From: IN%"ggholson@bellsouth.net" 11-MAR-2000 10:03:46.39 To: IN%"ggholson@mocha.memphis.edu" CC: Subj: (no subject) Return-path: Received: from localhost.localdomain (host-209-214-195-49.mem.bellsouth.net) by mocha.memphis.edu (PMDF V5.1-12 #D3067) with ESMTP id <01JMWID9TXKG9V57YK@mocha.memphis.edu> for ggholson@mocha.memphis.edu; Sat, 11 Mar 2000 10:03:38 CST Received: from bellsouth.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E7903D1B for ; Sat, 11 Mar 2000 10:08:15 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 16:08:15 +0000 From: ggholson Subject: (no subject) Sender: root@localhost.localdomain To: ggholson@mocha.memphis.edu Reply-to: ggholson@bellsouth.net Message-id: <38CA6F6E.F8F8D172@bellsouth.net> Organization: unitus MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.13-7mdk i586) Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------60E6F19DA41940374E62AE43" X-Accept-Language: en This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------60E6F19DA41940374E62AE43 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------835555B3E68283E5EDC0484C" --------------835555B3E68283E5EDC0484C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > VSI: A Pathway to Mastery and Persistence. VSI offers a viable alternat= ive to remedial coursework, allowing underprepared students to excel in h= istorically difficult courses as they develop needed basic skills. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------= --- > > Deanna C. Martin, Ph.D. Robert Blanc, Ph.D. This manuscript was publish= ed by Jossey-Bass Publishers as a chapter in issue #60 of the quarterly s= ourcebook, New Directions in Teaching and Learning in 1994. The title of = the publication is Supplemental Instruction: Increasing Student Achieveme= nt and Persistence. Martin is Director of the Center for Academic Develop= ment and Blanc is Director of the Institute for Professional Preparation.= Both are Associate Professors at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.= Dr. Martin's academic appointment is in the School of Education; Dr. Bla= nc's is in the UMKC School of Medicine. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------= --- > > Student Support at UMKC > > In the lead article of this volume, Vice Chancellor Widmar describes th= e prevailing campus ethos at UMKC at the time when the staff of the Cente= r for Academic Development originated Supplemental Instruction (SI). Impl= icit in the faculty expectation (and explicit in the directions from admi= nistration) was the paradoxical dictum that the staff retain students wit= hout engaging in remedial activities. Supplemental Instruction satisfied = the campus's immediate need by supporting high-risk courses rather than h= igh-risk students. > > The Need for Something More > > Later, when UMKC joined Division I NCAA athletics, a class of students = entered the University who were new to the campus: top flight and highly = visible athletes. Although all met NCAA standards for admission, some dem= onstrated academic weakness; furthermore, they had to meet an extensive t= ravel schedule that removed them from the campus at key points in the aca= demic term. > > Again, instructions from the administration (and the NCAA) seemed parad= oxical. Although these students clearly faced problems that were unique o= n the campus, the academic support provided for them could not be categor= ically different from that which was available to others. It soon became = evident to the Center staff that SI, even with the addition of tutors at = study tables (the standard regimen among Division I schools), was not suf= ficient to assure success for some athletes. Accordingly, staff undertook= a reassessment of SI. > > The Limitations of SI > > What the staff realized as they reconsidered SI for seriously marginali= zed students was that the conventional model relied on students' being ab= le, with a modicum of proficiency, to perform four tasks: 1. Hear and und= erstand the professor's language, and therefore the lecture; 2. Read and = understand the textbook and ancillary readings; 3. Sit through a lecture = and take some relevant notes; 4. Write well enough to express ideas in an= essay examination. > > For the new population, it appeared that not all of the above assumptio= ns were valid. Nor were they valid for the other academically compromised= students toward whom the University regularly made symbolic gestures: co= llege-bound, central-city youth. > > Staff resolved to develop a new, alternative course delivery system: VS= I. This permutation of SI was based not on the professor's lecture but ra= ther on a videotape of the professor's lecture. The videotape mode provid= ed many instructional advantages including (a) control over the rate of t= he flow of information, (b) the opportunity to monitor the quality of stu= dent comprehension as it occurred, (c) the direct integration of study sk= ills and content, and (d) extended time which would be needed to identify= and correct both content and skill deficits. > > If the new program worked, it could be used to address the needs of stu= dent athletes as well as the various populations of marginally prepared s= tudents. The staff had successfully used pieces of the proposed VSI model= previously, and as they considered their experience as well as the resea= rch of others, they had reason to be hopeful. > > The Origins of VSI: Helpful Theories, Research, and Practices > > Perhaps the single most basic bit of advice any academic lecturer recei= ves is this: "First you tell them what you are going to tell them. "Then = you tell them. "Then you tell them what you told them." > > That bit of homely wisdom underlies several rather important approaches= to student comprehension. For instance, both the Directed Reading Activi= ty (Betts, 1946) and the Directed Reading-Thinking Activity (Stauffer, 19= 69) recognize that preparing students for learning is perhaps the most fu= ndamental act in the teaching process. Robinson's (1961) SQ3R process for= med the basis of college skill instruction for generations of students. T= his five-step process prefaces the reading experience with the Survey ste= p and with the development of Questions that will guide the student's com= prehension of the reading assignments to come. The student then Read(s) t= he material, followed by the Recite and Review steps. Thus another varian= t of the homely wisdom of the trade. > > Variations on the same pedagogical theme were heard from teachers who r= ecognized that students working together in small groups of four or five = can accomplish more than students working independently of one another. T= he first on record with this view was Socrates. More recently, Whimbey an= d Sadler (1985) recommended "paired problem solving." Chemistry professor= Carmichael along with Whimbey (1980) implemented a similar instructional= style with students in the SOAR (Stress on Academic Reasoning) curriculu= m at Xavier University. Other science educators advocated like approaches= : Karplus developed the Science Curriculum Improvement Study at Berkeley'= s Lawrence Hall of Science in the 1970s; Fuller (1980) followed a similar= path in the ADAPT curriculum at the University of Nebraska. Lochhead and= Clement (1979) developed the concept of "Cognitive Process Instruction."= Austin (1961) found that increasing the frequency and quality of interac= tion between mathematics students and their > teachers -- and among students -- produced gains in learning. Whimbey (= 1984) encourage students to "think out loud." Empirical research verified= intuition, and support grew for the idea of increasing opportunities for= student interaction through collaborative learning techniques. > > The Origins of VSI: Prior Experience > > In the early 1980s, the staff of the Center, relying upon the materials= and people cited above, developed applications of SI designed to answer = the specific problem of medical students who failed the comprehensive exa= mination in the basic sciences that comes at the end of their second year= =2E Later in the decade, when the number of students from all parts of th= e U.S. seeking admission to the UMKC Board Review program outstripped the= available resources, the staff made a video-based program, FIRSTprep, av= ailable for adoption in medical schools outside Kansas City (Blanc 1989).