Ken gold decisions pdf download

Jay Tracy PA-C. Erickson, M. D, Vol. Full Online - by Damon Zahariades. Full Online - by Terry F Ritchie. Online Library - by Robert Kennedy. Full Online - by Tosca Reno. New E-Book - by James Miller. Chris Wells. Young M. Lance Levy. Winter Griffith. Online Library - by. Valeriy Davydov Mr. Arie Leibovitz Dr. Leslie Denes Mr.

Carl Levin Mrs. Lilla Denes Mr. Jeffrey Goodman Dr. Kenneth Levin Mrs. Leib Diogenes Mr. Mark Goodman Mr. Sander Levin Drs. Mary Goodman Dr. Joel Dorfman Dr. Mala Dorfman Dr. Stuart C. Gordon Dr. Randy Lieberman Mr. Armando Duer Mr. Herbert Gorman Dr. Carl Lipnik Mr. Sheldon Dulberg Mrs. Norma Gorosh Dr. Gerald Loomus Ms. Marjorie Duncanson Dr. Harold Loss Mr.

Brian Efrusy Ms. Judith Grant Mr. Phil M. Elkus Dr. Eugene Greenstein Dr. Beth Denenberg Mr. Philip Elkus Mr. David H. Grossman Ms. Julie Lowenthal Mr. Ron Elkus Mr. Joseph Gyongyosi Benard L. Maas Foundation Mrs.

Elmer R Ellias Mr. Corey Haber Dr. David Madorsky Mr. Frank Ellias Mr. David S. Hamburger Mr. John A. Malak Mr. Howard Emmer Mr. Robert Mames Mr. Robert Epstein Dr. Mary Handleman Mrs.

Sara L Manson Dr. Laina Feinstein Mr. Mark Haron Ms. Juana Medina Dr. Allan J. Feldman Drs. Paul Margolis Mr. Fred Ferber Sarah Zamari Dr. Jack Mayer Mr. Ron Ferber Mrs. Doreen Hermelin Mr. Herschel Finman Mr. Edward Hersch Mr. Jody Mendelson Mr. Ryan J. Fishman David Horodoker Organization Ms.

Shelly Mendelson Mr. Yosef Fleischmann Mr. Arthur Horwitz Mr. Myron Milgrom Mr. James Flood Drs. Sheldon Mintz Dr. Ronald Fogel Mr. William lcikson Mr. Jeffrey Modell Mr. Simon Indianer Mrs. Lynn D. Morrow Mrs. Elyse Essick Ms. Lisa sack Dr. Neal Mozen Mr. Aaron Fried Dr.

Bertrand Jacobs Mr. Joel Must Mr. Eugene Friedman Mr. David Kahan Mrs. Mary Must Dr. Robert Galin Mr. Douglas Kahan Mrs. Ilene Nemer Dr. Max J. Garber Mr. Jeffrey Kahan Mrs. Ann Newman Mrs. Sandra Garber Mr. Michael Kahan Mr. Bill Newman Ms. Inez Garfield Mrs. Ruth Kahn Dr. David Newman Mr. Ken Garfinkel Mr. Irvine Kaplan Mr. Post hoc analyses were also conducted in order to determine if significant interaction existed among predictor variables in the multiple regression models.

One-tailed tests of significance at the. This chapter presents a description and analysis of the data collected to test each of the research hypotheses, including post hoc analyses. Narrowing the Sample For this study, a total of students took the pretest. An independent samples t-test was conducted to compare pretest mean scores between students enrolled in a global learning course and students enrolled in a non-global learning course.

Since pretest score means were found to be significantly different, the study sample was narrowed to include only those students who took both the pretest and the posttest. Description of Participants The first page of the assessment form contained 10 questions requesting background information from each student. These data were collected after students completed the posttest and the semester was over.

Class Status Students who participated in the study were asked to report their class status. Table 1 shows that 92 students The university did not maintain statistics on the number of languages students spoke fluently. Table 4 shows that slightly less than the majority of students in both global learning courses This was done to determine whether there was a positive relationship between global learning course grades and global awareness and global perspective posttest scores.

