role playing, self efficacy and the at risk reading
TRANSCRIPT
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