View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Improving Student Success in the Capstone Seminar: The Importance of a Prior Research Intensive Experience

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Improving Student Success in the Capstone Seminar: The Importance of a Prior Research Intensive Experience
Language: English
Authors: Hinckley, Robert A., McGuire, Jack, Danforth, Tara L.
Source: Journal of Political Science Education. 2021 17(1):20-31.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 12
Publication Date: 2021
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Capstone Experiences, Seminars, Required Courses, Political Science, Majors (Students), Undergraduate Students, Grade Point Average, Academic Achievement, Prior Learning, Research Training, Research Methodology, Performance Factors, Scaffolding (Teaching Technique), Public Colleges, Research Papers (Students)
DOI: 10.1080/15512169.2019.1608831
ISSN: 1551-2169
Abstract: Most undergraduate social science programs require the completion of a capstone experience before graduation. Despite the recognized potential of capstone courses to deepen learning, many students do not perform well. The present study examines several factors that may prepare students for academic success in a fairly typical capstone course for undergraduate political science majors. We hypothesize that students who earn high grades in research intensive courses will also earn high grades in the capstone course, even after controlling for other factors related to academic performance. Our results show that successfully completing research intensive training in just one course, even above and beyond the introductory methods course, improves capstone performance. We conclude with a discussion of how our findings lend further support to arguments in favor of "scaffolding" political science curricula to funnel students from less to more intensive research experiences as they move toward the completion of their degrees.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2021
Accession Number: EJ1285996
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwH5Eh2hFrt8xDbNh51h_MAhAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDPjRO66mDrjpdiY7WAIBEICBmpqn_LXOcInGg426iE21Eqpg32bOnwBdx5NEoZcarkhxMNxtotP3TN-tv_O-RNyrd0hmQlzppHpEfHDOAj8ZBg33iYsY3nj0A-n73BauFLZ0PgZmEDjsGVKL_iUOoiDmkEckM7dwR0FfBm_DkSJHWqRukiFuDHsYmpbd-VYvGuLiKE0HKIAphnY7S5fXFbWzR7oSMokGY3v65iA=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0148653179;[15ub]01jan.21;2021Feb13.01:48;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0148653179-1">Improving Student Success in the Capstone Seminar: The Importance of a Prior Research Intensive Experience </title> <p>Most undergraduate social science programs require the completion of a capstone experience before graduation. Despite the recognized potential of capstone courses to deepen learning, many students do not perform well. The present study examines several factors that may prepare students for academic success in a fairly typical capstone course for undergraduate political science majors. We hypothesize that students who earn high grades in research intensive courses will also earn high grades in the capstone course, even after controlling for other factors related to academic performance. Our results show that successfully completing research intensive training in just one course, even above and beyond the introductory methods course, improves capstone performance. We conclude with a discussion of how our findings lend further support to arguments in favor of "scaffolding" political science curricula to funnel students from less to more intensive research experiences as they move toward the completion of their degrees.</p> <p>Keywords: Capstone seminar; research methods; undergraduate research; political science curriculum; student success</p> <hd id="AN0148653179-2">Introduction</hd> <p>The touchstone for curriculum builders in political science is the "Wahlke Report" (Wahlke [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref1">17</reflink>]), which summarized recommendations from the 1991 APSA Task Force on Political Science. The report endorses a capstone experience for all political science programs. More recently, the Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) endorsed capstone experiences for all disciplines (AAC&U [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref2">1</reflink>]). This advice reflects the expectation that students should be given the opportunity to tie together conceptual and methodological knowledge with applied research skills at an advanced undergraduate level.</p> <p>Nonetheless, capstone experiences present a challenge to both students and faculty. The AAC&U reports that many faculty are "... frustrated by students' poor preparation for tackling complex inquiry and creative projects" ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref3">1</reflink>], 31). They argue that this results from the lack of scaffolding in the curriculum of many programs that do not "incrementally foster and assess students' skills in inquiry and innovation as they advance through a course of study" ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref4">1</reflink>], 31). The sizable number of political science programs without a required capstone also speaks to a degree of skepticism among faculty about the prospects for student success (Hummer [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref5">8</reflink>]; Young [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref6">18</reflink>]). Taken together, these observations suggest that many of our students are not fully prepared to realize the benefits of a successful capstone experience.</p> <p>This study assesses a recent effort to improve the academic performance of students in a research-focused political science capstone course. The data are drawn from a "transcript analysis" (Siver, Greenfest, and Haeg [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref7">16</reflink>]) performed on the records of students who attempted a required capstone seminar over an eight-year period at a midsized public university.