Table 6 shows the course grades for students enrolled in a global learning course. The percentage of inter-rater agreement was calculated to test the hypotheses associated with research questions 1 and 2. Linear regression analysis was used to test the hypotheses associated with research questions 3 and 4.

For hypotheses tested with simple linear regression, the full regression model is presented. Post hoc analyses were conducted in order to determine if significant interaction existed among predictor variables in the multiple regression models. Hypothesis 1 The first hypothesis stated that there would be significant inter-rater agreement of at least. The results of these tests confirmed research hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 2 The second hypothesis stated that there would be significant inter-rater agreement of at least.

The results of these tests confirmed research hypothesis 2. This hypothesis stated that there would be a significant difference on global awareness posttest scores between those students who were enrolled in a global learning course and those who were not when controlling for global awareness pretest scores and class status, independent of global perspective posttest scores. See Chapter 3 for a description and coding of other variables.

These results did not confirm research hypothesis 3a. These results did not confirm research hypothesis 3b. The variable African American was excluded as a constant. These results did not confirm research hypothesis 3c. This hypothesis stated that there would be a significant difference on global awareness posttest scores between those students who were enrolled in a global learning course and those who were not when controlling for global awareness pretest scores and time spent abroad, independent of global perspective posttest scores.

These results did not confirm research hypothesis 3d. Hypothesis 3e. These results did not confirm research hypothesis 3e. These results did not confirm research hypothesis 3f.

Post hoc Analysis. Global awareness pretest scores were used to control for initial differences between treatment and control groups. Since the difference between group pretest scores was associated with the treatment in the ANCOVA models and a non-linear relationship between these variables might produce a differential effect on the DV, interaction was tested.

Dependent relationships between or among predictors are known as interactions McNeil, et al. Figure 1 shows the non-linear relationship between the two predictor variables, global awareness pretest scores and treatment.

This hypothesis stated that there would be a significant difference on global perspective posttest scores between those students who were enrolled in a global learning course and those who were not when controlling for global perspective pretest scores and class status, independent of global awareness posttest scores.

These results did not confirm research hypothesis 4a. These results did not confirm research hypothesis 4b. This hypothesis stated that there would be a significant difference on global perspective posttest scores between those students who were enrolled in a global learning course and those who were not when controlling for global perspective pretest scores and fluency in more than one language, independent of global awareness posttest scores.

These results did not confirm research hypothesis 4c. Hypothesis 4d. This hypothesis stated that there would be a significant difference on global perspective posttest scores between those students who were enrolled in a global learning course and those who were not when controlling for global perspective pretest scores and time spent abroad, independent of global awareness posttest scores. These results did not confirm research hypothesis 4d. These results confirmed research hypothesis 4e.

These results did not confirm research hypothesis 4f. Along with global awareness pretest scores, global perspective pretest scores were used to control for initial differences between treatment and control groups. Figure 2 shows the non-linear relationship between the two predictor variables, global perspective pretest scores and treatment.

Statistical analysis was conducted to explore the equivalence of the treatment and control groups. The treatment group was composed of There was also a significant difference in mean global awareness and mean global perspective pretest scores between the groups in the final sample. The research hypotheses served as the basis for presentation of results of the data analyses.

Research hypotheses 1 and 2 addressed the percentage of inter-rater agreement as evidence of the extent to which the rubrics were reliable. Among raters using the global awareness rubric for the pretest, agreement exceeded the minimum.

Posttest rater agreement also exceeded the minimum requirement. Agreement also exceeded the reliability requirement among raters using the global perspective rubric to score the pretest.

These results confirmed both research hypotheses 1 and 2. Research hypotheses 3a through 3f addressed the validity of the global awareness rubric. Hypotheses 3a through 3e stated that there would be a significant difference on global awareness posttest scores between those students enrolled in a global learning course and those who were not when controlling for global awareness pretest scores and an extraneous variable, independent of global perspective posttest scores.

