ROLE PLAYING, SELF EFFICACY AND THE AT RISK READING ...
Transcript of ROLE PLAYING, SELF EFFICACY AND THE AT RISK READING ...
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
1
ROLE‐PLAYING,SELF‐EFFICACYANDTHEAT‐RISKREADINGSTUDENT
TiffanyRenaeMillerMiddleTennesseeStateUniversity
DawnMcCormackMiddleTennesseeStateUniversityDawn.mccormack@mtsu.edu
RebeccaCawoodMcIntyre
MiddleTennesseeStateUniversity [email protected]
TimothyNelson
Abstract
Academicallyat‐riskstudentsfacedifficultanduniquechallengesinhighereducation.In
thisstudy,wearguethatReactingtothePastpedagogy,arole‐playinggame,provides
studentstheopportunitytolearneffectively.Thestudyfocusesonapilotprogramrecently
adoptedbyMiddleTennesseeStateUniversity’sReadingHistoryInitiative,acorequisite
programthatlinksreadingenhancementcourseswithrequiredhistorysurveys.The
resultsofthestudysuggestthatrole‐playingandspecificallytheReactingtothePast
pedagogyincreasesacademicself‐efficacyamongat‐riskreadingstudents.Thisincreasein
self‐efficacyleadstoadeeperappreciationoflearningandhigherlevelsofachievement.
ThisstudybridgesanimportantconnectionbetweenReactingtothePastpedagogyandat‐
riskstudents.Ultimately,thisstudyenhancesourunderstandingoftheopportunitiesthat
emerginginstructionalpractices,suchasReactingtothePast,canhaveamong
academicallyat‐riskcommunities.
Keywords:self‐efficacy,ReactingtothePast(RTTP,Reacting),academicallyat‐risk,
learningcommunities,studentsuccess,bestpractices,highimpactpractices,role‐play
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
2
StatementoftheProblem
Self‐efficacyisanindividual’sbeliefintheabilitytoaccomplishtasks,andacademic
self‐efficacyimpliesthatthetasksmustrelatetoacademicgoals(Vuong,Brown‐Welty,&
Tracz,2010).Astudent’sself‐efficacycontributestoacademicdevelopmentbydetermining
hisorheraspirations,levelofmotivation,andevenacademicaccomplishments(Bandura,
1993).Thereisapositiverelationshipbetweenself‐efficacyandlearningbecausethemore
astudentbelievesheorshecanaccomplishatask,thehighertheperformance(Barry&
Finney,2009).Self‐efficacyisacriticalskilltodevelopforstudentswhocometocollege
underprepared(Hsieh,Sullivan,&Guerra,2007).Thisstudyexaminesacohortofat‐risk
readingstudentsatMiddleTennesseeStateUniversity(MTSU),alargeregionalpublic
universitywithapproximately22,000students.“Atrisk”inthisstudyisstudentswhoscore
belowa19ontheReadingportionoftheACT.Thisprojectbeganasanhonor’sthesisin
Fall2017(Miller,2018).Ourgoalwastodeterminewhetherarole‐playinggamewould
buildself‐efficacyinourstudentpopulation.ReactingtothePast(RTTPorReacting),a
sophisticatedrole‐playinggame,waschosentotestthehypothesisthatthisactivelearning
wouldengagestudentsandbuildtheirabilitytoaccomplishacademicgoals.Reactinghas
beenstudiedintraditionalclassroomsettingsbut,todate,nostudieshaveshownits
impactintheat‐riskcohort.Althoughthiswasasmallpilot,wearguethatrole‐playingand
specificallyRTTPcanhaveaplaceinthedevelopmentalcoursesparticularlybecauseit
buildsacademicself‐efficacy.Inthefollowingsectionswewillgiveanoverviewofthe
relevantliterature,describetheacademicallyat‐riskpopulationatMTSU,andshowhow
thesestudents’needshavebeenaddressed.Thenwewilldescribethemethodsofthe
projectandhowitwasadaptedfortheat‐riskstudentsusingtheIndianaUniversity(IU)
SouthBendstudymeasuringself‐efficacy.Finally,wewilldiscussthefindingsandtheir
significanceforthispopulationandpotentiallyforotherdevelopmentalprogramsinhigher
education.
TheRelationshipbetweenDevelopmentalReadingandSelf‐Efficacy
Highereducationvaluesreadingcomprehension(Tinto,1993).Bythetimea
studentreachesuniversity,heorsheisexpectedtoreadavarietyoftextsandderivedeep
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
3
meaningsuniquelyfromthosetexts.Whilesomestudentsgainthisreadingproficiency,
othersstruggletoattainthegoal.Thislackofreadingskillsinuniversityagestudentsis
becomingmorepervasive.TheNationalEndowmentfortheArts(2007)reportsthree
alarmingshifts:first,Americansarespendinglesstimereading;second,reading
comprehensionskillsareeroding;andthird,thesedeclineshaveseriouscivic,social,
cultural,andeconomicimplications.
Compoundinglowreadingskillsistheriseinthenumberofstudentswhoenrollin
someformofhighereducation.Betweentheyear2004and2014,collegeenrollment
nationallyincreasedby17%(USDepartmentofEducation,2017).Inthefallof2016,
69.7%ofhighschoolgraduatesenrolledincollege(U.S.DepartmentofLabor,2017)and
manyofthesestudentswereill‐equippedforcollegecoursework.Intheirannualreporton
the"ConditionofCollegeandCareerReadiness,"ACTanalystsreportedonly44%ofthe
classof2016satisfactorilyreachedthebenchmarkinreading(ACT,2016).Theyarenot
aloneintheirfindings;theNationalAssessmentofEducationalProgressreportedthatonly
37%ofstudentsmeetorexceedreadingproficiency(USDepartmentofEducation,2016).
Thesereportsindicatethatuniversitiesareincreasinglyenrollingstudentsunder‐prepared
fortheacademicandprofessionalroadahead.
Studentsindevelopmentalreadingcourseshavealsobeenfoundtohavelowerself‐
efficacyattributesthanpeersintraditionalcollegecourses(Cantrelletal.,2013).Thiscan
haveasignificantimpactonretention.Curriculumindevelopmentalcourseshasthe
potentialtoincreaseself‐efficacy(MacArthur,Philippakos,&Ianetta,2015).Intentionally
choosingcurriculumandpedagogicalmethodsthathavethepotentialtoincreasestudent
self‐efficacyisimportantindevelopmentaleducationbecauseofthepotentialpositive
effectsforincreasingstudentsuccessandretention.Inarecentstudy,Han,Farruggia,and
Moss(2017)investigatedtherelationshipsbetweennon‐cognitive,ormindset,factors
amongfreshmenandstudentsuccess.Mindsetwasfoundtopredictacademicachievement
andretention,andself‐efficacywasthespecificmindsetmost‐closelyassociatedwith
academicsuccess.