[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref8">1</reflink>] Specifically, we examine to what extent capstone performance was improved by the prior completion of research intensive courses that incorporated substantive content and skills, including hypothesis formation, data analysis, and the presentation of results.</p> <hd id="AN0148653179-3">Preparing students for a successful capstone experience</hd> <p>In the Wahlke Report ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref9">17</reflink>], 55), recommendation 9b states that all political science programs should require a capstone experience that encourages students to recognize the interconnectedness of individual courses in a way that utilizes real-world methodologies. The report further delineates the possible forms for the capstone, which include a senior seminar, a research paper (in a seminar or otherwise), a colloquium series, a senior thesis, or comprehensive examinations. Moreover, the number of students meeting key learning objectives in the capstone experience can (Hummer [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref10">8</reflink>]) and often is (Young [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref11">18</reflink>]) used for program assessment. This is especially helpful when the capstone reflects program-wide learning objectives and is rotated among the teaching faculty.</p> <p>Nonetheless, a recent study by Hummer ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref12">8</reflink>]) found that only 129 out of 217 political science programs surveyed, or 59.4%, require a senior capstone for their majors. Hummer reports that most capstone experiences are seminars or research papers ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref13">8</reflink>], 232) and that the majority of capstones do not fully require integration of theories, problems, and methods from various areas of the discipline ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref14">8</reflink>], 234). Hummer's survey of department chairs revealed that such "nonintegrative" capstones are valued in any event because they help students master research skills and the process of doing empirical analysis ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref15">8</reflink>], 236). Programs without a required capstone cited resource constraints or lack of faculty support for the idea (2014, 238). These concerns are also reflected in the AAC&U report ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref16">1</reflink>]) on best practices in higher education and with critiques that students might lack adequate preparation, or only superficial preparation (e.g., Reisberg [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref17">14</reflink>]), for doing higher-level empirical work. A recent study of students in one political science capstone course showed that more than two-thirds of students could not adequately formulate a hypothesis, perform basic data analysis, or present their results (Siver, Greenfest, and Haeg [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref18">16</reflink>]).</p> <p>One promising approach to preparing students for academic success in the capstone experience is to develop programs that emphasize "research and discovery across the curriculum" (Elrod, Husic, and Kinzie [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref19">7</reflink>]). The pedagogical literature from the STEM fields shows that students should be introduced to the empirical part of the discipline early in their college careers and given numerous opportunities to practice basic research skills (as summarized in Levenson [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref20">10</reflink>]). In research intensive courses, methods should be taught in the context of a substantive topic tied directly to specific research skills (Siver, Greenfest, and Haeg [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref21">16</reflink>], 188). And research experiences should cover the full range of tasks, including question wording, reviewing scholarly literature, hypothesis construction, data collection, and analysis (Lopatto [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref22">11</reflink>]). To ensure that students develop problem-solving skills, course assignments should be student-directed (Bonnstetter [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref23">4</reflink>]). Bonnstetter ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref24">4</reflink>]) suggests that faculty and students work together on topic selection and question wording, but that students should drive all subsequent project decisions in frequent consultation with the instructor. In short, experiences in the STEM fields suggest that political science programs should require that students have opportunities beyond the introductory methods course to experience the research process.</p> <p>Although the benefits for students in STEM fields are well documented, little research has been done on how undergraduate research might improve academic success in a political science capstone experience (but see Siver, Greenfest, and Haeg [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref25">16</reflink>]). This may reflect how few political science students have undergraduate research experiences beyond whatever experience is gained from an introductory methods course. For instance, a National Science Foundation survey of individuals who received a bachelor's degree in a social, behavioral, or economic science revealed that only 38% of political science students participated in any type of undergraduate research (Russell, Hancock, and McCullough [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref26">15</reflink>]). And a recent study of U.S. political science programs showed that only about 28% require any methods training for students (Parker [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref27">13</reflink>], 123). In the next section, we describe and assess one systematic effort to infuse research intensive experiences into an otherwise traditional political science program.