Using one-tailed tests of significance at the. No significant difference between the comparison groups was found. On the basis of these results, hypotheses 3a through 3f were not confirmed. The validity of the global perspective rubric was explored through research hypotheses 4a through 4f.

Multiple regression analyses were used to test these hypotheses, wherein the full regression model was tested against the restricted model in order to determine if the primary IV, the global learning course, accounted for a significant amount of the unique variance in predicting the DV, global perspective posttest scores, independent of the covariates.

For hypotheses 4a through 4d, these analyses found no significant differences at the. On the basis of these results, hypotheses 4a through 4d were not supported. These results confirmed hypothesis 4e.

On the basis of these results, hypothesis 4f was not confirmed. The chapter continues with an interpretation and analysis of the results as they relate to the relevant literature. The chapter concludes with study limitations, implications for practice, and recommendations for future research. The ability to examine the world via diverse cultural, intellectual, and spiritual points of view has been called global perspective Braskamp, et al.

Increasingly, students view themselves as citizens of not only local and national communities, but also of the global community Education Development Center, ; Our World Alliance, Global learning is also a term that has been used to describe specific content, pedagogy, and assessment strategies that enable students to develop SLOs associated with global citizenship, that is global awareness and global perspective Florida International University, Global awareness and global perspective were two SLOs for an institution-wide global learning initiative at a large, Hispanic-serving, urban, public, research university in South Florida.

The purpose of this initiative was to provide all undergraduate students with curricular and co-curricular opportunities to develop these outcomes through global learning. All undergraduates, both native and transfer, were required to take a minimum of two global learning courses—one as part of the general education curriculum and one as part of their major program of study—and participate in co-curricular activities designed to increase their global awareness and global perspective.

Global learning courses were developed to enhance these outcomes through components such as international and global content, active learning strategies, team teaching, integrated co- curricular activities, and interdisciplinary and problem-based curricula. Despite the marked increase in global learning initiatives in recent years, global learning assessment options remain limited. This study addressed the following four research questions: 1.

Setting and Participants This study was conducted at a large, Hispanic-serving, urban, public, research university in South Florida with approximately 32, undergraduate students. Post hoc independent-samples t-tests found that the groups also differed significantly in terms of their global awareness and global perspective pretest scores. Trained faculty raters used the rubrics to score completed assessments.

Inter- rater reliability of at least. Linear regression Cohen, et al. The primary IV in this study was completion of a global learning course. The DVs in this study were student posttest scores on a rubric measuring global awareness and student posttest scores on a rubric measuring global perspective.

End-of-course grades for students enrolled in a global learning course were collected in order to perform a within-group discriminant analysis.

Results Research Question 1. The hypothesis was confirmed because agreement rates on both the pretest. Research Question 2. Evidence also supported the finding that the global perspective rubric yielded highly reliable scores. Because agreement rates on both the pretest. Research Question 3.

Multiple regression analyses used to test hypotheses 3a through 3e did not find significant main effects for the treatment when controlling for pretest scores and extraneous variables, therefore the research hypotheses were not confirmed.

However, a post hoc regression analysis did reveal a significant interaction between global awareness pretest scores and treatment.

On average, for students who scored above 1. The treatment did not, on average, have a significant effect for students who scored below 1. This cross-over interaction supported the finding that the global awareness rubric could be used to detect learning differences between the treatment and control groups as well as differences within the treatment group. This evidence strongly supported the validity of the scores yielded from the global awareness rubric. Research Question 4.

Research hypotheses 4a through 4f addressed the validity of the global perspective rubric. Multiple regression analyses used to test hypotheses 4a through 4d did not find significant main effects for the treatment when controlling for pretest scores and extraneous variables, therefore these research hypotheses were not confirmed.

