Submitted by Trinity Freeman

As a graduate student in Human Development and Family Science (HDFS), I am challenged with the opportunity and responsibility of moving from a consumer of knowledge to a producer of knowledge.  In this shift, it is important that I learn how to effectively and accurately create new knowledge to contribute to my field.  In order to do so, I need to be proficient in the processes, methods, and ethics that surround research.  These skills are introduced and fostered in undergraduate and graduate level research methods courses.  As a student, I have found that research methods classes can be quite challenging.  There are so many steps to consider when critically analyzing or creating a study, that it can often be overwhelming.  It leaves us to question what is the best way to teach this information so students feel comfortable with the specific concepts of research, while also capturing the vastness and importance of these topics in our field.

In order to address this issue, an instructor at a public university in the western US introduced a new way of teaching twenty-five undergraduate students about the research process.  Students were to create their own research proposals in small collaborative groups.   Each group, consisting of four to five students, was given the opportunity to formulate their own research question and create a proposal to be presented at the end of the semester.  Before working on the proposal itself, the instructor lectured on topics such as the research process, APA writing styles, ethics, etc.  The students were also exposed to a presentation by a librarian who instructed on how to find literature using the library’s database.  In addition, the students were given a variety of homework assignments and readings to increase their knowledge of the research process and to effectively construct their proposals.

After the culmination of the project, students completed a survey to reflect on how the collaborative research proposal contributed to their understanding of research methods and how the faculty support influenced their satisfaction with the project.  Students were also asked to report on the group dynamics and whether it influenced satisfaction with the proposal experience.  The instructor found that overall the majority of students expressed greater understanding of the research proposal process and felt they could construct another proposal in the future.  The students also expressed that the availability and willingness of the instructor to work with them on these proposals was very important in the writing process.  Lastly, the majority of students had positive experiences in their collaborative groups.  Those students who did not report positive experiences (20%), stated that unbalanced group dynamics or lack of personal connection to their topic were barriers.

As a first-year graduate student enrolled in a research methods course, I have had the opportunity to work in a collaborative small group with three other students to create our own research proposal.  In many ways, I can relate to the experiences of these undergraduate students.  Here are a few advantages and disadvantages, from my perspective, of this collaborative learning method.

Advantages

• Delegation – As similarly expressed by students in this article, a research proposal is a long and somewhat daunting task.  I was appreciative of the fact that I was not doing this alone.  We were able to split tasks to manage our time better and complete work more efficiently.
• Understanding the process – It is much easier for me to understand how research is conducted by actually doing it and not just reading or talking about it.  Working in collaborative groups made it possible for us to put into action the concepts we have learned in class.
• Pool of ideas – Working with others allows for more in depth and meaningful brainstorming.  We were able to come up with very innovative ideas by talking with one another and using the knowledge of each group member.

Disadvantages

• Selecting a research topic – Each member of my collaborative learning group had a unique research interest, which made it a bit challenging to hone in on one research topic.  It may be beneficial for the instructor to group students based on their research interests.
• Scheduling – Writing a research proposal takes a substantial amount of time. Scheduling for group members to meet outside of class can be difficult and complicate the process.  Additional time is class is needed for group work.
• Shared responsibility – Even though working together as a team helped quite a bit with time management, because we had our own tasks, there were some parts of the research process that I was not as involved in.  Therefore, I was not evenly exposed to all aspects of the proposal process.  Instructors could possibly allow individual submission of ‘mini’ assignments that coincide with each part, so that every student gets an opportunity to conduct a full research proposal.

Although concepts in research methods classes can be tricky to grasp, I as well as the students in this study, have found that collaborative learning can be effective in teaching students these concepts and provides a deeper understanding of the research process.

For more information:

Walsh, B.A., & Weiser, D. A. (2015). Teaching undergraduate research in human development and family studies: Piloting a collaborative method. Family Science Review, 20(1), 32-47.

Image credit: College WisCEL by college.library CC BY 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/by/2.0/

Submitted by Mary Kate Morgan

After reading the blog post, What Can I Do With This Major?, I began to think about why I chose the career path I have, and who advised me about the steps to get to this career. Majoring in family science can be intimidating if you do not know exactly what you want to do when you graduate.  But with the guidance, guest speakers, and in depth overview of specific careers in the family science field like Dr. Baugh provided in her course, students can get a better idea of what they can do with the major.  Dr. Baugh’s post about the course she designed to help students learn more about the career paths in family science caused me to reflect on how I made my decision to further my education, and I became interested in seeing if there were any courses or programs to help graduate students.