</p> <hd id="AN0148653179-4">Research design</hd> <p>In our analysis, we examine several factors that may contribute to academic success in a capstone course for undergraduate political science majors. Our focus is on courses that blend undergraduate research experiences with skills training and, therefore, should prepare students to write an original undergraduate research paper. More specifically, we hypothesize that students who earn high grades in research methods, or in advanced courses designed to provide research intensive experiences, should earn higher grades in the capstone course than students with low grades in those courses. We further test the possibility that the more research intensive courses a student attempts, the higher grade he or she will earn in the capstone course. Finally, we test the prospect that courses covering the entire research process will have a greater impact on capstone success than those only including a few research elements.</p> <p>The data we analyze are drawn from 15 sections of a required undergraduate political science capstone course at a medium-size Northeastern public university. The 142 students were taught by seven different instructors over an eight-year period during which research intensive courses at the upper division level were introduced into the curriculum. Using Hummer's ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref28">8</reflink>]) categories, the capstone experience is a "non-integrative" course that features a research paper. The research seminar is not integrative because it does not explicitly require students to explore themes by drawing on material from various subfields or from different disciplines. Like most non-integrative capstones (Hummer [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref29">8</reflink>], 236), this seminar emphasizes the demonstration of skills and the process of doing empirical research. Students work with the faculty to frame a researchable question, and then students drive all subsequent decisions about design, data collection, and analysis in consultation with the instructor. Capstone students and their faculty instructor meet as a group weekly to discuss problems and share drafts.</p> <p>We measure academic success in the capstone research seminar using the 4.0 grade scale because grades in this case directly reflect the quality of student research papers. Student grades reflect each of the key performance indicators defined by current pedagogical research: the framing of a researchable question, the writing of a critical review of relevant scholarly literature, hypothesis formation, research design and analysis, and the presentation of data (qualitative or quantitative). We believe these scores are comparable because instructors use the same syllabus and because expectations are aligned in annual assessment discussions. An analysis of variance also shows that there was no statistically significant difference in scores by instructor (<emph>F</emph> = 1.8, <emph>p</emph> =.09). Other measures of student success, such as drop, withdraw, or fail rates, are also important in some instances, particularly when the distribution of grades is split between very low and very high scores (Bergbower [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref30">2</reflink>]). However, the capstone grades in our sample (<emph>M</emph> = 3.03, <emph>SD</emph> = 0.97) do not have such a bimodal distribution.</p> <p>In addition to capstone course grades, our data include the students' research methods grade (<emph>M</emph> = 2.79, <emph>SD</emph> = 0.93), the number of research intensive courses attempted (<emph>M</emph> = 0.74, <emph>SD</emph> = 0.99), and the average grade in all attempted research intensive courses (<emph>M</emph> = 3.04, <emph>SD</emph> = 0.83). After the introduction of research intensive courses in the curriculum, students attempted an average of 1.6 (<emph>SD</emph> =.85) of these courses.</p> <p>We count as "research intensive" any course for which the instructor was awarded a small internal grant to enhance a course by applying an inquiry-based learning pedagogy. The five courses feature different research topics in the subfields of American politics, judicial process, comparative politics, and international relations. The syllabi indicate that they each cover one or more of the following: the writing of a literature review, research design, data collection, and data analysis (qualitative or quantitative). Key elements of these courses are summarized in Table 1. Of significance, only the first course requires a complete research paper, from question formation to analysis to conclusion. We believe this course should have the largest effect on capstone success, as it most clearly resembles the capstone seminar. By contrast, the second course requires many (but not all) elements of the research and writing process. The third course only requires formulating a research design. While there is certainly value to developing aptitude in one area, we suspect that students must be able to practice and understand the entire process to successfully replicate it in the capstone seminar.</p> <p>Table 1. Comparison of research intensive courses.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>1. Democracy and Democratization</td><td>2. U.S. Public Opinion</td><td>3. Politics of the Judicial Process</td><td>4. International Human Rights</td><td>5. Welfare Policy Research</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td><italic>Research requirement</italic></td><td>Complete research paper</td><td>Analysis of survey data</td><td>Research design</td><td>Literature review</td><td>Literature review</td></tr><tr><td><italic>Skills focus</italic></td><td>Writing a research question; writing a literature review; hypothesis formation and testing; multivariate analysis; measures of association</td><td>Writing a research question; questionnaire design; hypothesis formation and testing; measures of association</td><td>Writing a research question; hypothesis formation</td><td>Writing a research question; writing a literature review</td><td>Writing a research question; writing a literature review</td></tr><tr><td><italic>Frequency of computer lab meetings</italic></td><td>Weekly 100-min lab sessions (50% of all class meetings)</td><td>Eight 100-min sessions at middle and end of semester (25% of all class meetings)</td><td>None</td><td>None</td><td>None</td></tr><tr><td><italic>SPSS instruction</italic></td><td>Yes</td><td>Yes</td><td>No</td><td>No</td><td>No</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>It is important to note that the research intensive content of these courses was not advertised to students during the period our data were collected, so we have no reason to believe that our analysis will be biased because "better" students self-selected into (or avoided) these courses. The lack of a correlation between cumulative grade point average (GPA) and participation in research intensive courses (<emph>r</emph> = 0.01, <emph>p</emph> =.95) supports this assumption.