Active-Learning Strategies and its Effect on PETE vs. Athletic-Training Students

Thursday, April 3, 2014
Exhibit Hall Poster Area 1 (Convention Center)
Larry P. Nelson and Mary Lynn Crow, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX
Background/Purpose:

Service-learning experiences with public school partners have been recognized to be an effective method for teacher education practices. What is being done in the lecture part of a teaching methods course in relation to those service-learning experiences also deserves study for best practices. This study assessed the impact of an active-learning instructional sequence within the lecture part of a methods course.

Method:

Participants (N=49 control group; N=51 experimental group) were teacher candidates pursuing either a B.A. degree in Physical Education (N = 68) or a B.S. degree in Athletic Training Education (N = 32). The active-learning intervention included instructional strategies (i.e., Role-Play, Case Study, and Small Groups) designed to promote problem-solving related to their service-learning experiences. All activities included detailed discussions and solutions to challenges and explored how classmates and professors reacted to the differing solutions to problems.

All the student teachers’ responded to the Teacher Efficacy Scale (Woolfolk & Hoy, 1990) pre/post semester. The inventory has two scales: Personal Efficacy- which is an individual’s belief about their personal control in physical education, and Teaching Efficacy- which are beliefs about the teaching profession in general.

Analysis/Results:

Repeated measures multivariate analysis was used to look for differences between pre and post scores and experimental and control conditions. Results showed an effect of time (pre- vs. post-treatment), with the post-test scores being higher than the pre-test scores in Teaching Efficacy and Personal Efficacy measures for both control and experimental groups. In the case of Teaching Efficacy, there were no significant differences [F (1, 98) = .000,  p = .985] between conditions. However, in the case of Personal Efficacy there was a significant difference [F (1, 98) = 8.741, p = .004] where the experimental group reported significantly higher mean scores. Furthermore, when a two-way analysis was run for Personal Efficacy scores (taking out the variable for condition [i.e., control vs. experimental]), we found that academic track of students had significant effects [F (1, 98) = 6.373, p = .013], where PE teachers benefited significantly more from the active-learning experience than the Athletic Trainers.

Conclusions:

Higher gains in Personal Efficacy resulted when active-learning strategies were employed indicating significant growth in preservice teachers’ ability to feel confident facing new challenges in service-learning situations. Also, PETE students benefitted significantly more from this experience than those pursuing an athletic training education degree plan.