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
4
MTSUandtheReadingHistoryInitiative
Highereducationadministratorsandfacultyareaddressingtheneedsoftheunder‐
preparedstudentandschoolshaveinstitutedprogramsdesignedtoassistthesestudentsin
developingthenecessaryskillsforasuccessfulacademiccareer.Theseprogramsvaryin
scopeandcomplexity.Currently,auniversityseekingtoimplementaprogramforthe
academicallyat‐riskoftenchoosesfromtwopopularapproaches(Hodges&Agee2009).
Thefirstisthedesignationofprescribedcoursesdesignedtomeetneedsdemonstratedby
assessmentandthesecondconsistsoflearningassistantservicesofferedtotheentire
studentpopulation.MTSUusesablendedapproachwithlinkedclasses.MTSUhasastrong
commitmenttostudentsuccessandhasbeenproactiveinidentifyingpopulationsthat
needadditionalsupporttobesuccessful.Oneoftheprogramstocomeoutofthat
commitmentistheReadingHistoryInitiative.
TheReadingHistoryInitiativebeganinfall2015whenMTSUdirectlylinked(as
corequisites)READ1000ReadingSkillsEnrichment,athree‐hourprescribedreading
coursewithsectionsofHIST2020SurveyofUnitedStatesHistoryII,ageneraleducation
requirement.TheuniversitychoseHIST2020becauseitisa“gatekeeper”course;success
inthiscoursecorrelateshighlywithstudentretention.History2020isalsooneofthemost
challengingrequiredgeneraleducationcourses,particularlyforstudentswhoreadbelow
thecollegelevel.Inthispairing,theREAD1000courseusesthehistoryreadingsas
classroomtexts,employingavarietyofstrategiestoaidstudentcomprehension.The
readinginstructorandthehistoryinstructoralsoworkcloselytomaximizethe
effectivenessofthepairing.
In2017,theReadingHistoryInitiativepilotedanewcoursepairing,thanksinpart
toaTennesseeBoardofRegentsStudentEngagement,Retention,andSuccessGrant.While
preparingforthegrantapplication,theinvestigators(MarvaLucas,DawnMcCormack,
RebeccaMcIntyre,andTimothyNelson)discoveredthatanalarmingnumberofat‐risk
studentswerenotgraduatingbecausetheyfailedtocompleteorevenenrollinHIST2010
SurveyoftheUnitedStatesHistoryI,arequiredcourse.AtMTSU,asatotherpublic
universitiesandcollegesinTennessee,studentsarerequiredtotaketwohistorysurveys.
At‐riskreadingstudentshadtakenthefirstrequiredhistorybutweredelayingornot
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
5
takingthesecondrequiredhistory.Only35%ofthestudentswhotookdevelopmental
readinginFall2010hadtakenthesecondrequiredhistorywithinsixyears.Thesix‐year
graduationrateforthosestudentswasalso35%.Thefundedprojectgaveat‐riskreading
studentstheincentivetotakethatcrucialsecondhistorycoursebyprovidinganystudent
whosucceededintheREAD1000/HIST2020sequencetheopportunitytotakethesecond
requiredhistorysurveyHIST2010withaonehourpairedreadinglab.Withthislabas
extrasupport,webelievethatmoreat‐riskstudentswillcompletethisgeneraleducation
requirement,allowingthemtopersisttowardgraduation.Thepilotforthegrantwas5
readinglabspairedwith5history2010surveys.Alltheinstructors,bothhistoryand
reading,decidedtoemphasizeactivelearningandemployatleastoneHighImpactPractice
(HIP).Fortwoofthesepairedsections,ReactingtothePastwaschosenasoneoftheHIPs
experiences.
ReactingtothePast
ReactingtothePastisaprograminitiallycreatedbyMarkCarnesatBarnardCollege
(Carnes,2014).TheReactingprogramincludesahostofsimulationsthatallowstudentsto
role‐playdiversehistoricalevents.OneoftheprimarygoalsofReactingistointroduce
studentstothecomplexdecisionsofthepast(Proctor,2011).Typically,thesehistorical
momentsinvolveonetothreekeydecisions.Thegamedemandsthatstudentsplaya
characterwhocaninfluencethosedecisions,notjustre‐enactaneventfromthepastwitha
derivativescript.Studentsaregivenarolesheetthatdelineatestheirparticularagendaand
theirfaction.Theymustpromotetheiragendabyusingprimarysourcematerialsasthe
basisforcraftingarguments,makingspeeches,brokeringdeals,negotiatingbetween
factions,writingpersuasiveletters,andcreatingpublications.Inordertowin,students
mustconductintensiveresearch,collaboratewithpeers,andsharpenkeyrhetoricskills
throughclassdebates.Thesimulationsmaybedesignedtolastanywherefromonedayto
multipleweeks.Eachgameishighlyadaptabletosuittheobjectivessetbytheinstructor.
Thegamesarewidelyresearchedandvettedbyleadingprofessorsinfieldssuchashistory,
anthropology,philosophy,andpoliticalscience(Carnes,2014).Instructorshaveawide
varietyofdevelopedgamebooksfromwhichtochoosethroughtheReactingtothePast
library(https://reacting.barnard.edu/the‐curriculum).FromAthens,Greeceandthe
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
6
debateoverdemocracytoIndia’spushforindependence,manyofthegamesaresetin
someofthemosthighlycontestedtimesofhistory.Thisgame‐basedpedagogyuses
students’desirestowinasamotivatorforengaginginthecomplexitiesofthepast(Carnes,
2014).
Thegameisactivelearningatitsbestbecauseitrequirescognitiveprocessing
(Hagood,Watson,&Williams,2018).Thegamesemphasizeteamworkandcollaborationby
usingfactions,deal‐making,anddiscussion.Thiscollaborationaddsasocialrequirementor
overtexpectation(Hagoodetal.,2018).Participationismorethansimplytakingnotesor
beingintheclass.Studentsareheldaccountabletotheirpeersforknowingthematerial
andparticipatinginamannerworthyoftheirdesignatedcharacters.Studentsalsoreport
feelingempoweredtolearnthroughthestructureofthegame.Inordertowin,theymust
defendanargument;awell‐constructedargumentconsistsofsupportiveevidencefoundin
theprimarydocuments.Therefore,Reactingemphasizesactivelearningbyencouraging
studentstocollaborateandinternalizethematerial.
TheReactingpedagogyalignswithmanyofthecharacteristicsofHighImpact
Practices.HIPsaredefinedas“…teachingandlearningpractices(that)havebeenwidely
testedandhavebeenshowntobebeneficialforcollegestudentsfrommanybackgrounds”
(Kuh,2008).Thefindingsofhigh‐impactresearchhaveledtheAssociationofAmerican
CollegesandUniversities(AAC&U)toadoptthesepracticesintotheirmovementfor
nationalLiberalEducation(Hagoodetal.,2018).GeorgeKuh,aleadingscholaronHIPs,
believesthatinordertoenhancestudentengagementandincreasestudentsuccesswe
must,“…makeitpossibleforeverystudenttoparticipateinatleasttwohigh‐impact
activitiesduringhisorherundergraduateprogram”(Kuh,2008).