</p> <p>In addition to variables designed to measure research preparation, our analysis also includes several other potentially important predictors of academic success. Student gender is included in our analysis because it has been shown to correlate with success in political science programs (e.g., Cassese et al. [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref31">5</reflink>]). We also include cumulative GPA and whether the student repeated the capstone course. By controlling for these other factors, we hope to guard against the possibility that any relationship we find between our research experience variables and capstone grades simply reflects the success of students with generally high motivation, study skills, and scholastic aptitude doing well in all of their courses (for interpretations of what cumulative GPA tells us, see for instance Didia and Hasnat [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref32">6</reflink>]; Park and Kerr [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref33">12</reflink>]). Nonetheless, we acknowledge that, despite the inclusion of these statistical controls, without the use of randomized trials there is a possibility that our findings reflect some unmeasured element of student aptitude.</p> <hd id="AN0148653179-5">Analysis</hd> <p>We use Bergbower's ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref34">2</reflink>]) recently published work on student performance in undergraduate research methods courses as a template for our analysis. In Tables 2–4 we present the uncontrolled bivariate relationships among our three key independent variables—the number of research intensive courses attempted, average grade in those courses, and grade in the introductory research methods course—with the capstone grade. We then present the results of several multilevel regression models (Generalized Linear Latent and Mixed Models [GLLAMM]) that include our remaining variables, as well as section and instructor.</p> <p>Table 2. Average capstone grades by number of research intensive courses completed.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td><italic>N</italic></td><td>Average capstone grade</td><td>Standard deviation</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Number of research intensive courses</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>0</td><td char=".">79</td><td char=".">3.01</td><td char=".">1.0</td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td char=".">32</td><td char=".">3.20</td><td char=".">0.60</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td char=".">22</td><td char=".">2.78</td><td char=".">0.95</td></tr><tr><td>3–4</td><td char=".">9</td><td char=".">3.22</td><td char=".">0.73</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>Note</emph>. Pearson's <emph>r</emph> = 0.01, <emph>p</emph> =.95, <emph>N</emph> = 142.</p> <p>The bivariate analyses lend support to two of our three hypotheses concerning the importance of successful research intensive preparation. Table 2 shows that there is no statistically significant association, as measured by Pearson's product-moment correlation, between the number of research intensive courses attempted and capstone course grades. By contrast, Table 3 shows that higher average scores in any attempted research intensive course were correlated with higher capstone course grades. Table 4 shows that higher research methods grades were also correlated with higher capstone grades. Thus far, our results suggest that course-based research experiences and training can, when a student is successful, improve performance in the capstone course. In our multivariate analyses, we examine whether this finding holds up after controlling for other predictors of academic success.</p> <p>Table 3. Average capstone grade by average grade in research intensive courses.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td><italic>N</italic></td><td>Average capstone grade</td><td>Standard deviation</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Average grade in research intensive courses</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>0–2.0</td><td char=".">7</td><td char=".">2.27</td><td char=".">1.20</td></tr><tr><td>2.1–2.99</td><td char=".">14</td><td char=".">2.62</td><td char=".">0.90</td></tr><tr><td>3.0–3.33</td><td char=".">17</td><td char=".">3.00</td><td char=".">0.61</td></tr><tr><td>3.34–4.0</td><td char=".">26</td><td char=".">3.41</td><td char=".">0.65</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>2 <emph>Note</emph>. Pearson's <emph>r</emph> = 0.54, <emph>p</emph> <.01, <emph>N</emph> = 64. Students must have attempted at least one research intensive course to be included in this subsample.</p> <p>Table 4. Average capstone grade by research methods grade.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td><italic>N</italic></td><td>Average capstone grade</td><td>Standard deviation</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Grade in research methods course</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>0–2.0</td><td char=".">30</td><td char=".">2.62</td><td char=".">0.79</td></tr><tr><td>2.1–2.99</td><td char=".">29</td><td char=".">3.01</td><td char=".">0.82</td></tr><tr><td>3.0–3.33</td><td char=".">27</td><td char=".">3.19</td><td char=".">0.69</td></tr><tr><td>3.34–4.0</td><td char=".">35</td><td char=".">3.39</td><td char=".">0.95</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>3 <emph>Note</emph>. Pearson's <emph>r</emph> = 0.39, <emph>p</emph> <.01, <emph>N</emph> = 121. The 21 students who enrolled in methods at the same time as the capstone course were dropped from this analysis, reducing the same size from 142 to 121.