= Although the video program was multi-faceted, the central instructional = procedure was relatively straightforward. The implementation steps that p= roved effective in FIRSTprep comprised the central core of VSI: > > 1. Preview both the vocabulary which will be used in the lecture and, i= n rather cursory fashion, the main topics to be covered in the lecture. (= "Tell them what you are going to tell them.") > > 2. Process the videotaped lecture. In doing so, stop when necessary to = permit students to clarify something the professor has said or simply to = assure that the students are tracking the progress of the presentation. (= This technique derived from that used by John Madden, commentator on foot= ball for CBS network television, who likes to present plays in slow motio= n for the edification of his audience.) This is the "Tell them" phase of = the lesson. > > 3. Review the videotaped lecture, using any of a variety of well known = techniques. ("Tell them what you told them.") > > The difference between this approach and those traditionally used in po= stsecondary education lay in the centrality of students to the process as= opposed to the centrality of the material to be learned: -- Students con= duct the preview; -- Students determine the pace of the lecture; -- Stude= nts assure their own mastery as the lecture progresses; -- Students selec= t the key points for immediate review; -- Students identify misconception= s and modify and adapt their conceptions to achieve, eventually, more com= plete understanding. > > In essence, students take responsibility for their own learning. The ro= le of the facilitator is to drag his or her feet, assuring that students = understand the material while firmly resisting the pressure from students= to give them answers, thus hurrying the process. In the final analysis, = facilitators become experts in finessing answers from their groups. > > The result of using videotaped lectures in this way was quite remarkabl= e. In four years, the VSI method has been used with salutary effect by tw= o dozen different medical schools and health-care institutions, preparing= people to perform well on medical boards. The combination of the three-s= tage presentation punctuated by student discussion has proved to be an ex= tremely powerful learning mode. > > The Origins of VSI: Advice the Staff Rejected > > There is a good deal of conventional wisdom that operates among college= reading and study skills programs. If students cannot read and understan= d a text, the conventional wisdom tells us, first you must teach them to = comprehend at least at the tenth grade reading level. Then, they may be r= eady to enroll in a university course. Meanwhile, in order to help them d= evelop the necessary basic skills, start them at the level where they are= and move them at their own speed through the fundamentals of the element= ary school, the middle school, and the high school. > > And what results come from educational programs designed to provide adu= lts with basic skills? The answer proves disappointing. Those who go into= developmental studies rarely matriculate in a university. The staff cons= ulted one data base after another seeking evidence that adults who entere= d a developmental curriculum with skills at or below the middle school le= vel had gone on to university level coursework. They found only case stud= ies that extolled the virtues of one or another student or of one or anot= her teacher or suggested methods that lacked rigorous evaluative data to = support claims of effectiveness. Even today, research shows that only ten= percent of African- American students who participated in developmental = programs at community colleges had either graduated or were still in scho= ol after a period of 3.5 years (Boylan, et al., 1993). Another recent stu= dy cites a 12% rate of persistence leading to enrollment in a senior inst= itution if a student engaged in remedial coursework > (Jacobson, 1993). The latter figure is irrespective of ethnicity. Furth= ermore, editorials in abundance complain that students who enter programs= of remedial coursework lack the stamina to complete the course of study.= > > In discussion, staff came back again and again to an alternative view, = arguing that lack of basic skills need not preclude a student's comprehen= sion of an academic discipline. The example of Socrates was offered, and = it proved persuasive. Staff were particularly responsive to Socrates' dia= logue with Meno in which, with Socrates' tutelage, an uneducated slave bo= y derives the Pythagorean Theorem. What was unusual about Socrates' stude= nts? By today's standards, they were surely underprepared. Yet with Socra= tes' guiding questions and his patient insistence that his students knew = or could generate wise answers, they were able to invent the concepts of = truth and justice that have survived intact to the present day. Not a bad= piece of work for some underprepared Greeks of the fifth century B.C. Th= e next step was to create a fully integrated instructional system that in= extricably merged the learning process and the cognitive content of the d= iscipline. > > VSI and Original Instruction > > Departing only slightly from FIRSTprep, staff devised VSI according to = the following plan: (1) Get the most respected undergraduate professor wh= o (2) Teaches one of the historically difficult courses, and (3) Invite t= he professor into the video studio to deliver an entire course for the vi= deo camera. (4) Tidy the lectures with a modicum of editing. (5) Assign s= ix hours of credit to the VSI block: three hours of regular history cours= e credit and three hours of study skills credit. (6) Enroll at-risk stude= nts in a special section of the historically difficult course, and (7) Gi= ve the students a videocassette recorder, a monitor, a blackboard, and a = facilitator. (8) Arrange the schedules of the students to accommodate ext= ended class periods. (9) Ask the professor to administer exams to the reg= ular course and the video-based course on the same schedule and to apply = the same grading standards to both sections of the course. (10) Present t= he video-based course as rigorously as the regular > course. (11) Having done all the foregoing, then find a facilitator who= has some familiarity with the material and train that person in techniqu= es of collaborative learning. In practice, VSI worked out exactly as plan= ned. The professor had twice won the campus outstanding teacher award. Hi= s course in Western Civilization was definitely high risk with 20 to 30% = of the students typically ending the semester with D or F grades or withd= rawing prior to the end of the term. The professor would videotape the le= ctures and would cooperate in every way that had been outlined. In additi= on, he would meet periodically with the video-based class for one-half ho= ur to answer questions. > > Similarities and Differences: VSI and Comparison Group > > Lacking randomization and other key controls, this study can not claim = to meet experimental criteria. The project, however, has been replicated = with multiple groups over a period of five semesters on the UMKC campus a= nd lately on other campuses. The following set of data drawn from the Fal= l 1992 program is representative of the pilot studies conducted at UMKC. = A comprehensive VSI study is in progress. > > In the Fall of 1992, a total of 18 students enrolled in a special VSI s= ection and 157 in the regular section of Western Civilization. Of the 157= students in the comparison group, 18 enrolled as "pass/no pass," and the= se were necessarily excluded from all comparisons regarding final course = grades. Regarding differences and similarities between the groups, campus= experience has shown that professional school students are the most like= ly to persist; students who have not declared majors are least likely. Th= e data revealed that the VSI group included one professional school stude= nt, 5.6%, and 61% undeclared majors. The comparison group included 20% pr= ofessional school students and only 39% undeclared majors. These differen= ces were found to be statistically significant. Varsity athletes, althoug= h not at risk for attrition, typically do not achieve grades as high as t= he average of students on campus. The VSI group enrolled 39% athletes; th= e comparison group, 4%. Minority ethnicity appears > to be a risk factor on campus, and the VSI group enrolled 50% students = of minority ethnicity compared with 25% in the regular lecture course. On= ly with respect to gender distribution and age were the two groups approx= imately the same. None of the students in the VSI group had been on the D= ean's List for academic distinction; 13% of the other group had been so h= onored. Looking at probationary status, the reverse ratio appeared with 2= 8% of the VSI group on academic probation and 12% of the comparison popul= ation giving this evidence of previous academic difficulty. Early academi= c history revealed similar data: the VSI group entered the University wit= h a mean ACT score of 16 and they graduated in the middle of their high s= chool classes (52nd percentile). The comparison group earned mean scores = of 25 on the ACT and graduated in the 78th percentile from their high sch= ools. > > Simply stated, those in the regular lecture section of the Western Civi= lization course