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
7
Note:High‐ImpactEducationalPractices(2013).Retrievedfrom:www.aacu.org
Reactingfitsintofourhigh‐impactareas:acommonintellectualexperience,
collaborativeassignmentandprojects,undergraduateresearch,andintensiveburstsof
writing.Reactingalsoincludesinvolvementinsociallearningwithahightimecommitment
(takingweeksormonthstocomplete).Theseaspectsallowthestudenttocraftindividual
learningandongoingcriticalthinkinganddecision‐making,bothofwhichcharacterize
HIPs(Hagoodetal.,2018).
Reactingisalsoagoodfitformanystudentsincludingthosefromlow
socioeconomicbackgrounds.InastudyofReactingatMTSU,DawnMcCormackandKaren
Petersen(2018)concludedthat“RTTPcanengagestudentsfromdiversebackgrounds
withouttheoften‐prohibitivecostsassociatedwithothertypesofHIPs,suchasstudy
abroadandinternshipprograms.”Traditionallyunderrepresentedstudentscanstill
benefitfromHIPseveniftheycanonlyparticipateincollegeandtakecoursesthatutilize
Reactingcurricula.
TheReactingpedagogyhasmanypositivebenefits.McCormackandPetersen’sstudy
suggeststhatRTTPisaneffectivepedagogicaltoolforstudentengagement,andthatthe
experiencehelpsstudentsgainimportantskills(McCormack&Petersen,2018).Allofthis,
theyargue,shouldaidinretentionandappreciationforliberalartseducation.Bernstein,
Strasma,Olwell,andHigbee(2018)conductedafollow‐upstudyofstudentsthathad
participatedinReactingcoursestounderstandthelongitudinaleffectsofthepedagogy.
Theyfoundthatstudents’experiencedincreasedempathy,sawmultipleperspectives,and
understoodsimilaritiesamongtheiracademicpursuits.Anothernotablestudythat
examinedReactingconductedbyHagood,Norman,Park,andWilliams(2018)soughtto
Table1.AAC&U'stenhigh‐impactpractices
Highimpactpractices
Firstyearseminarsandexperiences Diversity/GlobalLearning
CommonintellectualExperiences ePortfolios
LearningCommunities ServiceLearning,Community‐Basedlearning
Writing‐IntensiveCourses Internships
CollaborativeAssignmentsandProjects Capstonecoursesandprojects
UndergraduateResearch
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
8
examinethepedagogyfrombothsidesoftheclassroom:studentsandinstructorsthrough
nation‐widesurveys.Overall,theirrespondentsbelievethatReactingfundamentally
changedhowtheylearnandteach.Theyalsofoundthatthemoreclassesastudenttakes
thegreatertheimpact.
ResearchershaveexaminedeffectsthatReactingcanhaveonstudentself‐efficacy.
Asmentionedearlier,theIUSouthBendstudydelvesintothecomplexrelationshipof
Reactingandself‐efficacy(Schult,Lidinsky,Zwicker,&Dunn,2018).Theresults
demonstratethattherewasanoverallincreaseinstudentefficacywiththelargest
improvementsforwomen.ThestudyalsopointedtoReactingpedagogybeingmost
powerfulforstudentswhofindtraditionalclassroomsleastempowering(Schultetal.,
2018).
However,Reactinghasnotbeenthoroughlystudiedintermsofat‐riskpopulations
orinthedevelopmentalclassroom.Aprimaryaimofthisstudywastodetermineifa
complexrole‐playinggamewouldengagestudentsinthematerialandbolstertheirsense
ofaccomplishment,theiracademicself‐efficacy.Althoughcommonlyconfused,self‐efficacy
isnotthesameasself‐esteemorself‐confidence,whichtendtomeasureanindividual’s
self‐worthorvalue.Eventhemostintellectualofstudentsmaystruggletoexcelinthe
classroom.AsnotedbyBandura(1993,p.119),“Thereisamarkeddifferencebetween
possessingknowledgeandskillsandbeingabletousethemwellundertaxingconditions.”
Bandurasuggeststhattherearetwodominantwaysastudentmayconstrueability.Some
studentsregardabilityasanacquirableskillthatcanbeimprovedthroughknowledge.
Theytendtojudgetheircapabilitiesbasedonpersonalimprovementratherthan
comparisonwithothers.Thisviewhelpsthestudentadvanceandadapttochanging
academicintensities.Otherstudentsseeabilityasaninherentcapacity.Iftheyperform
well,itisbecausetheyhavetheintellectualcapacity;iftheyperformpoorly,theylackthis
intellectualcapacity.Moreover,thelattertendtojudgetheircapabilitiesbasedonothers’
performances,whichcanbelittletheirviewofadvancement.Understandably,thiscanlead
toahighlyfrustratedstudentwithlittleadaptability.
Quantitatively,researchershavefoundthelevelofself‐efficacytobethesingle
strongestpredictorofGPAwhenexaminingacademicsuccessmodels(Faust,2017;Solberg
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
9
&Villareal,1997).Researchershavealsofoundthatself‐efficacymeasuresareauseful
predictorofcontinuinginachosenfieldofstudyandevengraduation(Vuongetal.,2010).
EducationalPsychologistshavealsoshownthatself‐efficacyplaysanimportantrolein
personaladjustmentstocollegelife,particularlyinthefirstyears(Chemers,Hu,&Garcia,
2001).Ultimately,measuringtheimpactapedagogyhasonstudentself‐efficacycanreveal
muchabouttheeffectivenessofthepractice.
Reactingfitsintothebroadcategoryofnewliteraciesasanalternateandcreative
meansofengagingstudentsinwhatHagood(2008)referredtoas“alternativeidentity
constructions”(p.539).AlthoughReactinggamesdonotcurrentlyincludeonline
components,thereisconsiderablepedagogicaloverlapwithAlternativeRealityGames
(ARGs),whicharegainingattentioninacademiccircles(Moseley,2012).Specifically,
ReactingsharesatleastfourcharacteristicswithARGs:theuseofnarrative,theabilityof
participantstoinfluenceoutcomes,problemsolvinginatime‐limitedformat,and
participationinacommunity.Thealternativerealitysettingcreatedinrole‐playallowsfor
ablendingoffamiliardiscourseswithhistoricalconversationswhereineducatorshopeto
engagestudents.Whilethevoicesthatstudentsbringtothegamesissuretoaffectgame
outcomes,itisplausiblethatengaginginnewdiscoursesinthegamesettingwillaffecthow
studentsparticipateincontemporaryculture.