</p> <p>Table 5 presents the results of three multi-level models designed to predict capstone grades. We use the GLLAMM program in Stata to produce the estimates for each three level model, with level 1 as student, level 2 as section, and level 3 as instructor.[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref35">2</reflink>] In contrast to Bergbower ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref36">2</reflink>], 205) we treat our dependent variable as continuous, although ordinal logit estimates show the same pattern of results. Model 1 includes all students who completed research methods before they attempted the capstone course, which reduces the sample size to 121 from 142. The results show that methods grade has the expected statistically significant relationship with capstone grade even after controlling for cumulative GPA, which also has an independent positive and statistically significant relationship with the capstone score. The number of research intensive courses has no observed effect on capstone grade.</p> <p>Table 5. Multilevel model predicting grade in the capstone course.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>Model 1: All students</td><td>Model 2: Students attempting at least one research intensive course</td><td>Model 3. Impact of complete vs. partial research experience</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Predictor variables</td><td>Slope</td><td>Standard error</td><td>Slope</td><td>Standard error</td><td>Slope</td><td>Standard error</td></tr><tr><td>Cumulative GPA</td><td>0.49</td><td>0.17**</td><td>0.28</td><td>0.24</td><td>.77</td><td>.25**</td></tr><tr><td>Female</td><td>−0.11</td><td>0.15</td><td>−0.02</td><td>0.15</td><td>−.02</td><td>0.15</td></tr><tr><td>Methods grade</td><td>0.23</td><td>0.08**</td><td>0.02</td><td>0.12</td><td>.01</td><td>.13</td></tr><tr><td>Repeated capstone</td><td>−0.25</td><td>0.20</td><td>−0.97</td><td>0.20**</td><td>−.72</td><td>.22**</td></tr><tr><td>No. research intensive courses</td><td>0.02</td><td>0.07</td><td>.002</td><td>0.08</td><td>–</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td> 1. Complete paper</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>.41</td><td>.16*</td></tr><tr><td> 2. Data analysis only</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>.32</td><td>.19<sup>^</sup></td></tr><tr><td> 3. Research design only</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>.06</td><td>.18</td></tr><tr><td>Average grade research intensive courses</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>0.51</td><td>0.10**</td><td>–</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td>Constant</td><td>1.10</td><td>0.60<sup>^</sup></td><td>1.67</td><td>.66*</td><td>1.17</td><td>.71<sup>^</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Log-likelihood</td><td>−136.23</td><td /><td>−53.29</td><td /><td>−61.25</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Condition number</td><td>27.24</td><td /><td>52.55</td><td /><td>34.96</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Level 1 <italic>N</italic> (Students)</td><td>121</td><td /><td>64</td><td /><td>64</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Level 2 <italic>N</italic> (Section)</td><td>15</td><td /><td>12</td><td /><td>12</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Level 3 <italic>N</italic> (Instructor)</td><td>7</td><td /><td>6</td><td /><td>6</td><td /></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>4 <emph>Note</emph>. **<emph>p</emph> <.01, *<emph>p</emph> <.05, <sups>^</sups><emph>p</emph> <.10.</item> <item>5 Models run with GLLAMM with adaptive quadrature option. The dependent variable is grade in the capstone course on a 0.0–4.0 scale. Model 1 only incudes students who completed research methods before the capstone course. Models 2 and 3 are further limited to students who attempted at least one research intensive course. The number of instructors in Model 2 is also reduced because one instructor taught before the research intensive courses were available to students. In Model 3 the comparison group for the three courses are two courses that only required students to write literature reviews.</item> </ulist> <p>The number of research intensive courses attempted does not directly reflect a successful learning outcome for the student. Hence, Model 2 adds average grade in all attempted research intensive courses as a predictor. Since 57 students did not enroll in any of the five possible research intensive courses, and we do not think assigning them a 0.0 grade in our data is substantively meaningful, the sample size is reduced to 64 from 121. Model 2 shows that average research intensive course grade has the expected relationship with capstone grade after controlling for our other independent predictors of academic success (e.g., cumulative GPA). Of interest, in Model 2 cumulative GPA and research methods grade no longer predict capstone scores. We discuss possible interpretations of this finding in the concluding section.</p> <p>To aid in the interpretation of the GLLAMM coefficient, we illustrate this finding in Figure 1. The illustration shows predicted capstone scores for various average grades in research intensive courses while holding the other predictor variables at their respective means. The average increase in capstone grades, from students who earned below a 1.0 average to those who earned a 4.0 average in research intensive courses, is about 2.0 grade points. By comparison, based on Model 1, capstone grades only increased an average of 1.0 grade point between an introductory methods grade of below a 1.0 to a 4.0.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Illustration of predicted senior capstone seminar grade by average grade in research intensive courses. All other variables held at their respective means.