presented profiles that parallel those of academically su= ccessful students. The profiles of those in the VSI group would identify = them as at-risk or underprepared according to multiple, accepted criteria= =2E > > Results > > Results were examined with respect to several variables. Course grades = are necessary but not sufficient measures of success. Whether the student= persists in the University is as good or better a measure of success. Ea= ch of these was accepted as a dependent variable in assessing the effecti= veness of the VSI project. Both measures indicated that the VSI group per= formed at as high a level or higher than the students in the regular lect= ure course. > > Ninety-five percent of the VSI group earned A or B grades and none rece= ived D grades or failed. Fifty-three percent of students in the regular c= ourse received A or B grades, and 24% either received a D grade or failed= =2E Final course grade average favored the VSI group with a mean of 3.6 (= on a 4-point scale) compared with 2.3 for the comparison group. With resp= ect to reenrollment, all but one of the students in the VSI group and all= of those on probation re-enrolled for the following semester. Of those i= n the regular section, only 45% of the probationers and 85% over all retu= rned to the University during the succeeding term. > > In summary, by every available criterion, although the VSI group appear= ed to be at greater risk, their performance equalled or exceeded that of = the regular lecture group. > > The study skills pre- and post-test differences for the VSI group are s= till being analyzed. Students did show statistically significant gains in= abstract reasoning as measured by the Differential Aptitude Tests (Level= 2, Form C) and essay writing as assessed by the course professor. Self-r= eport data as shown on the FIRO-B, Learning and Study Strategies Inventor= y (LASSI), and the ACT ASSET revealed statistically significant gains in = fifteen categories. Students demonstrated their ability to comprehend dif= ficult material as they passed examinations dealing with their supplement= al reading which included Aristophanes' Lysistrata, Bolt's A Man for All = Seasons, and Machiavelli's The Prince, all read in their entirety, along = with essays by Cicero, among others. > > Discussion and Conclusions > > The single most encouraging trend that emerges from the implementation = of VSI as an alternative rather than a supplement to instruction is evide= nce that underprepared, at-risk students can master difficult and rigorou= s content and develop requisite skills at the same time. The corollaries = of that statement are the following: (1) Students who cannot effectively = read and understand the textbook or listen to and understand a professor'= s lecture or listen to a lecture and prepare a set of class notes can, no= netheless, learn history, and while doing so, can acquire or strengthen t= he skills necessary for academic success; and (2) Students who cannot wri= te an effective essay answer to an academic question can learn to do so w= ithin the context of an academic course of study. > > These corollaries lead to the conclusion that students who are underpre= pared for postsecondary education can simultaneously engage in university= study and develop the requisite skills. > > Of equal importance, perhaps, is the obvious fact that the facilitator = manages students' study time. VSI staff conclude that managed study is an= essential component of the program, as students who are at-risk need dir= ect support, at least until they are sufficiently practiced in the techni= ques of study to manage on their own. Yet another implication of the VSI = model relates to the centrality of the lecture in the educational process= =2E In other, perhaps more literate times, the text was central to the le= arning experience, and the professor emphasized the elements of the text = that were essential and linked those elements in insightful ways. Now, in= response to a less-literate generation, the lecture acquires the central= instructional role with the text serving as reference material. It must = be noted, however, that this reversal is only viewed by the VSI practitio= ner as temporary, that VSI holds promise as a means by which to move one = to a higher level of literacy. > > The magical ingredient in the process appears to be the technology that= manifests in the form of the videocassette and the remote control device= =2E This technology enables the student to alternate between the professo= r's lecture and the silence in which to consider the meaning. The moments= of silence are precious. Silence offers the student a rare commodity in = the context of a classroom: time to think. And the reflective time allows= the student to form questions, observations, and opinions. Those, then, = are shared with fellow students. Confusion is resolved; conflicting views= are weighed; differences are explored. Students leave the session with c= learly defined questions and a sense of what to do next. > > A final reference to Socrates is perhaps appropriate. In the Apology, P= lato quoted Socrates' statement, "The life which is unexamined is not wor= th living." The educational equivalent might be, "The lecture that is une= xamined is not worth hearing." Adult students today, under the press of h= eavy commitments, rarely take time to actually examine and reflect upon w= hat they are learning. Most feel fortunate if they can crowd in enough ho= urs to meet the most immediate deadlines. In VSI, students have both the = time and the guidance to examine not only the material of the discipline,= but the ways in which they, as students, think and learn and interact wi= th one another. Time and guidance may not be the characteristics of quick= solutions, but they are more likely to be the characteristics of meaning= ful change. > > References > > ACT ASSET. The American College Testing Program, 1990. > > Austin, M.. "Improving Comprehension of Mathematics." Reading in the Se= condary Schools, ed. M. Jerry Weiss, New York: The Odyssey Press, Inc., 1= 961, 391-396. > > Betts, E. Foundations of Reading Instruction. New York: American Book, = 1946. > > Blanc, R. FIRSTprep. Institute for Professional Preparation: University= of Missouri-Kansas City, 1989. > > Boylan, H., Bliss, L., Bonham, B. "The Performance of Minority Students= in Developmental Education." Research In Developmental Education, Appala= chian State University: Boone, NC. 1993, 10 (2). > > Differential Aptitude Tests, 5, The Psychological Corporation Harcourt,= Bruce Jovanovich, 1990. > > Fuller, R. G., ed. Piagetian Programs in Higher Education. Lincoln, NE:= ADAPT, 1980. > > Jacobson, R. "Community Colleges Wonder Whether They Can Keep Doors Ope= n to All." The Chronicle of Higher Education, July, 1993. > > Karplus, R. The Science Curriculum Improvement Study. Berkeley: Univers= ity of California Press, 1974. > > Lochhead, J. and Clement, J., eds. Cognitive Process Instruction. Frank= lin Institute Press: Philadelphia, 1979. > > Robinson, F. Effective Study. New York: Harper Brothers, 1961. > > Palmer, D. and Schute, A. "LASSI." Learning and Study Strategies Invent= ory, H and H Publishing, Clearwater, 1987. > > Schutz, W. FIRO-B. Consulting Psychologists Press, 1989. Stauffer, R. D= irecting reading maturity as a cognitive process. New York: Harper and Ro= w, 1969. > > Whimbey, A., Carmichael, J.W., Jr., Jones, L.W., Hunter, J.T. and Vince= nt, H.A. "Teaching Critical Reading and Analytical Reasoning in Project S= OAR." Journal of Reading, 1980, 24, 5-10. > > Whimbey, A., Sadler, W. "A Holistic Approach To Improving Thinking Skil= ls." Phi Delta Kappan, 1985, November, 199-203. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------= --- > > = = and none received > D grades or failed. Fifty-three percent of students in the regular cour= se > re=F4=F0=BBU=14=F2=BBU=EC=F2=BBU4=F3=BBU=C4=F3=BBU=F4=BBU?=F4=BBU=E4=F4= =BBU=04=F6=BBU=DC=F6=BBU$=F7=BBU=B4=F7=BBU=FC=F7=BBU?=F8=BBU=D4=F8=BBUd=F9= =BBU=AC=F9=BBU?=FA=BBU=CC=FA=BBU\=FB=BBU=A4=FB=BBU|=FC=BBU=C4=FC=BBUT=FD=BB= U?=FD=BBUt=FE=BBU=BC=FE=BBUL=FF=BBU?=FF=BBUl > > = = and none received > D grades or failed. Fifty-three percent of students in the regular cour= se > reudents today, under the press of heavy commitments, rarely take time = to actually examine and reflect upon what they are learning. Most feel fo= rtunate if they can crowd in enough hours to meet the most immediate dead= lines. ITop of page | Main Document Download page http://www.umkc.edu/centers/cad/caddocs/jbvsi94.htm --------------835555B3E68283E5EDC0484C Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
VSI: A Pathway to Mastery and Persistence. VSI offers a viable alternative to remedial coursework, allowing underprepared students to excel in historically difficult courses as they develop needed basic skills.

  ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Deanna C. Martin, Ph.D. Robert Blanc, Ph.D. This manuscript was published by Jossey-Bass Publishers as a chapter in issue #60 of the quarterly sourcebook, New Directions in Teaching and Learning in 1994. The title of the publication is Supplemental Instruction: Increasing Student Achievement and Persistence. Martin is Director of the Center for Academic Development and Blanc is Director of the Institute for Professional Preparation. Both are Associate Professors at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. Dr. Martin's academic appointment is in the School of Education; Dr. Blanc's is in the UMKC School of Medicine.

  ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Student Support at UMKC

In the lead article of this volume, Vice Chancellor Widmar describes the prevailing campus ethos at UMKC at the time when the staff of the Center for Academic Development originated Supplemental Instruction (SI). Implicit in the faculty expectation (and explicit in the directions from administration) was the paradoxical dictum that the staff retain students without engaging in remedial activities. Supplemental Instruction satisfied the campus's immediate need by supporting high-risk courses rather than high-risk students.

The Need for Something More

Later, when UMKC joined Division I NCAA athletics, a class of students entered the University who were new to the campus: top flight and highly visible athletes. Although all met NCAA standards for admission, some demonstrated academic weakness; furthermore, they had to meet an extensive travel schedule that removed them from the campus at key points in the academic term.

Again, instructions from the administration (and the NCAA) seemed paradoxical. Although these students clearly faced problems that were unique on the campus, the academic support provided for them could not be categorically different from that which was available to others. It soon became evident to the Center staff that SI, even with the addition of tutors at study tables (the standard regimen among Division I schools), was not sufficient to assure success for some athletes. Accordingly, staff undertook a reassessment of SI.

The Limitations of SI

What the staff realized as they reconsidered SI for seriously marginalized students was that the conventional model relied on students' being able, with a modicum of proficiency, to perform four tasks: 1. Hear and understand the professor's language, and therefore the lecture; 2. Read and understand the textbook and ancillary readings; 3. Sit through a lecture and take some relevant notes; 4. Write well enough to express ideas in an essay examination.

For the new population, it appeared that not all of the above assumptions were valid. Nor were they valid for the other academically compromised students toward whom the University regularly made symbolic gestures: college-bound, central-city youth.

Staff resolved to develop a new, alternative course delivery system: VSI. This permutation of SI was based not on the professor's lecture but rather on a videotape of the professor's lecture. The videotape mode provided many instructional advantages including (a) control over the rate of the flow of information, (b) the opportunity to monitor the quality of student comprehension as it occurred, (c) the direct integration of study skills and content, and (d) extended time which would be needed to identify and correct both content and skill deficits.

If the new program worked, it could be used to address the needs of student athletes as well as the various populations of marginally prepared students. The staff had successfully used pieces of the proposed VSI model previously, and as they considered their experience as well as the research of others, they had reason to be hopeful.

The Origins of VSI: Helpful Theories, Research, and Practices

Perhaps the single most basic bit of advice any academic lecturer receives is this: "First you tell them what you are going to tell them. "Then you tell them. "Then you tell them what you told them."

That bit of homely wisdom underlies several rather important approaches to student comprehension. For instance, both the Directed Reading Activity (Betts, 1946) and the Directed Reading-Thinking Activity (Stauffer, 1969) recognize that preparing students for learning is perhaps the most fundamental act in the teaching process. Robinson's (1961) SQ3R process formed the basis of college skill instruction for generations of students. This five-step process prefaces the reading experience with the Survey step and with the development of Questions that will guide the student's comprehension of the reading assignments to come. The student then Read(s) the material, followed by the Recite and Review steps. Thus another variant of the homely wisdom of the trade.

Variations on the same pedagogical theme were heard from teachers who recognized that students working together in small groups of four or five can accomplish more than students working independently of one another. The first on record with this view was Socrates. More recently, Whimbey and Sadler (1985) recommended "paired problem solving." Chemistry professor Carmichael along with Whimbey (1980) implemented a similar instructional style with students in the SOAR (Stress on Academic Reasoning) curriculum at Xavier University. Other science educators advocated like approaches: Karplus developed the Science Curriculum Improvement Study at Berkeley's Lawrence Hall of Science in the 1970s; Fuller (1980) followed a similar path in the ADAPT curriculum at the University of Nebraska. Lochhead and Clement (1979) developed the concept of "Cognitive Process Instruction." Austin (1961) found that increasing the frequency and quality of interaction between mathematics students and their
teachers -- and among students -- produced gains in learning. Whimbey (1984) encourage students to "think out loud." Empirical research verified intuition, and support grew for the idea of increasing opportunities for student interaction through collaborative learning techniques.

The Origins of VSI: Prior Experience

In the early 1980s, the staff of the Center, relying upon the materials and people cited above, developed applications of SI designed to answer the specific problem of medical students who failed the comprehensive examination in the basic sciences that comes at the end of their second year. Later in the decade, when the number of students from all parts of the U.S. seeking admission to the UMKC Board Review program outstripped the available resources, the staff made a video-based program, FIRSTprep, available for adoption in medical schools outside Kansas City (Blanc 1989). Although the video program was multi-faceted, the central instructional procedure was relatively straightforward. The implementation steps that proved effective in FIRSTprep comprised the central core of VSI:

1. Preview both the vocabulary which will be used in the lecture and, in rather cursory fashion, the main topics to be covered in the lecture. ("Tell them what you are going to tell them.")

2. Process the videotaped lecture. In doing so, stop when necessary to permit students to clarify something the professor has said or simply to assure that the students are tracking the progress of the presentation. (This technique derived from that used by John Madden, commentator on football for CBS network television, who likes to present plays in slow motion for the edification of his audience.) This is the "Tell them" phase of the lesson.

3. Review the videotaped lecture, using any of a variety of well known techniques. ("Tell them what you told them.")

The difference between this approach and those traditionally used in postsecondary education lay in the centrality of students to the process as opposed to the centrality of the material to be learned: -- Students conduct the preview; -- Students determine the pace of the lecture; -- Students assure their own mastery as the lecture progresses; -- Students select the key points for immediate review; -- Students identify misconceptions and modify and adapt their conceptions to achieve, eventually, more complete understanding.

In essence, students take responsibility for their own learning. The role of the facilitator is to drag his or her feet, assuring that students understand the material while firmly resisting the pressure from students to give them answers, thus hurrying the process. In the final analysis, facilitators become experts in finessing answers from their groups.

The result of using videotaped lectures in this way was quite remarkable. In four years, the VSI method has been used with salutary effect by two dozen different medical schools and health-care institutions, preparing people to perform well on medical boards. The combination of the three-stage presentation punctuated by student discussion has proved to be an extremely powerful learning mode.

The Origins of VSI: Advice the Staff Rejected

There is a good deal of conventional wisdom that operates among college reading and study skills programs. If students cannot read and understand a text, the conventional wisdom tells us, first you must teach them to comprehend at least at the tenth grade reading level. Then, they may be ready to enroll in a university course. Meanwhile, in order to help them develop the necessary basic skills, start them at the level where they are and move them at their own speed through the fundamentals of the elementary school, the middle school, and the high school.