Method
ThisprojectexaminedstudentsintwosectionsoftheMTSUHIST2010course,both
sectionsbeingpairedwithaonehourreadinglab.Thehistorycoursemetforthreehours
perweek,withtheonehourreadinglabfollowingimmediatelyafterthehistorycourse.In
total,thestudyincludes1,090minutes(approximately18hours)ofdirectclass
observations.
Duringthisstudy,thehonorsstudent(Miller)workedcloselywiththehistory
professor(McIntyre),whochosetheRTTPgamePatriots,Loyalists,andRevolutioninNew
YorkCity,1775‐1776becauseitbestfitthelearningobjectivesofthecourse(Offut,2011).
ThisgameintroducesstudentstothepoliticalandsocialchaosofcolonialNewYorkCity.
PatriotsandLoyalistsvieforanadvantageinanundecidedpopulace.Throughthe
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
10
experience,studentsbegintounderstandthestrengthsandweaknessesofbothsides.They
alsobegintounderstandhowthecolonialenvironment(i.e.economicsystem,social
structure,etc.)shapedtheimpactandpowerofthearguments.Themaindebatecenterson
whethercolonialNewYorkCityshouldpursueapathofreconciliationwiththeBritishor
independence(andpossiblewar)fromthemothercountry.
TheultimategoalofeachstudentistogaincontrolofNewYorkCityattheendof
1776,aswellasachievecertainvictoryobjectivesspecifictohisorherroleand
background.Publicpoliticalpersuasionthrougheffectiveargumentationstrengthensthe
student’schancesofwinning.However,thesearenottheonlyformsofpersuasion.
Studentsmayalsochoosetoengageinprivatepersonaldeals,pamphleteering,swayinga
crowd,andevenbriberywhenappropriate.Thecombinationoftheseovertandcovert
activitiesdeterminesthestudent’svictory.Whetherastudentisvictoriousisbasedupon
hisorhercharacter’srole.
Throughoutthegamethestudentsmustalsounderstandtherichphilosophical
debatesofthetime.Politicalideologiessuchasliberalism,republicanism,anddemocracy
reallybegantofomentduringthecolonialera.Studentsmustderivethecoreoftheir
argumentsfromtheseschoolsofthought.Tohelpstudentsgrapplewiththesedeep
concepts,thedesigneraddedaseriesofprimarysourcestothegamebook.Thesesources
includeextensiveexcerptsfromJohnLocke’sSecondTreatiseofGovernmentandpamphlets
fromSamuelJohnson,ThomasPaine,andJamesChalmers(Offut,2011).
Table2.Patriots,Loyalists,andRevolutioninNewYorkCity,1775‐1776
LearningObjectives
CriticalThinking TeamworkandProblem‐Solving
Writing Making"CitizensoftheWorld"
Speaking BuildingCommunity
Leadership
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
11
Eachgameisdesignedtobehighlyadaptabletotheobjectivesoftheinstruction.
Therefore,adecisionwasmadetoadaptthegametofittheneedsoftheacademicallyat‐
riskstudents.Forthispilot,MillerandMcIntyrechangedthetimeframefortheReacting
game.Typicallythegameisfourweekslong.Becauseofthenewnessofthegametothe
studentsandtheprogram,theydecidedtocondensethegameintoamorecompressed
schedulethatlastedthreeweeksbecausetheywantedtogiveextratimelayingoutthe
contextofthegame..
Contextsessions,whichoccurpriortogameplay,werecriticallyimportant.These
sessionslastedtwoandonehalfweeksinsteadoftheusualoneweek.Facultymembers
haveobservedthatmanyat‐riskreadingstudentscomewithveryshallowhistorical
knowledge.Thus,MillerandMcIntyrefeltitimportanttohavestudentsunderstandthe
complexbackgroundthatledto1776.Thecontextsessionsweregivenaslectureswith
frequentquizzesinterspersed.Whilethecontextsessionsgaveavalidoverview,theylater
learnedthatthestudentswantedmorecontext,particularlyoneconomicandmilitary
matters.Theyalsoadjustedtherolesheetsbeforegivingthemtothestudents.Manyofthe
rolesheetsincludedmaterialthatwasmorerelevanttotheeliminatedsessions.Theyleft
thebackgroundsandbiographiesofthecharactersintactandaddedsomeillustrationsto
therolesheetssothestudentscouldgetabetterideaofwhattheircharacterswouldhave
lookedanddressedlike.
MillerandMcIntyrealsoadjustedthereadingrequirements.Theydirectedthe
studentstouseThomasPaine’sCommonSenseandJamesChalmers’PlainTruth.Paine’s
Table3.Patriots,Loyalists,andRevolutioninNewYorkCity,1775‐1776
KeyConcepts
Philosophicalbasisofgovernment
Originof,rightsto,andgovernmentalprotectionofproperty
Ruleoflawandtheroleofcourts
Historicalcontingency
Rightofrebellionandrevolutionundercertaincircumstances
Roleandlegitimacyofviolence
Politicallegitimacyofagovernmentandhowitisgained,maintained,andlost
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
12
CommonSenseaddressesthesharedgrievancesofthePatriots.Althoughalittlelesswell‐
known,ChalmerswrotePlainTruthasarebuttaltoPaine’sargumentandstronglysupports
theLoyalists’cause.Theygavestudentsthetextoftheoriginaldocument.Toadaptthis
gameforthestudents,McIntyrealsocreatedannotatedversionsofbothpiecesandshowed
anin‐classvideoonThomasPaine.
Thegame’soriginaldesignincludesavarietyofassignmentoptions.Forthispilot,
McIntyredecidedtofocusheavilyonparticipation,speeches,andreflection.Participation
involvedmorethanjustshowinguptoclass;studentshadtobeactivelyinvolvedinthe
discussionandhadtodemonstratethattheyunderstoodtheobjectivesoftheirroles.This
wasdeterminedbytheactionstheytookandthewordstheyspokeinclass.Speecheswere
requiredtobesubmittedbeforetheyweredelivered.Thegradeassessedboththewritten
speechandtheoralspeech.Anotheradjustmenttothegamewasafinalreflectionpaper.
Studentswroteandturnedinareflectionontheircharacter,theircharacterdevelopment,
howtheyplayedthegame,andwhattheylearnedfromthegame.
Todetermineself‐efficacy,MillerusedtheIndianaUniversitySouthBendstudythat
measuredtheself‐efficacyofcollegestudentsenrolledineightsectionsoftheirLiterary
andIntellectualTraditionsReactingcoursesfrom2010‐2013(Schultetal.,2018).Apre‐
surveywasadministeredafterthecontextsessionbutbeforethegameplay,andapost‐
surveywasadministeredafterthegameended.Surveyswerethechoseninstrumentto
measurechangesinself‐efficacy,primarilybecauseself‐efficacyisanindividually
perceivedmeasurebestcapturedbysurveys.ThesurveywasadaptedfromtheIUSouth
Bendstudy(Schultetal.,2018),whichusedanadjustedformofBarryandFinney’s(2009)
CollegeSelf‐EfficacySurveyforRTTP.
