Transcript Document

Biomedical Component 2014
Student & Teacher
Summer Institute Results
Student Results
Program Highlights
• Significant differences found between this
year and last year’s camp in following areas:
– AFFILIATION WITH FACULTY AND STAY ON
CAMPUS INCREASING INTEREST IN ATTENDING
COLLEGE.
– INCREASED INTEREST IN SCIENCE AND MATH
– LEARNING EXPERIENCES
Has your affiliation and interaction with university faculty
members increased your interest in attending college?
No
21%
Yes
79%
2014N=135
2013 = 92.5% (N=161)
T-test between %’s
t-statistic=3.469; df=294
Two-tailed prob. =.0006
Has your week long stay at a university campus influenced your
decision to attend college?
30%
70%
2014N= 136
2013 = 83% (N=161)
T-test between %’s
t-statistic=2.654; df=295
Two-tailed prob. =.0084
Has participating in the Biomed HSTA Summer
Institute increased your interest in science?
80%
Yes, 76%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
No, 24%
20%
10%
0%
2014 N = 136
2013 = 85% (N=158)
t-statistic = 1.955
df=292
Two-tailed prob.=.0515
Has participating in the Biomed HSTA Summer
Institute increased your interest in math?
54%
53%
Yes, 53%
52%
51%
50%
49%
48%
47%
No, 47%
46%
45%
44%
2014 N = 136
2013 = 38% (N=159)
t-statistic =2.582
df=293
Two-tailed prob.=.0103
How comfortable do you feel using Experimental Design
(Research Methods and the Scientific Method)?
m=3.86
sd=1.09
N=57
m=3.83
sd=0.82
N=76
4.5
4
3.5
m=2.63
sd=0.58
N=79
3
m=2.59
sd=0.57
N=81
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Week 1 (2014)
Week 1 (2013)
Week 2 (2014)
Week 2 (2013)
1 to 5 Likert Scale
(1) Not At All Comfortable; (2) A Little Comfortable; (3) Moderately Comfortable;
(4) Comfortable; (5) Very Comfortable
Week 1: t-statistic =10.550
df=153
Two-tailed prob.=.000
Week 2: t-statistic =8.906
df=136
Two-tailed prob.=000
How comfortable do you feel using Community Based
Participatory Research/Community Engagement?
m=4.10
sd=0.87
N=58
4.2
4.1
4
m=3.96
sd=0.97
N=78
3.9
m=3.68
sd=0.93
N=82
3.8
3.7
m=3.48
sd=1.13
N=79
3.6
3.5
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.1
Week 1 (2014)
Week 1 (2013)
Week 2 (2014)
Week 1: t-statistic =2.854
df=155
Two-tailed probability=.005
Week 2 (2013)
Week 2: t-statistic =2.703
df=138
Two-tailed probability=.008
How comfortable do you feel using Statistics?
3.8
3.7
m=3.70
sd=1.16
N=77
3.6
3.5
3.4
m=3.27
sd=1.23
N=79
3.3
3.2
3.1
3
Week 1 (2014)
Week 1 (2013)
Week 1: t-statistic =2.245
df=154
Two-tailed prob.=.030
How comfortable do you feel using Excel?
3.6
3.5
m=3.52
sd=1.12
N=82
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.1
3
2.9
m=3.03
sd=1.53
N=58
2.8
2.7
Week 2 (2014)
Week 2 (2013)
Week 2: t-statistic =2.188
df=138
Two-tailed prob.=.030
Do you plan to use Experimental Design during
the upcoming year?
Week 1 (2014)
Week 1 (2013)
80%
70%
72%
60%
50%
54%
41%
40%
30%
24%
20%
10%
5%
4%
0%
Yes
Unsure
Week 1: t-statistic between %s=2.385
df=152
two-tailed probability=.0183
No
The laboratory experiences helped me to better
understand what “metabolic syndrome” is.
5
4
m=4.29
m=4.23
4.5
m=3.86
m=3.88
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
SD=1.15
1
SD=1.13
SD=0.85
SD=0.82
0.5
0
Week 1 (2014)
(N=78)
Week 1 (2013)
(N=78)
Week 2 (2014)
(N=57)
Mean
SD
Week 1: t-statistic=2.285
df=154
two-tailed probability=.024
Week 2 (2013)
(N=82)
Week 2: t-statistic=2.479
1 to 5 Likert Scale
(1) Not At All; (2) Very Little; (3) Moderately;
(4) Quite A Bit; (5) A Lot
df=137
two-tailed probability=.014
The laboratory experiences helped me to better
understand health problems in my community.
5
m=4.37
4.5
m=4.00
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
SD=1.06
SD=0.77
1
0.5
0
Week 2: 2014 (N=58)
Week 2: 2013 (N=81)
Week 2: t-statistic=2.385
df=137
two-tailed probability=.019
How much did you enjoy the College Fair (talking with
professionals about potential careers and/or programs?