And what results come from educational programs designed to provide adults with basic skills? The answer proves disappointing. Those who go into developmental studies rarely matriculate in a university. The staff consulted one data base after another seeking evidence that adults who entered a developmental curriculum with skills at or below the middle school level had gone on to university level coursework. They found only case studies that extolled the virtues of one or another student or of one or another teacher or suggested methods that lacked rigorous evaluative data to support claims of effectiveness. Even today, research shows that only ten percent of African- American students who participated in developmental programs at community colleges had either graduated or were still in school after a period of 3.5 years (Boylan, et al., 1993). Another recent study cites a 12% rate of persistence leading to enrollment in a senior institution if a student engaged in remedial coursework
(Jacobson, 1993). The latter figure is irrespective of ethnicity. Furthermore, editorials in abundance complain that students who enter programs of remedial coursework lack the stamina to complete the course of study.

In discussion, staff came back again and again to an alternative view, arguing that lack of basic skills need not preclude a student's comprehension of an academic discipline. The example of Socrates was offered, and it proved persuasive. Staff were particularly responsive to Socrates' dialogue with Meno in which, with Socrates' tutelage, an uneducated slave boy derives the Pythagorean Theorem. What was unusual about Socrates' students? By today's standards, they were surely underprepared. Yet with Socrates' guiding questions and his patient insistence that his students knew or could generate wise answers, they were able to invent the concepts of truth and justice that have survived intact to the present day. Not a bad piece of work for some underprepared Greeks of the fifth century B.C. The next step was to create a fully integrated instructional system that inextricably merged the learning process and the cognitive content of the discipline.

VSI and Original Instruction

Departing only slightly from FIRSTprep, staff devised VSI according to the following plan: (1) Get the most respected undergraduate professor who (2) Teaches one of the historically difficult courses, and (3) Invite the professor into the video studio to deliver an entire course for the video camera. (4) Tidy the lectures with a modicum of editing. (5) Assign six hours of credit to the VSI block: three hours of regular history course credit and three hours of study skills credit. (6) Enroll at-risk students in a special section of the historically difficult course, and (7) Give the students a videocassette recorder, a monitor, a blackboard, and a facilitator. (8) Arrange the schedules of the students to accommodate extended class periods. (9) Ask the professor to administer exams to the regular course and the video-based course on the same schedule and to apply the same grading standards to both sections of the course. (10) Present the video-based course as rigorously as the regular
course. (11) Having done all the foregoing, then find a facilitator who has some familiarity with the material and train that person in techniques of collaborative learning. In practice, VSI worked out exactly as planned. The professor had twice won the campus outstanding teacher award. His course in Western Civilization was definitely high risk with 20 to 30% of the students typically ending the semester with D or F grades or withdrawing prior to the end of the term. The professor would videotape the lectures and would cooperate in every way that had been outlined. In addition, he would meet periodically with the video-based class for one-half hour to answer questions.

Similarities and Differences: VSI and Comparison Group

Lacking randomization and other key controls, this study can not claim to meet experimental criteria. The project, however, has been replicated with multiple groups over a period of five semesters on the UMKC campus and lately on other campuses. The following set of data drawn from the Fall 1992 program is representative of the pilot studies conducted at UMKC. A comprehensive VSI study is in progress.

In the Fall of 1992, a total of 18 students enrolled in a special VSI section and 157 in the regular section of Western Civilization. Of the 157 students in the comparison group, 18 enrolled as "pass/no pass," and these were necessarily excluded from all comparisons regarding final course grades. Regarding differences and similarities between the groups, campus experience has shown that professional school students are the most likely to persist; students who have not declared majors are least likely. The data revealed that the VSI group included one professional school student, 5.6%, and 61% undeclared majors. The comparison group included 20% professional school students and only 39% undeclared majors. These differences were found to be statistically significant. Varsity athletes, although not at risk for attrition, typically do not achieve grades as high as the average of students on campus. The VSI group enrolled 39% athletes; the comparison group, 4%. Minority ethnicity appears
to be a risk factor on campus, and the VSI group enrolled 50% students of minority ethnicity compared with 25% in the regular lecture course. Only with respect to gender distribution and age were the two groups approximately the same. None of the students in the VSI group had been on the Dean's List for academic distinction; 13% of the other group had been so honored. Looking at probationary status, the reverse ratio appeared with 28% of the VSI group on academic probation and 12% of the comparison population giving this evidence of previous academic difficulty. Early academic history revealed similar data: the VSI group entered the University with a mean ACT score of 16 and they graduated in the middle of their high school classes (52nd percentile). The comparison group earned mean scores of 25 on the ACT and graduated in the 78th percentile from their high schools.

Simply stated, those in the regular lecture section of the Western Civilization course presented profiles that parallel those of academically successful students. The profiles of those in the VSI group would identify them as at-risk or underprepared according to multiple, accepted criteria.

Results

Results were examined with respect to several variables. Course grades are necessary but not sufficient measures of success. Whether the student persists in the University is as good or better a measure of success. Each of these was accepted as a dependent variable in assessing the effectiveness of the VSI project. Both measures indicated that the VSI group performed at as high a level or higher than the students in the regular lecture course.

Ninety-five percent of the VSI group earned A or B grades and none received D grades or failed. Fifty-three percent of students in the regular course received A or B grades, and 24% either received a D grade or failed. Final course grade average favored the VSI group with a mean of 3.6 (on a 4-point scale) compared with 2.3 for the comparison group. With respect to reenrollment, all but one of the students in the VSI group and all of those on probation re-enrolled for the following semester. Of those in the regular section, only 45% of the probationers and 85% over all returned to the University during the succeeding term.

In summary, by every available criterion, although the VSI group appeared to be at greater risk, their performance equalled or exceeded that of the regular lecture group.

The study skills pre- and post-test differences for the VSI group are still being analyzed. Students did show statistically significant gains in abstract reasoning as measured by the Differential Aptitude Tests (Level 2, Form C) and essay writing as assessed by the course professor. Self-report data as shown on the FIRO-B, Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI), and the ACT ASSET revealed statistically significant gains in fifteen categories. Students demonstrated their ability to comprehend difficult material as they passed examinations dealing with their supplemental reading which included Aristophanes' Lysistrata, Bolt's A Man for All Seasons, and Machiavelli's The Prince, all read in their entirety, along with essays by Cicero, among others.

Discussion and Conclusions

The single most encouraging trend that emerges from the implementation of VSI as an alternative rather than a supplement to instruction is evidence that underprepared, at-risk students can master difficult and rigorous content and develop requisite skills at the same time. The corollaries of that statement are the following: (1) Students who cannot effectively read and understand the textbook or listen to and understand a professor's lecture or listen to a lecture and prepare a set of class notes can, nonetheless, learn history, and while doing so, can acquire or strengthen the skills necessary for academic success; and (2) Students who cannot write an effective essay answer to an academic question can learn to do so within the context of an academic course of study.

These corollaries lead to the conclusion that students who are underprepared for postsecondary education can simultaneously engage in university study and develop the requisite skills.

Of equal importance, perhaps, is the obvious fact that the facilitator manages students' study time. VSI staff conclude that managed study is an essential component of the program, as students who are at-risk need direct support, at least until they are sufficiently practiced in the techniques of study to manage on their own. Yet another implication of the VSI model relates to the centrality of the lecture in the educational process. In other, perhaps more literate times, the text was central to the learning experience, and the professor emphasized the elements of the text that were essential and linked those elements in insightful ways. Now, in response to a less-literate generation, the lecture acquires the central instructional role with the text serving as reference material. It must be noted, however, that this reversal is only viewed by the VSI practitioner as temporary, that VSI holds promise as a means by which to move one to a higher level of literacy.