The Department of Family Studies at the University of Maryland, College Park, created a program with similar goals as Dr. Baugh’s course. The department took the objective of the course a bit further for graduate level students by developing a Preparing Future Faculty and Family Professionals program (PFFFP) “to enrich the graduate education and professional development of its doctoral students” (Koblinsky, Kuvalanka, & McClintock- Comea, 2006, p. 30). This department first developed this program in 2003 by modeling it after the national Preparing Future Faculty program, and after evaluating the first year of this program the Family Studies Department expanded the program to address the interests of PhD students who were seeking both academic and nonacademic careers (Koblinsky, Kuvalanka, & McClintock- Comea, 2006). The University of Maryland set up five major goals for this program that include goals such as “to inform PhD students about the work required in faculty positions at diverse academic institutions”, “to educate students about the responsibilities and demands of nonacademic careers in family science”, and “to prepare students to secure positions in the types of institutions and agencies where they want to work” (Koblinsky, Kuvalanka, & McClintock- Comea, 2006, p. 30). The article also highlights how the program implemented inclusive pedagogical practices. The PFFFP makes sure to give the students the chance to experience the “traditional triad of faculty responsibilities”- teaching, research, and service (p. 31).

While the PFFFP program focuses a lot on preparing graduate students for faculty positions, it also introduces students to nonacademic career paths by examining family science careers in government, nonprofit agencies, and the private sector (Koblinsky, Kuvalanka, & McClintock- Comea, 2006). The program has come up with steps for the students to take in order to develop a plan to continue their professional development and address identified gaps. In table 2 of this article the five goals that were previously discussed are explained in more detail with corresponding method/delivery, faculty/student feedback, and recommendations which is a great resource for those interesting in revising their graduate programs.

This article provided research, goals, and reasons for why the PFFFP program worked for this family science program, and I feel this resource could be a guide to other programs that find their graduate students questioning “what’s next?” after graduation.

For more information read:

Koblinsky, S. A., Kuvalanka, K. A., & McClintock-Comeaux, M. (2006). Preparing future faculty and family professionals. Family Relations, 55(1), 29-43.

Image credit: Question Mark by Marco Bellucci CC BY 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

“What can I do with this major?  What job do I get?” are questions that many of us have heard throughout the years from our students.  Majoring in family science can be both a gift and a curse for undergraduates.  The gift is there are so many opportunities for careers under the family science umbrella that job prospects are limitless.  The curse is that some of our students get confused and even discouraged when faced with all these options.  Many have a difficult time finding their way and deciding what they want to do when they graduate.

My colleagues and I, determined to help our students find their way, created a course aimed specifically at the search for a career in family science.  Our Exploring Professions and Practices in Family Science course takes students on a journey through the domains of family practice.  This course exposes students to concrete examples of the types of jobs they will be prepared to get upon completion of their degree.  Course readings and lectures cover specific jobs, their requirements, salaries, and opportunities for advancement.  Invited guest speakers provide practical advice and networking opportunities that many students start to explore before they graduate.

We decided that our students would benefit from a course that exposes them to the four primary domains of family practice: family life education, mental health counseling/marriage and family therapy, family case management/planning, and early childhood careers.  Within each domain, students are exposed to specific jobs, professional practices, and ethical issues.  They are also asked to examine their level of interest in each domain to help provide clarity as they move throughout the course.

Students are excited about the course and have reported:

• This course provides students with endless opportunities and resources to prepare them for their future careers. It is an excellent course to take for students who are not yet sure of what they want to do with this major.
• This course is great for people who are looking for some guidance on where they want college to lead them.
• The strengths of this course were exploring the different career paths within this major and field. It was nice to know that I do have options and many to choose from and I’m able to move from one to another. Taking what I learned from one job and applying it to the next.

So far, the only constructive criticism we have received about this course is that it should be offered earlier in their college career!

Many students enroll in a family science major and know exactly what they want to do when they graduate.  Whether it is child life, marriage and family therapy, social work, or law school we have a good number of students who have a clear understanding of why they chose this major.  This course was created for those students who have not yet reached that point. Students who are passionate about families or have always wanted to work with children, but they are not sure how or in what capacity to do so.

For more information on the foundation of this course, please read: Myers-Wall, J. A., Ballard, S. M., Darling, C. A., & Myers-Bowman, K. S. (2011). Reconceptualizing the domain and boundaries of family life education. Family Relations, 60, 357-372.