As was found for the global awareness rubric, however, a post hoc regression analysis revealed significant interaction between global perspective pretest scores and treatment. On average, the treatment led to significantly higher global perspective posttest scores for students who scored above. The treatment did not, on average, have a significant effect for students who scored below. This cross-over interaction supported the finding that the global perspective rubric could be used to detect learning differences between the treatment and control groups as well as within the treatment group.

This evidence was strong support for the validity of the scores yielded from the global perspective rubric. Interpretation and Analysis of Results This study derived its theoretical foundation from constructivism, which guided its approach to research methods, teaching, learning, and assessment.

According to CFT, individuals must be able to consider multiple unanticipated contextual variables and a variety of sometimes unrelated precedents in order to think critically in ISDs. These researchers have asserted that global awareness and global perspective result from a constructivist approach to global learning that includes international and global content, active learning strategies, team teaching, integrated co-curricular activities, and interdisciplinary and problem-based curricula.

Reliability The study found high percentages of inter-rater agreement, far exceeding the. Each of the holistic rubrics contained no more than five scoring scale levels, and descriptive performance criteria were included to assist raters in distinguishing qualitative response differences pertaining to each score level Popham, The high rates of agreement were also consistent with the literature on recommended training protocols for raters using rubrics to score open-ended questions.

These training protocols were implemented during the data collection phase of the study. Training sessions began with study and discussion of the rubrics, followed by collaborative and individual scoring of anchor papers distributed along levels of the scoring scale. The structural validity of rubrics is rarely discussed in research literature. Evidence of the structural validity of criterion-based tests and surveys is commonly gathered through intercorrelations among items or through factor analyses.

However, in her discussion of class models of traits as one type of underlying assessment structure, Loevinger implied that structural validity is an important characteristic of rubrics.

Validity Treatment effects between groups. An assumption of this study was that global learning courses were comprised of substantively different learning strategies than non-global learning courses and that students in global learning courses would make greater learning gains in global awareness and global perspective than students in non- global learning courses.

Messick asserted that the substantive aspect of construct validity is supported by empirical evidence that the processes sampled by the performance are those in which the student is actually engaged. The ANCOVAs conducted to test between group comparisons did not reveal significant main effects for the treatment in predicting either global awareness or global perspective posttest scores.

In this study, student pretest scores were included as a predictor variable in the linear regression models used to test hypotheses 3a through 3e and 4a through 4e.

They were also used to control for initial differences between treatment and control groups. Since these differences between group pretest scores were associated with the treatment, interaction was tested.

These results indicated that the global learning course did indeed have an effect on student achievement of global awareness and global perspective. The rubrics were able to detect the differential effect of the global learning course on student learning, namely that the course significantly increased global awareness and global perspective for students who entered with a minimum level of prior achievement of these outcomes.

Global learning courses were characterized by instructional strategies and content associated with ISDs, and the rubrics were designed to measure cognition within ISDs. Treatment effect within group.

This study involved a within-group discriminant analysis to determine if the global learning course grade could be used to predict a significant amount of the unique variance in student posttest scores.

This study did not reveal a significant relationship between global learning course grades and posttest scores, which may be a source of invalidity for the rubrics. On the other hand, it may be the case that faculty grading criteria and rubric score criteria addressed different constructs, negating the value of this comparison.

This study did not collect information concerning the specific criteria used for assigning grades in the global learning courses. This indicates that the rubrics were able to detect differences within groups, strong evidence that they indeed measure the intended constructs.

Relationship between global awareness and global perspective. This study found a significant moderately positive relationship between global awareness and global perspective pretest scores as well as between global awareness and global perspective posttest scores. The correlations were not so weak as to cast doubt on an interrelationship, yet not so strong as to imply that the rubrics were actually measuring the same construct. Extraneous variables. However, the beta coefficient for the variable was negative, meaning that students who took a previous global learning course actually scored lower on the global perspective posttest.

This result cast doubt on the confirmation of the hypothesis. Furthermore, all of the regression models yielded low to moderate coefficients of determination, with R2 values ranging between. This suggested that other variables, those not tested in the study, were contributing to the unaccounted for variance in the DVs.