TheMTSUsurveyaskedquestionsinthreeprimarytaskareas.First,therewere
questionsthatspecificallyrelatedtoReactingtaskssuchasspeeches,identifyingmain
points,andunderstandingdifferentperspectives.Next,therewerequestionsthatevaluated
studentperceptiononacademictaskssuchasresearchingandwritingpapers,
understandingreadings,andmanagingtime.Finally,therewerequestionsthatevaluated
studentperceptiononsocialtaskssuchasmakingfriends,workingwellinagroup,and
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
13
joiningaclassdiscussion.Becausesomeofthetaskswereessentialtomultipleareas,there
wassomeoverlapinquestions.
WhilethestudyisbasedontheIUSouthBendproject,itisimportanttonotesome
keydifferences.First,thesizeofparticipantpoolfortheIUSouthBendstudywas134,for
theMTSUstudyitwas25.Additionally,theparticipantsoftheIUSouthBendstudywerein
typicalclasssettings;theMTSUstudyincludesparticipantsthatareacademicallyat‐risk.
TheresultsoftheIUSouthBendstudyindicatedthatthestudentswhobenefitedthemost
fromtheReactingpedagogywerethosewhofoundtraditionalformsofinstruction
ineffective,whichprovespromisingfortheMTSUacademicallyat‐riskcommunity.
Theself‐efficacysurveysusedbytheIUSouthBendstudy(Schultetal.,2018)were
adaptedtofittheMTSUstudybyreducingthenumberofquestionsandadjustingthe
wordingoftheopen‐endedresponsequestion.Theprimarythree‐foldlayoutofthesurvey
questionsfocusingonReacting,academic,andsocialskillsremainedthesame.LiketheIU
SouthBendstudy(Schultetal.),studentswereaskedtoindicatetheirconfidenceaboutthe
questionsona1‐10scale.
Thedistributionofsurveysoccurredatdifferenttimesinthetwostudies.TheIU
SouthBendstudy(Schultetal.,2018)gavethepre‐surveyatthebeginningofthesemester
andthepost‐surveyattheend.TheMTSUstudygivesthepre‐surveyandthepost‐survey
only3weeksapart.WebelieveconductingthesurveyscenteredontheReacting
componenthelpedisolatetheeffectsofthisparticularpedagogy,ratherthanthe15‐week
classaswhole.ThiswasparticularlynecessarysincetheMTSUstudydidnotuseacontrol
groupforcomparisonofresults.
Reflectionpapersweretheothermethodusedtodetermineofself‐efficacy.The
reflectionpromptaskedstudentstoassesshowthegamechangedhowtheythoughtof
historyandgameplaying.Theywereencouragedtowriteaboutwhattheyperceivedas
beneficialornotbeneficialaboutthegame.
ResultsandDataAnalysis
Thesurvey’sopen‐endedresponsesprovidemoredetailaboutthestudents’
personalobservationsofgrowthinself‐efficacy.Theresponsescenteredontwoareas.
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
14
While34outofthe35eligiblestudentsagreedtoparticipate,only25completelyfilledout
thesurveys.Astables4,5,and6illustrate,thestudentsexperiencedanoverallincreasein
self‐efficacy.
Table4.Combined(Class1&2)Pre‐test/post‐testcomparisonsforRTTPtasks
Question Pre‐test Post‐Test MeanDifference
t(25)
M SD M SD
Makeaspeech 5.4 2.12 7.92 1.632.52
1.673E‐05 *
UnderstandDifferentPerspectives 7.4 1.61 8.52 1.00 1.12 0.229 *
Identifymainpoints 7.6 1.66 8.52 1.23 0.92 0.598 *
Reading 6.64 1.96 8.08 1.38 1.44 0.041 *
SupportPOV 7.88 1.74 8.8 1.26 0.92 0.334 *
Note:n=25,*p<0.05
Table5.Combined(Class1&2)Pre‐test/post‐testcomparisonsforacademictasks
Question Pre‐test Post‐Test MeanDifference
t(25)
M SD M SD
ResearchforPaper 6.76 2.13 7.84 1.95 1.08 0.681 *
WritePapers 6.36 2.40 7.76 1.90 1.4 0.008 *
UnderstandReadings 6.84 2.10 8.24 1.59 1.4 0.071 *
ManageTime 7.36 2.46 8.32 1.57 0.96 2.250 *
Note:n=25,*p<0.05
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
15
Table6.Combined(Class1and2)Pre‐test/post‐testcomparisonsforsocialtasks
Question Pre‐test Post‐Test MeanDifference
t(25)
M SD M SD
MakeFriends 7.28 2.19 8.4 1.87 1.12 0.076 *
WorkWellwithGroup 7.64 1.89 8.44 1.69 0.8 2.198 *
JoinClassDiscussion 7.68 2.01 8.72 1.43 1.04 0.033 *
Note:n=25,*p<0.05
Studentsdemonstratedgrowthinalltwelvetasks.Thelargestgainsweremadein
twoReactingspecifictasks:makeaspeech(+2.52)andreading(+1.44).OtherReacting
specifictasks,suchasidentifyingmainpointsandsupportingpointsofview,alsosaw
significantincreasesinself‐efficacy.Theareawiththethird‐highestgainwastiedbetween
twogeneralacademictasks:writepapers(+1.40)andunderstandreadings(+1.40).Allfour
ofthegeneralacademicskillssawincreasesinself‐efficacy.Therewasanincreaseinthe
socialtasksinallthreeoftheareas:makingfriends,workingwellwithagroup,andjoininga
classdiscussion.
Intheclassspecificanalyses,class1hadthegreatestincreasesintheareasof
makingaspeech(+2.88),researchingforapaper(+1.75),andwritingforapaper(+1.75).
Tenofthetwelvetaskareasindicatedasignificantincrease.Class2alsohadthegreatest
increaseinmakingaspeech,butatamoremodestamount+1.89(versusClass1of+2.88).
Thenextlargestincreasewasinunderstandingdifferentperspectives(+1.44).Sevenofthe
twelveareasindicatedasignificantincreaseinself‐efficacy.Class2hadonly9outofits15
studentscompletebothsurveys—a60%participationrate.Class1had16ofits20
studentssufficientlycompletebothsurveys—an80%participationrate.