</p> <p>Finally, we test the possibility that courses featuring a complete research paper will contribute more to capstone success than courses that have relatively few research elements. Model 3 reports a final GLLAMM model that includes separate dummy variables (1 = completed course with 2.0 or higher, 0 = did not complete or did not enroll) for the most complete research intensive experience (Democracy and Democratization), one that required only research design and analysis (Public Opinion), and one that required only a research design (Judicial Process). The comparison group is the two remaining courses, which only required the writing of a literature review. As we expected, only the complete research experience showed a positive and statistically significant contribution to capstone performance (<emph>p</emph> =.013) relative to the "literature review only" experiences. In terms of expected capstone grade, completing the democracy course raised the capstone grade about half a grade point (.46) on average. Completion of the partial research experience (Public Opinion) raised the capstone grade an average of.32 grade points, but the effect was only marginally significant (<emph>p</emph> =.096) relative to the comparison courses. Computing the marginal effects of taking any combination of two courses showed that the expected gain in capstone grade was statistically significant but did not exceed that of enrolling in only the course with the complete research experience.</p> <hd id="AN0148653179-6">Conclusion: Practice makes better</hd> <p>A capstone experience is recognized as an important "high impact" practice in higher education (AAC&U [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref37">1</reflink>]; Wahlke [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref38">17</reflink>]). In this study, we examined predictors of success in a fairly typical political science capstone experience, that is, a research seminar that requires the application of advanced undergraduate research skills to test a novel hypothesis that is derived from an established theoretical perspective. We found that academic success in at least one research intensive upper-division course improved subsequent student performance in the capstone seminar. This effect was especially large and clear for a course that featured the research and writing process from start to finish, rather than incorporating just some research elements. Of importance, this effect also held after controlling for other common predictors of academic success.</p> <p>By contrast, student performance in the introductory research methods course did not have a direct impact on capstone success in our final model. Based on our results, we suspect that the effect of introductory research methods on capstone performance is mediated; in other words, students who do well in research methods subsequently perform better in upper-division research intensive courses and, in turn, have more academic success in the capstone seminar.[<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref39">3</reflink>] This points to the importance of "scaffolding" in curricular design: Students should be given an opportunity to practice research procedures and make logical connections as they move from less to more demanding courses and, hence, ultimately improve their capstone performance. Furthermore, the work of Bernstein and Allen ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref40">3</reflink>]) shows that repeated practice can improve student motivation to overcome research challenges by reducing methods anxiety. Mapping out and testing these more detailed pathways to capstone success seems like a promising avenue for future study.</p> <p>To some extent, our results also reinforce the need for a more structured—and hence less flexible—political science curriculum. Bergbower ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref41">2</reflink>]) found that students were most successful in research methods after completing five prior political science courses. When combined with other research about the benefits of a structured major, such as the development of high levels of abstract reasoning (Ishiyama and Hartlaub [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref42">9</reflink>]), we believe that our findings lend credence to the use of prerequisites that funnel students from less to more demanding research experiences. Based on our experiences and analysis, this might involve giving upper-division "research intensive" courses an official designation and then requiring students to pass one of the designated courses before enrolling in the capstone seminar. Our results suggest that, to maximize the benefit, this designation should be reserved for courses that feature a complete research paper writing experience.</p> <p>Nonetheless, we recognize that our study does not directly speak to the second key aspect of capstone experiences. As was originally envisioned in the Wahlke Report, students should also be encouraged to integrate conceptual material from across the discipline. We believe that this is also an important goal; however, we also suspect that conceptual integration poses a distinct set of challenges to students and faculty. We hope future research will clarify and address these concerns.</p> <hd id="AN0148653179-7">Acknowledgements</hd> <p>The authors would like to thank Ms. Laurie Peary for her assistance with this project and also gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments of two anonymous reviewers.</p> <ref id="AN0148653179-8"> <title> Notes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref2" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> This project was reviewed and approved by the SUNY Potsdam Institutional Review Board (project 17-S-2006).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref30" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Our preliminary analysis also included tests for the effects of several other variables on capstone success. These included grades in introductory statistics and introduction to comparative politics (which features some methods skills). We also examined size of the capstone seminar. However, we dropped these from the final model as they did not improve our model fit to the data.