The magical ingredient in the process appears to be the technology that manifests in the form of the videocassette and the remote control device. This technology enables the student to alternate between the professor's lecture and the silence in which to consider the meaning. The moments of silence are precious. Silence offers the student a rare commodity in the context of a classroom: time to think. And the reflective time allows the student to form questions, observations, and opinions. Those, then, are shared with fellow students. Confusion is resolved; conflicting views are weighed; differences are explored. Students leave the session with clearly defined questions and a sense of what to do next.

A final reference to Socrates is perhaps appropriate. In the Apology, Plato quoted Socrates' statement, "The life which is unexamined is not worth living." The educational equivalent might be, "The lecture that is unexamined is not worth hearing." Adult students today, under the press of heavy commitments, rarely take time to actually examine and reflect upon what they are learning. Most feel fortunate if they can crowd in enough hours to meet the most immediate deadlines. In VSI, students have both the time and the guidance to examine not only the material of the discipline, but the ways in which they, as students, think and learn and interact with one another. Time and guidance may not be the characteristics of quick solutions, but they are more likely to be the characteristics of meaningful change.

References

ACT ASSET. The American College Testing Program, 1990.

Austin, M.. "Improving Comprehension of Mathematics." Reading in the Secondary Schools, ed. M. Jerry Weiss, New York: The Odyssey Press, Inc., 1961, 391-396.

Betts, E. Foundations of Reading Instruction. New York: American Book, 1946.

Blanc, R. FIRSTprep. Institute for Professional Preparation: University of Missouri-Kansas City, 1989.

Boylan, H., Bliss, L., Bonham, B. "The Performance of Minority Students in Developmental Education." Research In Developmental Education, Appalachian State University: Boone, NC. 1993, 10 (2).

Differential Aptitude Tests, 5, The Psychological Corporation Harcourt, Bruce Jovanovich, 1990.

Fuller, R. G., ed. Piagetian Programs in Higher Education. Lincoln, NE: ADAPT, 1980.

Jacobson, R. "Community Colleges Wonder Whether They Can Keep Doors Open to All." The Chronicle of Higher Education, July, 1993.

Karplus, R. The Science Curriculum Improvement Study. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974.

Lochhead, J. and Clement, J., eds. Cognitive Process Instruction. Franklin Institute Press: Philadelphia, 1979.

Robinson, F. Effective Study. New York: Harper Brothers, 1961.

Palmer, D. and Schute, A. "LASSI." Learning and Study Strategies Inventory, H and H Publishing, Clearwater, 1987.

Schutz, W. FIRO-B. Consulting Psychologists Press, 1989. Stauffer, R. Directing reading maturity as a cognitive process. New York: Harper and Row, 1969.

Whimbey, A., Carmichael, J.W., Jr., Jones, L.W., Hunter, J.T. and Vincent, H.A. "Teaching Critical Reading and Analytical Reasoning in Project SOAR." Journal of Reading, 1980, 24, 5-10.

Whimbey, A., Sadler, W. "A Holistic Approach To Improving Thinking Skills." Phi Delta Kappan, 1985, November, 199-203.

  ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                                                                                                                and none received
D grades or failed. Fifty-three percent of students in the regular course
reôð»Uò»Uìò»U4ó»UÄó»Uô»U?ô»Uäô»Uö»UÜö»U$÷»U´÷»Uü÷»U?ø»UÔø»Udù»U¬ù»U?ú»UÌú»U\û»U¤û»U|ü»UÄü»UTý»U?ý»Utþ»U¼þ»ULÿ»U?ÿ»Ul

                                                                                                                                                                and none received
D grades or failed. Fifty-three percent of students in the regular course
reudents today, under the press of heavy commitments, rarely take time to actually examine and reflect upon what they are learning. Most feel fortunate if they can crowd in enough hours to meet the most immediate deadlines. ITop of page | Main Document Download page

http://www.umkc.edu/centers/cad/caddocs/jbvsi94.htm
  --------------835555B3E68283E5EDC0484C-- --------------60E6F19DA41940374E62AE43 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; name="jbvsi94.htm" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="jbvsi94.htm" Content-Base: "http://www.umkc.edu/centers/cad/caddoc s/jbvsi94.htm" Content-Location: "http://www.umkc.edu/centers/cad/caddoc s/jbvsi94.htm"

VSI: A Pathway to Mastery and Persistence. VSI offers a viable alternative to remedial coursework, allowing underprepared students to excel in historically difficult courses as they develop needed basic skills.

Deanna C. Martin, Ph.D. Robert Blanc, Ph.D. This manuscript was published by Jossey-Bass Publishers as a chapter in issue #60 of the quarterly sourcebook, New Directions in Teaching and Learning in 1994. The title of the publication is Supplemental Instruction: Increasing Student Achievement and Persistence. Martin is Director of the Center for Academic Development and Blanc is Director of the Institute for Professional Preparation. Both are Associate Professors at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. Dr. Martin's academic appointment is in the School of Education; Dr. Blanc's is in the UMKC School of Medicine.

Student Support at UMKC

In the lead article of this volume, Vice Chancellor Widmar describes the prevailing campus ethos at UMKC at the time when the staff of the Center for Academic Development originated Supplemental Instruction (SI). Implicit in the faculty expectation (and explicit in the directions from administration) was the paradoxical dictum that the staff retain students without engaging in remedial activities. Supplemental Instruction satisfied the campus's immediate need by supporting high-risk courses rather than high-risk students.

The Need for Something More

Later, when UMKC joined Division I NCAA athletics, a class of students entered the University who were new to the campus: top flight and highly visible athletes. Although all met NCAA standards for admission, some demonstrated academic weakness; furthermore, they had to meet an extensive travel schedule that removed them from the campus at key points in the academic term.

Again, instructions from the administration (and the NCAA) seemed paradoxical. Although these students clearly faced problems that were unique on the campus, the academic support provided for them could not be categorically different from that which was available to others. It soon became evident to the Center staff that SI, even with the addition of tutors at study tables (the standard regimen among Division I schools), was not sufficient to assure success for some athletes. Accordingly, staff undertook a reassessment of SI.

The Limitations of SI

What the staff realized as they reconsidered SI for seriously marginalized students was that the conventional model relied on students' being able, with a modicum of proficiency, to perform four tasks: 1. Hear and understand the professor's language, and therefore the lecture; 2. Read and understand the textbook and ancillary readings; 3. Sit through a lecture and take some relevant notes; 4. Write well enough to express ideas in an essay examination.

For the new population, it appeared that not all of the above assumptions were valid. Nor were they valid for the other academically compromised students toward whom the University regularly made symbolic gestures: college-bound, central-city youth.

Staff resolved to develop a new, alternative course delivery system: VSI. This permutation of SI was based not on the professor's lecture but rather on a videotape of the professor's lecture. The videotape mode provided many instructional advantages including (a) control over the rate of the flow of information, (b) the opportunity to monitor the quality of student comprehension as it occurred, (c) the direct integration of study skills and content, and (d) extended time which would be needed to identify and correct both content and skill deficits.

If the new program worked, it could be used to address the needs of student athletes as well as the various populations of marginally prepared students. The staff had successfully used pieces of the proposed VSI model previously, and as they considered their experience as well as the research of others, they had reason to be hopeful.

The Origins of VSI: Helpful Theories, Research, and Practices

Perhaps the single most basic bit of advice any academic lecturer receives is this: "First you tell them what you are going to tell them. "Then you tell them. "Then you tell them what you told them."