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
16
Table8.Pre‐test/post‐testcomparisonsforClass2
Question Pre‐test Post‐Test MeanDifference
t(9)
M SD M SD
Makeaspeech 5.33 2.74 7.22 1.86 1.89 0.800 *
UnderstandDifferentPerspectives 6.89 1.76 8.33 0.71 1.44 0.499 *
Identifymainpoints 7.33 1.73 7.89 1.27 0.56 30.156
Reading 6.78 1.39 7.78 1.39 1.00 3.997 *
SupportPOV 7.89 1.76 8.56 1.33 0.67 11.143
ResearchforPaper 7.44 2.01 7.33 2.24 ‐0.11 82.430
WritePapers 7.00 2.29 7.78 2.28 0.78 4.311 *
UnderstandReadings 6.67 2.00 7.78 1.56 1.11 3.036 *
ManageTime 7.67 1.80 7.89 1.62 0.22 59.426
MakeFriends 7.11 2.62 7.67 2.45 0.56 21.446
WorkWellwithGroup 7.11 2.15 8.44 1.24 1.33 2.220 *
JoinClassDiscussion 7.00 2.65 8.00 1.66 1.00 6.588 *
Note:n=9,*p<0.05
Thereflectionpapersdemonstratedthatstudentsinbothclassesgainedthemost
confidenceinmakingspeeches.Onestudentstated,“Ihavealwayshadaproblemwith
introducingaspeechbeforeacrowd.Thisprojectreallyhelpedme.Iwouldn’tsayIhave
Table7.Pre‐test/post‐testcomparisonsforClass1
Question Pre‐test Post‐Test MeanDifference
t(16)
M SD M SD
Makeaspeech 5.44 1.79 8.31 1.40 2.88 0.001 *
UnderstandDifferentPerspectives 7.69 1.49 8.63 1.15 0.94 6.440
Identifymainpoints 7.75 1.65 8.88 1.09 1.13 1.067 *
Reading 6.56 2.25 8.25 1.39 1.69 0.403 *
SupportPOV 7.88 1.78 8.94 1.24 1.06 1.619 *
ResearchforPaper 6.38 2.16 8.13 1.78 1.75 0.088 *
WritePapers 6.00 2.45 7.75 1.73 1.75 0.058 *
UnderstandReadings 6.94 2.21 8.50 1.59 1.56 0.849 *
ManageTime 7.19 2.81 8.56 1.55 1.38 2.547 *
MakeFriends 7.38 2.00 8.81 1.38 1.44 0.166 *
WorkWellwithGroup 7.94 1.73 8.44 1.93 0.50 26.114
JoinClassDiscussion 8.06 1.53 9.13 1.15 1.06 0.036 *
Note:n=16,*p<0.05
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
17
fullyovercomespeakinginfrontofpeople,butwhenImademyspeech,andIgotan
applause,IfeltlikeIreallydidsomething.”Thestudentrecognizedaweakskillthatcould
beimprovedwithexperience.Thestudentalsoindicatedthatpeerfeedbacksuchas
applausehelpedtoboostandstrengthenbeliefsaboutabilities.Anotherstudentfoundthe
powerofwordsreallyimpactful,“IbelieveIgainedthemostconfidenceinforminga
speech.Particularlyaspeechtomakeacertainpointortotryandgetpeopletothinka
certainwayorvoteonacertainthing.”Forthisstudent,speakingwhileparticipatingin
Reactingwasnotjustanotherassignment,itwasanopportunitytotakeastandfor
somethingimportant.
Thesecondareathatmoststudentschosetodiscusswasthepeer‐to‐peer
interaction.Formany,theopportunitytointeractwithotherschallengedthemtogo
beyond.Onestudentstated,“Workingwithotherstudentshelpedmecomeoutofmy
comfortzoneandlearnaboutdifferentcharactersinthegame.”Adifferentstudent
understoodtheimportanceofworkingwithothersinthepursuitofsomethingbigger.The
studentstated,“IbelieveIgainedthemostconfidenceinengagingwithclassmatesin
physicalclassactivities.Ifeelmorecomfortableworkingwithotherpeopletocompleteone
goal.”
Inboththesurveyandthereflection,thelargestincreaseinself‐efficacyacrossthe
boardwasinmakingaspeech.Thissupportspreviousliterature,particularlytheIUSouth
Bendstudy.Webelievethatthesestudentshavehadlimitedpracticewithpublicspeaking
uptothispoint,andtheopportunitytopracticehelpedthemfeelliketheycoulddoit
betterormoreofteninthefuture.AlsothecollaborativeatmospherecreatedbyReacting
encouragedstudentstostepoutinthisarea.
Wealsobelievethattherewasanincreaseinreading.Theseweredifficulttextsthat
studentsweregrapplingwith,butitwasobviousthroughtheirspeechesthatthey
understoodthe18thcenturyprose.Thisfindingisparticularlyimportantforthisgroupof
students.Muchofthereadingoccurredoutsidetheclassroom,whichmeansveryfewin‐
classobservationscouldhelpidentifygrowth.Forfutureresearch,werecommendusing
aninstrumentthatcanmoreaccuratelydeterminethegrowthoflearningforout‐of‐class
activities.
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
18
Ofinterestishowthisgameplayingpedagogyworkedwellintwoclassesthathad
verydifferentclassroomcultures.Fromthebeginning,thedifferencesbetweentheclasses
wereevidentandsharp.Behaviorally,Class1adoptedahighlyvocalandengagedapproach
tothenewmaterial.Incontrast,Class2adoptedaquietandreservedapproachtothenew
material.Despitethesedifferences,theReactingpedagogyachievedanincreaseinself‐
efficacyinthemajorityoftaskareasforbothclasses.Logically,oneofthemarksofan
effectivepedagogyisitsadaptabilitytoavarietyofcontexts,andthisprovestruefor
Reacting.
Intermsofpeer‐to‐peerinteraction,thestudentstendedtoworkwellwitheach
otherasindicatedbythesocialtasksectiononthesurveysandthein‐classobservations.
Interestingly,basedonthepre‐surveyscores,studentsexpressedthegreatestconfidence
inthesocialareatasks.So,fromthebeginning,thestudentsgenerallyfeltconfidentin
collaboratingandworkingwiththeirpeers.Thisfindingbodeswellforstudent‐centered
curriculum.Studentshavealottolearnfromeachother,andasindicatedbythesurveys
andobservations,theyareeagertodoso.
LimitationsandImplicationsforFutureResearch
Whilethisproject’sfindingscouldprovebeneficialtotheacademiccommunity,itis
limitedinitssize.Thisprojectwasnotoriginallyintendedforpublicationoutsideofan
honorsthesis,however,thesuccessoftheprogramwassuchthatseveralmembers
believeditdeservedawideraudience.Eventhoughitisdifficulttoprojectthesefindingsas
comprehensiveforat‐riskstudentsnationwide,itsuggeststhatReactingisbeneficialtoat‐
riskstudents.
Mucheducationresearchfocusesonthestandardstudent,andevenReacting
researchuntilrecentlyhasprimarilyfocusedonitsimpactintraditionalclassrooms.