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref39" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Our data do not allow us to test the extent of statistical mediation suggested by Model 2. Mediation in this case would assume that an introductory research methods course was completed before the research intensive upper-division coursework. However, this sequencing was not required in our program, and we do not have the data to establish the exact sequence in which these courses were taken. Our data only indicate which courses were completed before the capstone seminar. Nonetheless, we believe this is the most plausible explanation for the differences in the coefficients for methods grade and cumulative GPA between Model 1 and Model 2.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0148653179-9"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). 2007. College Learning for the New Global Century: A Report from the National Leadership Council for Liberal Education & America's Promise. Washington, D.C.: Association of American Colleges and Universities.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bergbower, Matthew L. 2017. " When Are Students Ready for Research Methods? A Curriculum Mapping Argument for the Political Science Major." Journal of Political Science Education 13 (2): 200 – 210. doi: 10.1080/15512169.2017.1292917.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bernstein, Jeffrey L. and Brooke Thomas Allen. 2013. " Overcoming Methods Anxiety: Qualitative First, Quantitative Next, Frequent Feedback Along the Way." Journal of Political Science Education 9 (1): 1 – 15. doi: 10.1080/15512169.2013.747830.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref23" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Bonnstetter, Ronald J. 1998. " Inquiry: Learning from the Past with an Eye on the Future." Electronic Journal of Science Education. 3 (1): 1-5. https://ejse.southwestern.edu/article/view/7595/5362</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref31" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Cassese, Erin C., Mirya R. Holman, Monica C. Schneider, and Angela L. Bos. 2015. " Building a Gender and Methodology Curriculum: Integrated Skills, Exercises, and Practices." Journal of Political Science Education 11 (1): 61 – 77. doi: 10.1080/15512169.2014.985106.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref32" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Didia, Dal and Baban Hasnat. 1998. "The Determinants of Performance in the University Introduction to Finance Course." Financial Practice & Education 8 (1): 102 – 107.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref19" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Elrod, Susan, Diane Husic, and Jillian Kinzie. 2010. " Research and Discovery Across the Curriculum." Peer Reviewed 12 (2): 4 – 8.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref5" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Hummer, Jill Abraham. 2014. " The Content and Integrative Component of Capstone Experiences: An Analysis of Political Science Undergraduate Programs." Journal of Political Science Education 10 (2): 222 – 42. doi: 10.1080/15512169.2014.894366.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref42" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Ishiyama, John and Stephen Hartlaub. 2003. " Sequential or Flexible? The Impact of Differently Structured Political Science Majors on the Development of Student Reasoning." PS: Political Science and Politics 36 (1): 83 – 86. doi: 10.1017/S1049096503001744.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Levenson, Cathy W. 2010. " Enhancing Undergraduate Research in the Arts and Humanities." Peer Review 12 (2): 1-5.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lopatto, David. 2009. Science in Solution: The Impact of Undergraduate Research on Student Learning. Tucson, AZ : The Research Corporation.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Park, Kang H. and Peter M. Kerr. 1990. " Determinants of Academic Performance: A Multinomial Logit Approach." Journal of Economic Education 21 (2): 101 – 111. doi: 10.1080/00220485.1990.10844659.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Parker, Jonathan. 2010. " Undergraduate Research-Methods Training in Political Science: A Comparative Perspective." PS: Political Science and Politics 43 (1): 121 – 125. doi: 10.1017/S1049096510990677.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reisberg, Leo. 1998. " Research by Undergraduates Proliferates, but is Some of it Just Glorified Homework?" Chronicle of Higher Education, June 26. https://<ulink href="http://www.chonicle.com/article/Some-Professors-Question/97965">www.chonicle.com/article/Some-Professors-Question/97965</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Russell, Susan H., Mary P. Hancock, and James McCullough. 2007. " The Pipeline. Benefits of Undergraduate Research Experiences." Science 316 (5824): 548 – 549. doi: 10.1126/science.1140384.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Siver, Christi, Seth W. Greenfest, and G. Claire Haeg. 2016. " Are We Teaching Them Anything? A Model for Measuring Methodology Skills in the Political Science Major." Journal of Political Science Education 12 (2): 186 – 199. doi: 10.1080/15512169.2015.1060890.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wahlke, John C. 1991. " Liberal Learning and the Political Science Major: A Report to the Profession." PS: Political Science and Politics 24 (1): 48. doi: 10.2307/419376.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Young, Candace C. 2016. " Survey of Assessment Practices in Political Science." PS: Political Science and Politics 49 (1): 93 – 98. doi: 10.1017/S1049096515001304.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Robert A. Hinckley; Jack McGuire and Tara L. Danforth</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>Robert A. Hinckley is Associate Professor of Politics at SUNY Potsdam. He received his PhD from the University of California at Santa Barbara. Hinckley's research interests include comparative political behavior and political psychology, and he teaches undergraduate courses in comparative politics and research methods.</p> <p>Jack McGuire is Associate Professor of Politics at SUNY Potsdam. He received his PhD from Washington State University. McGuire's research interests focus on state and local government and American political institutions. He teaches undergraduate courses in American politics and research methods.</p> <p>Tara L. Danforth recently graduated from SUNY Potsdam. As an undergraduate, she completed a Kilmer research apprenticeship that focused on student academic success. She currently attends graduate school at the University of New Hampshire.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref33"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1285996