The results from these tests were similar to those of Barrows et al. Barrows et al. Assessment of student attitudes associated with global learning and global citizenship was lacking in both studies.

Global education researchers such as Case and Merryfield have contended that attitudinal dispositions such as openmindedness, anticipation of complexity, resistance to stereotypes, empathy, and non- chauvinism determine our aptitude or readiness for global awareness and global perspective.

Measures of student attitudes may prove to be better predictors of student achievement of these outcomes than the extraneous variables explored in this study.

The study was also limited by attrition bias resulting from students who were absent on the day of the posttest, dropped the course prior to the posttest, or chose not to complete the posttest.

The study was further limited by the content of the cases that were used. Additionally, variability in test- taking procedures may have contributed to measurement error that limited the study. Students who came to class late or left early also had less time to complete the task.

Implications for Practice The results of this study generated practice implications for global learning assessment and instruction.

These implications were derived on the basis of their consistency with the results and with literature on global learning and assessment. Pilot faculty, however, reported that they found the rubrics useful at the classroom level for many types of performance tasks. These multiple formative and summative data sources, using the same evaluative criteria, could help substantiate findings, uncover subtle implications that a single assessment source might miss, identify areas for improvement, and reveal areas for further research Musil, Faculty members sometimes share assessment criteria with students for the sake of fairness and transparency or to encourage students to work towards expectations.

It is recommended here that faculty use the rubrics for peer- and self-assessment to empower and motivate students to actively seek learning experiences that will increase their global awareness and perspective.

However, just as the results of this study indicated that training protocols were related to high estimates of reliability, evidence suggests that students should also be trained in the use of relevant rubrics to mitigate error and subjectivity Sluijsmans, et al. Train Faculty and Staff to Integrate Rubrics Into Curriculum and Co-curriculum The results of this study demonstrated the importance of theoretical consistency, clear language and construction, and effective training protocols in the development and implementation of valid and reliable rubrics.

The methods used in this study may serve as a model for global learning professional development. As a result of their involvement, several faculty members using the instruments customized the language of rubric criteria to address both the global learning outcomes and the specific content of their courses.

Student affairs staff could also customize the rubric criteria in order to assess student learning in global learning co-curricular activities. Faculty and staff development could be implemented to increase valid and reliable customization of the global learning rubrics and promote buy-in for assessment.

Backwards Curriculum Design involves three stages: a establishing desired outcomes; b determining the kinds of evidence that will demonstrate achievement of the outcomes; and c developing learning experiences and selecting content that will enable student achievement of the outcomes.

With this shift in perspective, participants see that assessment and teaching strategies are as influential as content. Pretest scores could be used to organize diverse learning groups composed of students with varying aptitude or readiness for global awareness and global perspective. To that end, it would be efficacious for global learning faculty to conceive of individual and group learning needs as interrelated.

Hanvey asserted that a global perspective is actually a characteristic of the group, composed of the differentiated cognitive attributes of the individual members of that group.

The same may hold true for global awareness, as it is a learning outcome that is highly interconnected with global perspective. In this section, additional research is recommended to expand our knowledge and understanding of such assessments.

Conduct Similar Studies at Other Institutions Based upon the results of this study, one recommendation for future research is to replicate the study at other institutions implementing global learning initiatives with similar global learning SLOs. Results may differ at other types of institutions, in different courses, with dissimilar student demographics.

Apply Rubrics to Other Performance Assessments In this study the global awareness and global perspective rubrics were used to assess student learning through one kind of performance task, written responses to two open-ended questions concerning complex case studies.

In addition, the content of the cases used was not aligned with the subject matter of any of the courses involved in the study. Since this study required an instrument that could be used across the curriculum, it was decided to utilize cases that could be understood via numerous disciplinary perspectives.

However, studies are needed to determine if valid, reliable comparisons can be made using uniform global learning performance criteria but differentiated and discipline-specific authentic performance tasks, such as portfolios, research papers, poster presentations, case studies, speeches, debates, films, blogs, models and prototypes, and fine and performing arts presentations.