That bit of homely wisdom underlies several rather important approaches to student comprehension. For instance, both the Directed Reading Activity (Betts, 1946) and the Directed Reading-Thinking Activity (Stauffer, 1969) recognize that preparing students for learning is perhaps the most fundamental act in the teaching process. Robinson's (1961) SQ3R process formed the basis of college skill instruction for generations of students. This five-step process prefaces the reading experience with the Survey step and with the development of Questions that will guide the student's comprehension of the reading assignments to come. The student then Read(s) the material, followed by the Recite and Review steps. Thus another variant of the homely wisdom of the trade.

Variations on the same pedagogical theme were heard from teachers who recognized that students working together in small groups of four or five can accomplish more than students working independently of one another. The first on record with this view was Socrates. More recently, Whimbey and Sadler (1985) recommended "paired problem solving." Chemistry professor Carmichael along with Whimbey (1980) implemented a similar instructional style with students in the SOAR (Stress on Academic Reasoning) curriculum at Xavier University. Other science educators advocated like approaches: Karplus developed the Science Curriculum Improvement Study at Berkeley's Lawrence Hall of Science in the 1970s; Fuller (1980) followed a similar path in the ADAPT curriculum at the University of Nebraska. Lochhead and Clement (1979) developed the concept of "Cognitive Process Instruction." Austin (1961) found that increasing the frequency and quality of interaction between mathematics students and their teachers -- and among students -- produced gains in learning. Whimbey (1984) encourage students to "think out loud." Empirical research verified intuition, and support grew for the idea of increasing opportunities for student interaction through collaborative learning techniques.

The Origins of VSI: Prior Experience

In the early 1980s, the staff of the Center, relying upon the materials and people cited above, developed applications of SI designed to answer the specific problem of medical students who failed the comprehensive examination in the basic sciences that comes at the end of their second year. Later in the decade, when the number of students from all parts of the U.S. seeking admission to the UMKC Board Review program outstripped the available resources, the staff made a video-based program, FIRSTprep, available for adoption in medical schools outside Kansas City (Blanc 1989). Although the video program was multi-faceted, the central instructional procedure was relatively straightforward. The implementation steps that proved effective in FIRSTprep comprised the central core of VSI:

1. Preview both the vocabulary which will be used in the lecture and, in rather cursory fashion, the main topics to be covered in the lecture. ("Tell them what you are going to tell them.")

2. Process the videotaped lecture. In doing so, stop when necessary to permit students to clarify something the professor has said or simply to assure that the students are tracking the progress of the presentation. (This technique derived from that used by John Madden, commentator on football for CBS network television, who likes to present plays in slow motion for the edification of his audience.) This is the "Tell them" phase of the lesson.

3. Review the videotaped lecture, using any of a variety of well known techniques. ("Tell them what you told them.")

The difference between this approach and those traditionally used in postsecondary education lay in the centrality of students to the process as opposed to the centrality of the material to be learned: -- Students conduct the preview; -- Students determine the pace of the lecture; -- Students assure their own mastery as the lecture progresses; -- Students select the key points for immediate review; -- Students identify misconceptions and modify and adapt their conceptions to achieve, eventually, more complete understanding.

In essence, students take responsibility for their own learning. The role of the facilitator is to drag his or her feet, assuring that students understand the material while firmly resisting the pressure from students to give them answers, thus hurrying the process. In the final analysis, facilitators become experts in finessing answers from their groups.

The result of using videotaped lectures in this way was quite remarkable. In four years, the VSI method has been used with salutary effect by two dozen different medical schools and health-care institutions, preparing people to perform well on medical boards. The combination of the three-stage presentation punctuated by student discussion has proved to be an extremely powerful learning mode.

The Origins of VSI: Advice the Staff Rejected

There is a good deal of conventional wisdom that operates among college reading and study skills programs. If students cannot read and understand a text, the conventional wisdom tells us, first you must teach them to comprehend at least at the tenth grade reading level. Then, they may be ready to enroll in a university course. Meanwhile, in order to help them develop the necessary basic skills, start them at the level where they are and move them at their own speed through the fundamentals of the elementary school, the middle school, and the high school.

And what results come from educational programs designed to provide adults with basic skills? The answer proves disappointing. Those who go into developmental studies rarely matriculate in a university. The staff consulted one data base after another seeking evidence that adults who entered a developmental curriculum with skills at or below the middle school level had gone on to university level coursework. They found only case studies that extolled the virtues of one or another student or of one or another teacher or suggested methods that lacked rigorous evaluative data to support claims of effectiveness. Even today, research shows that only ten percent of African- American students who participated in developmental programs at community colleges had either graduated or were still in school after a period of 3.5 years (Boylan, et al., 1993). Another recent study cites a 12% rate of persistence leading to enrollment in a senior institution if a student engaged in remedial coursework (Jacobson, 1993). The latter figure is irrespective of ethnicity. Furthermore, editorials in abundance complain that students who enter programs of remedial coursework lack the stamina to complete the course of study.

In discussion, staff came back again and again to an alternative view, arguing that lack of basic skills need not preclude a student's comprehension of an academic discipline. The example of Socrates was offered, and it proved persuasive. Staff were particularly responsive to Socrates' dialogue with Meno in which, with Socrates' tutelage, an uneducated slave boy derives the Pythagorean Theorem. What was unusual about Socrates' students? By today's standards, they were surely underprepared. Yet with Socrates' guiding questions and his patient insistence that his students knew or could generate wise answers, they were able to invent the concepts of truth and justice that have survived intact to the present day. Not a bad piece of work for some underprepared Greeks of the fifth century B.C. The next step was to create a fully integrated instructional system that inextricably merged the learning process and the cognitive content of the discipline.

VSI and Original Instruction

Departing only slightly from FIRSTprep, staff devised VSI according to the following plan: (1) Get the most respected undergraduate professor who (2) Teaches one of the historically difficult courses, and (3) Invite the professor into the video studio to deliver an entire course for the video camera. (4) Tidy the lectures with a modicum of editing. (5) Assign six hours of credit to the VSI block: three hours of regular history course credit and three hours of study skills credit. (6) Enroll at-risk students in a special section of the historically difficult course, and (7) Give the students a videocassette recorder, a monitor, a blackboard, and a facilitator. (8) Arrange the schedules of the students to accommodate extended class periods. (9) Ask the professor to administer exams to the regular course and the video-based course on the same schedule and to apply the same grading standards to both sections of the course. (10) Present the video-based course as rigorously as the regular course. (11) Having done all the foregoing, then find a facilitator who has some familiarity with the material and train that person in techniques of collaborative learning. In practice, VSI worked out exactly as planned. The professor had twice won the campus outstanding teacher award. His course in Western Civilization was definitely high risk with 20 to 30% of the students typically ending the semester with D or F grades or withdrawing prior to the end of the term. The professor would videotape the lectures and would cooperate in every way that had been outlined. In addition, he would meet periodically with the video-based class for one-half hour to answer questions.

Similarities and Differences: VSI and Comparison Group

Lacking randomization and other key controls, this study can not claim to meet experimental criteria. The project, however, has been replicated with multiple groups over a period of five semesters on the UMKC campus and lately on other campuses. The following set of data drawn from the Fall 1992 program is representative of the pilot studies conducted at UMKC. A comprehensive VSI study is in progress.