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Improving Student Success in the Capstone Seminar: The Importance of a Prior Research Intensive Experience
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hinckley%2C+Robert+A%2E%22">Hinckley, Robert A.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22McGuire%2C+Jack%22">McGuire, Jack</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Danforth%2C+Tara+L%2E%22">Danforth, Tara L.</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Political+Science+Education%22"><i>Journal of Political Science Education</i></searchLink>. 2021 17(1):20-31.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 12
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2021
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Capstone+Experiences%22">Capstone Experiences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Seminars%22">Seminars</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Required+Courses%22">Required Courses</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Political+Science%22">Political Science</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Majors+%28Students%29%22">Majors (Students)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Undergraduate+Students%22">Undergraduate Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grade+Point+Average%22">Grade Point Average</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+Achievement%22">Academic Achievement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Prior+Learning%22">Prior Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+Training%22">Research Training</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+Methodology%22">Research Methodology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Performance+Factors%22">Performance Factors</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Scaffolding+%28Teaching+Technique%29%22">Scaffolding (Teaching Technique)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Public+Colleges%22">Public Colleges</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+Papers+%28Students%29%22">Research Papers (Students)</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/15512169.2019.1608831
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1551-2169
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Most undergraduate social science programs require the completion of a capstone experience before graduation. Despite the recognized potential of capstone courses to deepen learning, many students do not perform well. The present study examines several factors that may prepare students for academic success in a fairly typical capstone course for undergraduate political science majors. We hypothesize that students who earn high grades in research intensive courses will also earn high grades in the capstone course, even after controlling for other factors related to academic performance. Our results show that successfully completing research intensive training in just one course, even above and beyond the introductory methods course, improves capstone performance. We conclude with a discussion of how our findings lend further support to arguments in favor of "scaffolding" political science curricula to funnel students from less to more intensive research experiences as they move toward the completion of their degrees.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2021
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1285996
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1285996
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/15512169.2019.1608831
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 12
        StartPage: 20
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Capstone Experiences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Seminars
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Required Courses
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Political Science
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Majors (Students)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Undergraduate Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Grade Point Average
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Academic Achievement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Prior Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research Training
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research Methodology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Performance Factors
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Scaffolding (Teaching Technique)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Public Colleges
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research Papers (Students)
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Improving Student Success in the Capstone Seminar: The Importance of a Prior Research Intensive Experience
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hinckley, Robert A.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: McGuire, Jack
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Danforth, Tara L.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2021
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1551-2169
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 17
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Political Science Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1