Conduct Qualitative and Mixed Methods Studies Further research concerning the validity and reliability of the global awareness and global perspective rubrics should involve qualitative and mixed-methods approaches that make use of evidence sources that differ from those explored in this study.

Among these studies, other IVs should be explored for their contribution to the unique variance of student scores. To bolster evidence of their validity, content analysis of the rubrics and performance tasks should be conducted to determine the extent to which they adequately address the constructs of global awareness and global perspective. Spiro et al. Hanvey also argued that individuals develop a suite of attributes associated with a global outlook to a greater or lesser degree throughout the course of their lives.

Conclusions While colleges and universities across the United States have surged forward in their implementation of a variety of global learning initiatives, effective student learning assessment of these programs has lagged behind Grudzinski-Hall, Institutions are in need of valid and reliable assessments of global learning outcomes, such as global awareness and global perspective, in order to make valid data-based decisions that improve student learning through curriculum, faculty development and placement, planning, and budgeting.

In many cases, institutions must provide student learning evidence to accrediting agencies, students, and other stakeholders that demonstrates the extent to which such decisions are meaningful, useful, and appropriate Messick, These student learning-based decisions have ethical, instructional, and practical implications that ultimately influence the efficacy of the educational endeavor. The results of this study suggested that the rubrics were highly reliable and could be used to validly detect the differentiated effects of global learning courses on student development of global awareness and global perspective.

Coming of age in a globalized world. Bloomfield, IL: Kumarian Press. American Association of Colleges and Universities. Globalizing the curriculum. Diversity Digest, 8 3 , American Association for Higher Education. Nine principles of good practice for assessing student learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus. Educating for the global community, a framework for community colleges. Retrieved from www. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Anderson, C. Global understandings: A framework for teaching and learning.

Retrieved from ERIC database. ED Anderson, H. Developing an understanding of world affairs. Anderson Ed. Anderson, L. Schooling and citizenship in a global age: An exploration of the meaning and significance of global education. ED Andrade, H. Teaching with rubrics: The good, the bad, and the ugly. College Teaching, 53 1 , Appiah, K. Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a world of strangers.

New York, NY: W. Archbald, D. Beyond standardized testing: Assessing authentic academic achievement in the secondary school. The need for definition of international education in U.

Klasek Ed. Auba, J. Comenius and the organisation of education. Dobinson Ed. ED Banks, J. Diversity, group identity, and citizenship education in a global age. Educational Researcher, 37 3 , Barrows, T. What students know about their world. Change, 12 4 , Becker, J. An examination of objectives, needs and priorities in international education in U.

ED Bennett, M. A developmental approach to training for intercultural sensitivity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10 2 , Biggs, J. Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32 3 , Bloom B. Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain.

Bonney, C. Address of welcome. Bonwell, C. Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ED Bowen, L. Engaging diversity on the homogenous campus: The power of immersion experiences. Bragaw, D. Schooling and citizenship in a global age. Being effective interventionists to foster global citizenship.

Journal of College and Character, 11 1 , Braskamp, L. Global perspectives inventory GPI : Its purpose, construction, potential uses, and psychometric characteristics. Global learning and education for sustainable development. Buell, R. International relations. Burn, B. Expanding the international dimension of higher education. London, England: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Butts, R. Shane Ed. International education: overview. Deighton Ed. New York, NY: Macmillan. Campbell, D. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Case, R. Key elements of a global perspective. Social Education, 57 6 , Castells, M. Information technology, globalization, and social development [PDF document].

Globalization: A world-systems perspective. Journal of World- Systems Research, 2 3 , Chickering, A. Developing a global perspective for personal and social responsibility.

Peer Review, 11 4 , Clark, J. Barrows, S. Ager, M. Bennett, H. Braun, J. Clark, L. Global awareness: Thinking systematically about the world.

Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. Clarke, V. Journal of Research in in International Education, 3 1 ,