In the Fall of 1992, a total of 18 students enrolled in a special VSI section and 157 in the regular section of Western Civilization. Of the 157 students in the comparison group, 18 enrolled as "pass/no pass," and these were necessarily excluded from all comparisons regarding final course grades. Regarding differences and similarities between the groups, campus experience has shown that professional school students are the most likely to persist; students who have not declared majors are least likely. The data revealed that the VSI group included one professional school student, 5.6%, and 61% undeclared majors. The comparison group included 20% professional school students and only 39% undeclared majors. These differences were found to be statistically significant. Varsity athletes, although not at risk for attrition, typically do not achieve grades as high as the average of students on campus. The VSI group enrolled 39% athletes; the comparison group, 4%. Minority ethnicity appears to be a risk factor on campus, and the VSI group enrolled 50% students of minority ethnicity compared with 25% in the regular lecture course. Only with respect to gender distribution and age were the two groups approximately the same. None of the students in the VSI group had been on the Dean's List for academic distinction; 13% of the other group had been so honored. Looking at probationary status, the reverse ratio appeared with 28% of the VSI group on academic probation and 12% of the comparison population giving this evidence of previous academic difficulty. Early academic history revealed similar data: the VSI group entered the University with a mean ACT score of 16 and they graduated in the middle of their high school classes (52nd percentile). The comparison group earned mean scores of 25 on the ACT and graduated in the 78th percentile from their high schools.

Simply stated, those in the regular lecture section of the Western Civilization course presented profiles that parallel those of academically successful students. The profiles of those in the VSI group would identify them as at-risk or underprepared according to multiple, accepted criteria.

Results

Results were examined with respect to several variables. Course grades are necessary but not sufficient measures of success. Whether the student persists in the University is as good or better a measure of success. Each of these was accepted as a dependent variable in assessing the effectiveness of the VSI project. Both measures indicated that the VSI group performed at as high a level or higher than the students in the regular lecture course.

Ninety-five percent of the VSI group earned A or B grades and none received D grades or failed. Fifty-three percent of students in the regular course received A or B grades, and 24% either received a D grade or failed. Final course grade average favored the VSI group with a mean of 3.6 (on a 4-point scale) compared with 2.3 for the comparison group. With respect to reenrollment, all but one of the students in the VSI group and all of those on probation re-enrolled for the following semester. Of those in the regular section, only 45% of the probationers and 85% over all returned to the University during the succeeding term.

In summary, by every available criterion, although the VSI group appeared to be at greater risk, their performance equalled or exceeded that of the regular lecture group.

The study skills pre- and post-test differences for the VSI group are still being analyzed. Students did show statistically significant gains in abstract reasoning as measured by the Differential Aptitude Tests (Level 2, Form C) and essay writing as assessed by the course professor. Self-report data as shown on the FIRO-B, Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI), and the ACT ASSET revealed statistically significant gains in fifteen categories. Students demonstrated their ability to comprehend difficult material as they passed examinations dealing with their supplemental reading which included Aristophanes' Lysistrata, Bolt's A Man for All Seasons, and Machiavelli's The Prince, all read in their entirety, along with essays by Cicero, among others.

Discussion and Conclusions

The single most encouraging trend that emerges from the implementation of VSI as an alternative rather than a supplement to instruction is evidence that underprepared, at-risk students can master difficult and rigorous content and develop requisite skills at the same time. The corollaries of that statement are the following: (1) Students who cannot effectively read and understand the textbook or listen to and understand a professor's lecture or listen to a lecture and prepare a set of class notes can, nonetheless, learn history, and while doing so, can acquire or strengthen the skills necessary for academic success; and (2) Students who cannot write an effective essay answer to an academic question can learn to do so within the context of an academic course of study.

These corollaries lead to the conclusion that students who are underprepared for postsecondary education can simultaneously engage in university study and develop the requisite skills.

Of equal importance, perhaps, is the obvious fact that the facilitator manages students' study time. VSI staff conclude that managed study is an essential component of the program, as students who are at-risk need direct support, at least until they are sufficiently practiced in the techniques of study to manage on their own. Yet another implication of the VSI model relates to the centrality of the lecture in the educational process. In other, perhaps more literate times, the text was central to the learning experience, and the professor emphasized the elements of the text that were essential and linked those elements in insightful ways. Now, in response to a less-literate generation, the lecture acquires the central instructional role with the text serving as reference material. It must be noted, however, that this reversal is only viewed by the VSI practitioner as temporary, that VSI holds promise as a means by which to move one to a higher level of literacy.

The magical ingredient in the process appears to be the technology that manifests in the form of the videocassette and the remote control device. This technology enables the student to alternate between the professor's lecture and the silence in which to consider the meaning. The moments of silence are precious. Silence offers the student a rare commodity in the context of a classroom: time to think. And the reflective time allows the student to form questions, observations, and opinions. Those, then, are shared with fellow students. Confusion is resolved; conflicting views are weighed; differences are explored. Students leave the session with clearly defined questions and a sense of what to do next.

A final reference to Socrates is perhaps appropriate. In the Apology, Plato quoted Socrates' statement, "The life which is unexamined is not worth living." The educational equivalent might be, "The lecture that is unexamined is not worth hearing." Adult students today, under the press of heavy commitments, rarely take time to actually examine and reflect upon what they are learning. Most feel fortunate if they can crowd in enough hours to meet the most immediate deadlines. In VSI, students have both the time and the guidance to examine not only the material of the discipline, but the ways in which they, as students, think and learn and interact with one another. Time and guidance may not be the characteristics of quick solutions, but they are more likely to be the characteristics of meaningful change.

References

ACT ASSET. The American College Testing Program, 1990.

Austin, M.. "Improving Comprehension of Mathematics." Reading in the Secondary Schools, ed. M. Jerry Weiss, New York: The Odyssey Press, Inc., 1961, 391-396.

Betts, E. Foundations of Reading Instruction. New York: American Book, 1946.

Blanc, R. FIRSTprep. Institute for Professional Preparation: University of Missouri-Kansas City, 1989.

Boylan, H., Bliss, L., Bonham, B. "The Performance of Minority Students in Developmental Education." Research In Developmental Education, Appalachian State University: Boone, NC. 1993, 10 (2).

Differential Aptitude Tests, 5, The Psychological Corporation Harcourt, Bruce Jovanovich, 1990.

Fuller, R. G., ed. Piagetian Programs in Higher Education. Lincoln, NE: ADAPT, 1980.

Jacobson, R. "Community Colleges Wonder Whether They Can Keep Doors Open to All." The Chronicle of Higher Education, July, 1993.

Karplus, R. The Science Curriculum Improvement Study. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974.

Lochhead, J. and Clement, J., eds. Cognitive Process Instruction. Franklin Institute Press: Philadelphia, 1979.

Robinson, F. Effective Study. New York: Harper Brothers, 1961.

Palmer, D. and Schute, A. "LASSI." Learning and Study Strategies Inventory, H and H Publishing, Clearwater, 1987.

Schutz, W. FIRO-B. Consulting Psychologists Press, 1989. Stauffer, R. Directing reading maturity as a cognitive process. New York: Harper and Row, 1969.

Whimbey, A., Carmichael, J.W., Jr., Jones, L.W., Hunter, J.T. and Vincent, H.A. "Teaching Critical Reading and Analytical Reasoning in Project SOAR." Journal of Reading, 1980, 24, 5-10.

Whimbey, A., Sadler, W. "A Holistic Approach To Improving Thinking Skills." Phi Delta Kappan, 1985, November, 199-203.

[Site Map]

Top of page | Main Document Download page

--------------60E6F19DA41940374E62AE43--