However,wepositthattheacademicallyat‐riskcommunitiesinuniversitiesandcolleges
aroundthecountrytodayareripeformoreresearch.Ashighereducationbeginstofocus
moreondegreecompletion,ratherthansimplyhighenrollmentnumbers,thiscommunity
shouldgainattention.Thediversityofthesestudentsuniquelyteststhedurabilityand
functionalityofeducationalpractices.Wesuggestconductingadditionalstudiesthatfocus
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
19
onacademicallyat‐riskcommunities,Reacting,andgameplaying.Thesestudiescanhelp
identifytheuniquedifferencesofthesestudentsandthewaythattheylearn.
Duetolimitationsinclassaccess,thisstudylackedhavingacontrolgroupfor
comparison.Asaresult,itisnotpossibletoascertainthedegreethatperceptionofgrowth
wasbasedonparticipationinReactingasopposedtootherfactors.Thislimitationwas
partiallyaddressedinthecloseproximityofthesurveystothegame.Thedesignandthe
wordingofquestionsapparentlytiedstudentperceptionofgrowthtoparticipation.The
degreetowhichthisperceptionwillbesustainedorwilltranslatetobetteracademic
performance,however,isunknown.
Forfutureresearch,wesuggestsimilarstudieswithlargersamplesizesthatusea
scientificorquasi‐scientificdesign.Collaborationamonguniversitiesandcollegeswould
beverybeneficialandtheimplicationsfar‐reaching.Additionalresearchinthisfieldcould
beconductedwithdifferentadjustmentstothegameweusedoradifferentgameentirely.
Dosomeadjustmentshelpthestudentslearnmoreeffectively?Whatdegreeshouldthese
adjustmentsbemade,ifany?DosomeReactinggamesworkbetterthanothers?What
gamesdothesestudentspreferorlearnthemostfrom?Researcherscouldalsoexamine
theuseofthispedagogyinrelationtoothereducationalpractices,suchasconcept‐
mappingorreadingmanagement.Ifaninstructorwantedtointroduceconceptsfrom
Reactinginasmallerway,heorshecouldincorporatecharacterroles.Forexample,
McIntyreintroducedcharacterrolesinalimitedwayinanearlierassignmentwhere
studentsresearchedahistoricalfigureandwhenpromptedinclasstoldtheirpeersabout
thatcharacter.Theythenhadtofigureoutwhatothercharacterrolesassignedintheclass
wouldhaveaconnectiontotheircharacter.Thissmallforayintoroleplayingwas
extremelybeneficialtostudentsasevidencedbytheirreflectionpapersandthetestresults
onidentifyingandunderstandingthesignificanceofthesehistoricalfigures.
Finally,wesuggestconductinglongitudinalstudiestoexaminethefullandlong‐
termimpactofReactingforat‐riskstudents.Thereareseveralquestionsthatshouldbe
answeredinordertovalidatetheeffectivenessoftheReactingpedagogy:Whatdifference
doesReactingmakeonreadingcomprehensionorotherskill‐basedtests?Dostudents
seekoutadditionalReactingclasses?Arethesestudentsretainedathigherratesthan
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
20
peersinsimilarcourses?DostudentswhoparticipateincoursesthatincludeReacting
achievehigherGPAsthanpeerswhodonot?Dothesestudentsshowgreaterinterestin
history,perhapstotheextentthatsomeselecthistoryasamajor?Dothesestudents
completetheirdegreeprogramsatcomparablyhigherrates?Howdostudentsremember
andutilizethelessonstheylearnedfromReacting?
Conclusion
ThisprojectexaminedtheimpactofReactingpedagogyontheself‐efficacyof
academicallyat‐riskstudents.Thestudyincludedsurveys,free‐responses,reflectionsand
in‐classobservationstodeterminegrowth.Thefindingssuggestthatthispedagogymaybe
ausefulpracticetoincreaseself‐efficacyamongat‐riskstudents,particularlythosewho
strugglewithreading.Asresearcherscontinuetostudyeffectivepedagogiesthatengage
at‐riskstudents,wesuggestthatReactingtothePastisworthyoffurtherconsiderationfor
effectiveinstructioninhistory.
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
21
References
ACT(2016).Theconditionofcollegeandcareerreadiness.Retrievedfrom
https://www.act.org/content/act/en/research/condition-of-college-and-career-readiness-
2016.html
Bandura,A.(1986).Socialfoundationsofthoughtandaction:Asocialcognitivetheory.
EnglewoodCliffs,NJ,US:Prentice‐Hall,Inc.
Bandura,A.(1993).Perceivedself‐efficacyincognitivedevelopmentand
functioning.EducationalPsychologist,28(2),117‐148.
Barry,C.L.,&Finney,S.J.(2009).Canwefeelconfidentinhowwemeasurecollege
confidence?ApsychometricinvestigationoftheCollegeSelf‐Efficacy
Inventory.MeasurementandEvaluationinCounselingandDevelopment,42(3),197‐
222.
Bernstein,J.L.,Strasma,M.G.,Olwell,R.,&Higbee,M.D.(2018).Whathappensafter
reacting?Afollow‐upstudyofpastRTTPparticipantsatapublicregionaluniversity.
InC.E.Watson&T.CHagood(Eds.),PlayingtolearnwithReactingtothePast(pp.
141‐157).NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan,Cham.
Cantrell,S.C.,Correll,P.,Clouse,J.,Creech,K.,Bridges,S.,&Owens,D.(2013).Patternsof
self‐efficacyamongcollegestudentsindevelopmentalreading.JournalofCollege
ReadingandLearning,44(1),8‐34.
Carnes,M.C.(2014).Mindsonfire:Howrole‐immersiongamestransformcollege.
Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.
Chemers,M.M.,Hu,L.T.,&Garcia,B.F.(2001).Academicself‐efficacyandfirstyearcollege
studentperformanceandadjustment.JournalofEducationalPsychology,93(1),55.
Faust,L.E.(2017).Astudyofgritandself‐efficacyinstudentsindevelopmentalplacements
(Doctoraldissertation).Retrievedfromhttps://knowledge.library.iup.edu/etd
Hagood,T.C.,Watson,C.E.,&Williams,B.M.(2018).ReactingtothePast:Anintroduction
toitsscholarlyfoundation.InC.E.Watson&T.C.Hagood(Eds.),Playingtolearnwith
ReactingtothePast(pp.1‐16).NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan,Cham.
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
22
Hagood,T.C.(2008).Intersectionsofpopularculture,identities,andnewliteracies
research.InJ.Coiro,M.Knobel,C.Lankshear,&D.J.Leu(Eds.)HandbookofResearch
onNewLiteracies(pp.531‐551).NewYork:Taylor&FrancisGroup.
Hagood,T.C.,Norman,N.J.,Park,H.,&Williams,B.M.(2018).Playingwithlearningand
teachinginhighereducation:HowdoesReactingtothePastempowerstudentsand
faculty?InC.E.Watson&T.C.Hagood(Eds.),PlayingtolearnwithReactingtothe
Past(pp.159‐192).NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan,Cham.