SD, 0.92
Week 2: 2013 (N=82)
Mean, 3.99
SD, 0.95
Week 2: 2014 (N=57)
Mean, 4.35
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Week 2: t-statistic=2.239
df=137
two-tailed probability=.027
3.5
4
4.5
Participated in My First Patient
Screenings
Helpfulness of Goal Setting Session
in Developing Personal Goal
No
10%
4%
4%
33%
25%
34%
Yes
90%
Very Unhelpful (1)
Somewhat Helpful (3)
Very Helpful (5)
Combined
Weeks:
N=134
Mean=3.86
SD=1.12
Not Helpful (2)
Helpful (4)
Comparisons of Mentors, Faculty Teachers & FSC’s
2014 to 2013
2014
Mean
2014
SD
2013
Mean
2013
SD
Mentors Spent time
4.4
0.78
4.48
0.9
Mentors Treated Student Equally
4.35
0.99
4.58
0.8
Mentors Made feel Important
4.27
0.91
4.41
0.85
Mentors Responsive to Needs
4.47
0.76
4.59
0.74
Mentors Interacted
4.29
0.97
4.38
0.9
Mentors Provided Overview of College
4.53
0.83
4.65
0.6
MENTOR’S RATINGS
TEACHER’S RATINGS
Teachers Made Feel Special
Teachers Responsive to Needs
Teachers Interacted
2014
Mean
3.95
4.18
4.02
2014
SD
1.12
1.05
1.13
2013
Mean
4.16
4.3
4.2
2013
SD
0.95
0.85
0.89
FACULTY’S RATINGS
Faculty Made Feel Special
Faculty Responsive to Needs
Faculty Interacted
2014
Mean
4.08
4.19
4.01
2014
SD
0.99
0.94
1.07
2013
Mean
4.22
4.32
4.23
2013
SD
0.84
0.75
0.84
FSC’S RATINGS
FSCs Available When Needed Attention
FSCs Treated Equally
FSCs Responsive to Needs
2014
Mean
4.04
4.1
4.08
2014
SD
1.06
1.08
1.07
2013
Mean
3.91
4.08
4.02
2013
SD
1.03
0.96
0.94
Key Quotes on Improving Summer
Institute
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
LESS LECTURES MORE LABS!!!!!!!
have better food at WVUor allow HSTA students to order food from
other places
Make sure the faculty does not just talk at the students. Make the
students get involved by doing some activities.
I feel that they did a good job over all but it needed to be a little more
organized and be more helpful to people specific needs. Yes we do need
to meet new people and i understand that they want us to room with
others from different counties but i feel that the first day they should
let everyone get to know each other and pick a roommate from a
different county. Someone that you know that you would feel
comfortable. thank you :)
More time with the people other than those in the group you are
assigned.
Do more evening activities.
Make the rules more clear at the beginning and give more trust to the
students.
What did you like Most about the
Summer Institute?
•
Mentors (Jay, Lakiah, Joe, Kara, Ryan, Jen)
•
Cadaver Lab
•
Hands on Activities (The Learning)
–
“you get the chance to meet a lot of medical students and talk to them about their experience. you also get
to talk to a lot of college students which helps give you more information on what to expect when you get
to college”
–
“My favorite thing about Biomed was all of the people that I had the pleasure of meeting. Everyone was
interesting and exceptional and a pleasure to be around. The mentors were helpful and approachable and
really helped to guide me over the week. The lesson that I participated in with Dr. Klink was engaging and
interesting and well done and sparked an interest in me that I didn't know that I had. Biomed was overall
an incredible experience in my life that I will remember for years to come.”
–
“The videos that we made in the Social Behavior & Public Health class that my group was in. I really
enjoyed the experience and the people that it was shared with.”
–
“ I liked the hands on experience of the cadaver and getting an idea of what types of things I will possibly
do in my college courses, if I do decide to pursue a career in health care or even science. I also enjoyed the
mentor panel so I can get a more realistic perspective on college life and study specifically at WVU. I liked
goal setting because it gave me a fresh sense of inspiration to go at my goals head on without hesitation.”
Final Comments
• Overall, satisfaction
with Biomed SI ranged
from Fairly to
Extremely, (m=3.99,
sd=0.91 vs. m=3.91,
sd=1.15 (2013))
• Impact on increasing
interest in HCCs
hovered around
Moderate to High,
(m=3.57, sd=1.33)
• Although no significant
differences between
years, last year’s means
were slightly higher
than this year for
mentors, teachers,
faculty, with the
exception of FSCs
TEACHER RESULTS
Program Highlights
• Significant differences found between this
year and last year’s camp in following areas:
– USE OF SOCIAL NETWORKING IN UPCOMING
YEAR
– BEING A HEALTH CARE ADVOCATE FOR
FAMILY/COMMUNITY
Do you plan to use Social Networking upon
returning to your school and community?
