EXAMINATION OF ALTERNATIVE MODELS OF STUDENTS’ ASSESSMENT OF THEIR COLLEGE: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HARD AND SOFT SCIENCES

ABSTRACT

This study examines the relationship between the discriminable components of quality of learning experiences (that is, resources, content, learning flexibility, student‐faculty contact, and involvement) and students’ summative assessment of their college. The relative explanatory powers of three alternative combinatory models — the compensatory (linear‐additive), conjunctive, and disjunctive — are tested for. undergraduate students from hard and soft sciences. The conjunctive model provides the maximal predictability for hard sciences whereas all three models have the same explanatory powers in soft sciences. In addition, the five quality of learning experience components explain a higher portion of the variation of assessment in hard sciences than in soft sciences. Finally, the two dominant predictors of assessment in hard sciences are flexibility and involvement while the best determinants of assessment in soft sciences are flexibility and student‐faculty contact. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Yoram Neumann

Yoram Neumann (Ph.D. – Cornell University) is Research Professor and the Director of the Graduate Program in Technology Strategy and Policy at Boston University.

Edith Finaly‐Neumann

Edith Finaly-Neumann (Ph.D. – Boston University) is Assistant Professor in the School of Social Work at Boston University.