Han,C.,&Farruggia,S.P.,&Moss,T.P.(2017).Effectsofacademicmindsetsoncollege
students’achievementandretention.JournalofCollegeStudentDevelopment,58(8),
1119‐1134.
Higbee,M.D.(2009).“HowReactingtothePastgamesmademewanttocometoclassand
learn":AnassessmentoftheReactingPedagogyatEMU,2007‐2008.Thescholarship
ofteachingandlearningatEMU,2(1),4.
Hodges,R.,&Agee,K.(2009).Programmanagement.InR.F.Flippo&D.C.Caverly(Eds.),
Handbookofcollegereadingandstudystrategyresearch(pp.351‐378).NewYork:
Routledge.
Hsieh,P.,Sullivan,J.R.,&Guerra,N.S.(2007).Acloserlookatcollegestudents:Self‐efficacy
andgoalorientation.JournalofAdvancedAcademics,18(3),454‐476.
Kuh,G.D.(2008).High‐impacteducationalpractices:Abriefoverview.Retrievedfrom
http://www.aacu.org/leap/hips
MacArthur,C.A.,Philippakos,Z.A.,&Ianetta,M.(2015).Self‐regulatedstrategyinstruction
incollegedevelopmentalwriting.JournalofEducationalPsychology,107(3),855.
Martin,K.,Goldwasser,M.,&Harris,E.(2017).Developmentaleducation’simpacton
students’academicself‐conceptandself‐efficacy.JournalofCollegeStudent
Retention:Research,Theory&Practice,18(4),401‐414.
McCormack,D.,&Petersen,K.K.(2018).Impactandperception:ReactingtothePastat
MiddleTennesseeStateUniversity.InC.EWatson&T.C.Hagood(Eds.),Playingto
learnwithReactingtothePast(pp.17‐39).NewYork:Palgrave.
Miller,T.R.(2018)Battleforthemind:TheuseofReactingtothePastintheacademicallyat‐
riskclassroom(Honorsthesis).Retrievedfromhttps://jewlscholar.mtsu.edu
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
23
Moseley,A.(2012).Analternativerealityforeducation?Lessonslearnedfromonline
immersivegames.InternationalJournalofGame‐BasedLearning2(3).
http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijgbl.2012070103
NationalEndowmentfortheArts(2007).Toreadornottoread:Aquestionofnational
consequence.Washington,DC:NationalEndowmentfortheArts.
Offut,B.(2011).Patriots,Loyalists,andRevolutioninNewYorkCity,1775‐1776.Upper
SaddleRiver,NJ:PrenticeHall.
Proctor,N.W.(2011).ReactingtothePast:Thegamedesigner’shandbook.CreateSpace
IndependentPublishingPlatform.
Schult,C.A.,Lidinsky,A.,Zwicker,L.F.,&Dunn,E.E.(2018).Strengtheningstudents’self‐
efficacythroughReactingtothePast.InC.E.Watson&T.C.Hagood,(Eds.),Playingto
learnwithReactingtothePast(pp.75‐89).NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan,Cham.
Solberg,V.S.,&Villareal,P.(1997).Examinationofself‐efficacy,socialsupport,andstress
aspredictorsofpsychologicalandphysicaldistressamongHispaniccollege
students.HispanicJournalofBehavioralSciences,19,182‐102
Tinto,V.(1993).Leavingcollege:Rethinkingthecausesandcuresofstudentattrition.2nd
ed.UniversityofChicagoPress.
U.S.DepartmentofLabor,BureauofLaborStatistics(2017).Collegeenrollmentandwork
activityof2016highschoolgraduates.Retrievedfrom
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/hsgec.nr0.htm
U.S.DepartmentofEducation,InstituteofEducationSciences,NationalCenterfor
EducationStatistics,NationalAssessmentofEducationalProgress(2016).Howdid
USstudentsperformonthemostrecentassessment?Retrievedfrom
https://www.nationsreportcard.gov
U.S.DepartmentofEducation,InstituteofEducationSciences,NationalCenterfor
EducationalStatistics(2017).Fastfacts:Enrollment.Retrievedfrom
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98
Vuong,M.Brown‐Welty,S.&Tracz,S.(2010.Theeffectsofself‐efficacyonacademic
successoffirst‐generationcollegesophomorestudents.JournalofCollegeStudent
Development51(1),50‐64.
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
24
APPENDIXA:SURVEYS
Self‐EfficacyRTTPSurvey(Pre‐test)
SCALE:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Notatallconfident ExtremelyConfident
Indicateyourconfidencetothefollowingstatements:
RTTPQuestions
1. Ifeel_________inmakingaspeech.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2. Ifeel_________inunderstandingdifferentperspectives.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3. Ifeel_________inidentifyingimportantpoints.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
4. Ifeel_________inreading.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
5. Ifeel_________inusingevidencetosupportapointofview.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
AcademicQuestions:
1. Ifeel_________inresearchingforapaper.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2. Ifeel_________inwritingpapers.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3. Ifeel_________inunderstandingreadings.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
4. Ifeel_________inmanagingtime.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
25
SocialQuestions
1. Ifeel_________inmakingfriends.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2. Ifeel_________inworkingwellinagroup.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3. Ifeel_________injoiningaclassdiscussion.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Adaptedfrom“StrengtheningStudents’Self‐EfficacyThroughReactingtothePast.”ByCarolynA.Schult,April
Lidinsky,LisaFetheringillZwicker,andElizabethDunn
Self‐EfficacyRTTPSurvey(Post‐test)
SCALE:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Notatallconfident ExtremelyConfident
Indicateyourconfidencetothefollowingstatements:
RTTPQuestions
6. Ifeel_________inmakingaspeech.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
7. Ifeel_________inunderstandingdifferentperspectives.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
8. Ifeel_________inidentifyingimportantpoints.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
9. Ifeel_________inreading.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
10. Ifeel_________inusingevidencetosupportapointofview.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
AcademicQuestions:
5. Ifeel_________inresearchingforapaper.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Journal of Student Success and Retention Vol. 5, No. 2, May 2019
26
6. Ifeel_________inwritingpapers.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
7. Ifeel_________inunderstandingreadings.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
8. Ifeel_________inmanagingtime.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
SocialQuestions
4. Ifeel_________inmakingfriends.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
5. Ifeel_________inworkingwellinagroup.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
6. Ifeel_________injoiningaclassdiscussion.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Open‐endedResponse:
InwhatareaorskilldoyoubelieveyouhavegainedthemostconfidencethroughyourexperiencewithReactingtothePast?
Adaptedfrom“StrengtheningStudents’Self‐EfficacyThroughReactingtothePast.”ByCarolynA.Schult,April
Lidinsky,LisaFetheringillZwicker,andElizabethDunn