4.5
2013, m=4.13 (N=8)
4
3.5
2014, m=3.08 (N=13)
3
2.5
2
1.5
SD=1.04
1
SD=0.99
0.5
0
Independent T-Test between Means
1 to 5 Likert Scale
(1) Not At All; (2) Very Little; (3) Moderately;
(4) Quite A Bit; (5) A Lot
•T-statistic = 2.287
•df= 19
•Two –tailed probability = .034
After participating in the HSTA Summer Institute, do you
think that you would like to be a health care advocate for
your own family/community?
3
2014, m=2.85
2013,
m=2.38
2.5
2
1.5
1
SD=0.52
0.5
SD=0.38
0
2014
2013
Mean
SD
Independent T-Test between Means
1=I did not like the idea
2=I liked the idea little, and I think my family would be interested
3=I liked it a lot, and I know my family would be interested.s
•T-statistic = 2.394
•df= 19
•Two –tailed probability = .027
What other professional development
needs would you like to see addressed?
I would like to see more statistics
training for all teachers. Students
get too caught up in ttest, ANOVA,
and correlations. I would like to
give them other options to
examine their data.
Not learning the same thing
every year!!!
More inventive ways to present
ethics, etc.
What other professional development
needs would you like to see addressed?
Technology and hands-on
lab ideas with easily
accessible equipment.
I would like to see a group put
together a new rubric for use at
symposium and this would also
help us prepare students for the
presentations.
Student motivation is always a
concern. I would also like to see
us be able to get professional
development credit.
Program Highlights
MOST USEFUL TECHNIQUE FOR HSTA CLUB: CBPR (61.5%)
LEAST USEFUL TECHNIQUE FOR HSTA CLUB: SOCIAL NETWORKING (54.5%)
MOST USEFUL TECHNIQUE FOR CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION: EXCEL (33.3%)
LEAST USEFUL TECHNIQUE FOR CLASSROOM TEACHING: SOCIAL NETWORKING (50%)
92.3% INDICATED THAT THEY GAINED IDEAS FOR HSTA CLUB PROJECTS. ALL
TEACHERS INDICATED THAT THEY WERE PREPARED OR EXTREMELY PREPARED TO
HELP STUDENTS CONCEIVE AND CARRY OUT PROJECTS.
(2014 m=4.23 (N=13) VS. 2013 m=4.63 (N=8)
TEACHER INDICATED THAT THEY WERE EITHER GOOD OR EXPERT IN:
*INCOPORATING RESEARCH PRINCIPLES INTO THEIR CLUBS (2014 m=3.15)
*CONFIDENT IN TEACHING STUDENTS ABOUT RESEARCH (2014 m=3.08)
Program Highlights
THE MAJORITY OF TEACHERS EITHER AGREED OR STRONGLY AGREED THAT THE SUMMER
INSTITUTE CONTRIBUTED TO THEIR SCIENCE CONTENT KNOWLEDGE
(2014 m=4.46 (N=13) VS. 2013 m=4.14 (N=7)
THE MAJORITY OF TEACHERS FAIRLY TO STRONGLY AGREED THAT THE SUMMER INSTITUTE
CONTRIBUTED TO THEIR MATH CONTENT KNOWLEDGE
(2014 m=3.83 (N=12) VS. 2013 m=3.63 (N=8)
THE MAJORITY FEEL COMFORTABLE OR EXTREMELY COMFORTABLE WITH THE TEACHING
METHODS.
HIGHEST RATING: EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN (2014 m=4.85 (N=13) VS. 2013 m=4.63 (N=8)
LOWEST RATING: STATISTICS (2014 m=4.23 (N=13) VS. 2013 m=4.25 (N=8)
MAJORITY OF TEACHERS REPORTED THAT THEY WILL USE A LOT , QUITE A BIT, OR MODERATELY
THE TEACHING METHODS.
HIGHEST RATING: EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN (2014 m=4.15 (N=13) VS. 2013 m=4.25 (N=8)
LOWEST RATING: SOCIAL NETWORKING (2014 m=3.08 (N=13) VS. 2013 m=4.13 (N=8)**
Final Comments
• Overall, the teachers were either SATISFIED OR EXTREMELY
STATISFIED with the Summer Institute.
(2014 m=4.54 (N=13) VS. 2013 m=4.88 (N=8)
• Many reported that the pre-academy sessions were Fairly to
Extremely Effective in preparing them to facilitate student
learning during the student week.
– Highest Rating: Faculty Sessions (m=4.46)
– Lowest Rating: Statistics Overview: m=3.73)
• They FAIRLY TO STRONGLY AGREED that their teaching methods
improved due to the SI
(2014 m=4.23(N=13) VS. 2013 m=4.50 (N=8)
• For the most part, last year’s respondents rated the different
components of the SI slightly higher than this year’s respondents.
Nevertheless, this year’s Summer Institute received very good
ratings as well.