The use of student management teams (SMTs) is a relatively new teaching technique designed to increase the quality of college courses and student performance and engagement within those courses. However, to date, little systematic, empirical research has validated the effectiveness of using SMTs. To test the effectiveness of this technique, the current research utilized a pretest–posttest paradigm consisting of four total courses (two introduction to psychology courses taught by one professor and two educational psychology courses taught by another professor). In one of each of these course types, the professor implemented an SMT (the other course of that type served as a control comparison). Results revealed that members of the SMTs performed better in their courses, increased their course engagement, and this increase in course engagement mediated the link between SMT membership and course performance. Implications for the further study and use of SMTs are discussed.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
2.
BensleyA. D.CroweD. S.BernhardtP.BucknerC.AllmanA. L. (2010). Teaching and assessing critical thinking skills for argument analysis in psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 37, 91–96. doi:10.1080/00986281003626656
3.
BrittT. W.ThomasJ. L.DawsonC. R. (2006). Self-engagement magnifies the relationship between qualitative overload and performance in a training setting. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 2100–2114. doi:10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00096.x
4.
CanuW. H. (2008). An experiential learning activity demonstrating normal and phobic anxiety. Teaching of Psychology, 35, 22–25. doi:10.1080/00986280701826634
5.
ClarkC. R.MercerS. H.Zeigler-HillV.DufreneB. A. (2012). Barriers to the success of ethnic minority students in school psychology graduate programs. School Psychology Review, 41, 176–192.
6.
Cook-SatherA. (2013). Student-faculty partnership in explorations of pedagogical practice: A threshold concept in academic development. International Journal for Academic Development. doi:10.1080/1360144X.2013.805694
7.
DeciE. D. L.VallerandR. J.PelletierL. G.RyanR. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26, 325–346. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2603&4_6
8.
GasiewskiJ. A.EaganM. K.GarciaG. A.HurtadoS.ChangM. J. (2012). From gatekeeping to engagement: A multicontextual, mixed method study of student academic engagement in introductory STEM courses. Research in Higher Education, 53, 229–261. doi:10.1007/s11162-011-9247-y
9.
HandelsmanM. M. (2012). Course evaluation for fun and profit: Student management teams. In HolmesJ.BakerS. C.StowellJ. R. (Eds.), Essays from e-xcellence in teaching (Vol. 11, pp. 8–11). Retrieved from the Society for the Teaching of Psychology website: http://teachpsych.org/ebooks/eit2011/index.php
10.
HandelsmanM. M.BriggsW. L.SullivanN.TowlerA. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 98, 184–191. doi:10.3200/JOER.98.3.184-192
11.
KeeleyJ.SmithD.BuskistW. (2006). The teacher behavior checklist: Factor analysis of its utility for evaluating teaching. Teaching of Psychology, 33, 84–91. doi:10.1207/s15328023top3302_1
12.
LydonJ. E.ZannaM. P. (1990). Commitment in the face of adversity: A value-affirmation approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 1040–1047. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1040
13.
MacKinnonD. P.LockwoodC. M.HoffmanJ. M.WestS. G.SheetsV. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83–104. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.83
NuhferE. B. (1997). Student management teams—the heretic’s path to teaching success. In CampbellW.SmithK. (Eds.), New paradigms for college teaching (pp. 103–126). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Retrieved fromhttp://hort.ifas.ufl.edu/als5934/campbell-smith1997.pdf
16.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
ShroutP. E.BolgerN. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422–445. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.4.422
19.
WaltonM. (1986). The Deming management method. New York, NY: Putnam Perigree.
20.
YoderJ. D.HochevarC. M. (2005). Encouraging active learning can improve students’ performance on examinations. Teaching of Psychology, 32, 91–95. doi:10.1207/s15328023top3202_2