Image credit: College Degrees 360 CC BY-SA 2.0 https://www.flickr.com/photos/83633410@N07/7658298768

A recent conversation in my graduate parent education course is the catalyst for this post.  We were discussing the delivery of parent education intervention using online methods and technology.  During the course of the discussion, many students reported their desire to learn more about the ‘how to’ of online family life education programs. As a department, I think we do an excellent job of teaching both undergraduate and graduate students how to select appropriate programs based on populations needs and strengths.   We also spend a good amount of time focused on the evaluation of these efforts either throughout the process or at the end.  As a result of this recent conversation, it is apparent that we could do a better job in providing students with more hand-on opportunities to actually do online education.

We make the assumption that this tech-savvy generation of students is able to maneuver online with ease because web-based content has been a consistent influence throughout their lives.  Many of our current students have had access to computers, smartphones, and the internet since childhood.  They are abreast of websites and applications that can solve almost any problem.  But the truth is that most of their online knowledge is limited to either information finding and/or social media usage.

Instruction on the delivery of online family life education is an appropriate area of focus that family science programs should provide.  One comprehensive resource to aid in this is Hughes, Bowefs, Mitchell, Curtiss, and Ebata’s (2012) article which outlines effective delivery, implementation, and evaluation of online content.  The author suggest strategies in:

• Problem analysis – assessing the need to be addressed with the online program
• Program content – providing materials that are theory-driven, research based, and culturally appropriate
• Instructional design – matching the activities to the preferences of the population
• Program implementation – suggestions for recruitment and retention of participants
• Program evaluation – evaluate effectiveness and quality of program

Since the initial conversation in my graduate course, I have referred students to this publication.  I also plan to use it as a guide to providing more opportunities for students to create online content either in class or as part of a larger assignment.

For more information see: Hughes, R., Bowers, J. R., Mitchell, E. T., Curtiss, S., & Ebata, A. T. (2012).  Developing online family life prevention and education programs. Family Relations, 61, 711-727.

As an instructor, I consistently review and revise my teaching style in order to continue to reach a diverse population of student learners.  Lately, as in the last few years, I have noticed several trends with my undergraduate family science students.  My average student test scores have decreased despite using ‘tried and true’ methods of instruction.  Students also require additional information when completing course assignments and they request many more examples of previous student work than usual.  Also, student preparation for class seems to be at an all time low.  Fortunately, I devised a plan to address these issues and implemented them last semester.

After many discussions with colleagues about their evolving teaching techniques and countless hours researching ways to reach this generation of college students, I surmised that a major barrier to student success was reading.  Reading before class was something that was standard and expected when I was in college.  But today’s student has little interest in devoting hours to reading before each class.  Many of my students are non-traditional and as a result of work, volunteer, parenting and family responsibilities have very little time to read articles and chapters before coming to class.

Therefore, I came up with the bright idea to allow for reading time during class to increase participation and it worked!  I restructured my undergraduate courses with respect to the reading assignments.  Instead of using a textbook, I created a course pack which contained short (2-7 page) readings on each course topic.  Students were required to purchase the course pack and the expectation was that they would bring it to class each day.  I even offered extra credit to ensure they would do so.  At the start of class, I would post several reading/reflection questions intended to guide their ‘reading time’ which occurred during the first 10-15 minutes of class.  After reading, students were then instructed to discuss the main points of the reading with their classmates and share ideas as to how it related to the topic for that day.  Class would then proceed with my lecture consisting of Powerpoint slides, activities, and planned discussion topics.

Average scores on the first exam increased from 80 to 85 in one class and 83 to 87 in the other.  Students were also more engaged, knowledgeable about the material, and requested less instruction when completing course assignments.  On the mid-semester evaluation in response to what they like best about the course, students reported:

“I love having the ability to read course material in class and not outside of the class.”

“The class is put together well and the course pack is amazing. Super helpful.”

“Love the course pack! It helps me organize my notes and actually read the material…in class.”

Based on these results, I plan to use this format in upcoming semesters.  I understand that this approach may not be appropriate for all courses based on their complexity and content.  The courses that I used for this experiment were family life education and exploring professions in family science.  But I do think the idea of creating opportunities to increase student reading, both inside and outside of class, can be an important addition to any family science course.

“The MORE that you READ, the more things you will KNOW.  The MORE that you LEARN, the more places you’ll GO.” – Dr. Seuss 

Image credit: jwyg CC BY-SA 2.0 https://www.flickr.com/photos/nypl/3109294361/

Do you regularly use case studies when teaching your family science courses? If so, I would love to know more about your favorite case studies and, if you have assessed their effectiveness, how you went about doing that.

… →