Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLowrey, Aubrey Elizabeth
dc.description.abstractThis mixed methods study sets out to evaluate learning styles in hands on animal science courses where preparing students to join industry post graduation is a goal of the coursework. Working off of Doolittle and Camp’s definition of behaviorism and constructivism, this study was crafted to combine qualitative and quantitative data to determine which learning method created greater gains in student skill performance, confidence, and satisfaction with coursework. Measurements taken were skill performance scores of a basic and advanced skill, student peak heart rate, average horse heart rate, journal responses, surveys, and VARK learner preference analysis. Overall, findings of this study support constructivism as the more beneficial learning style, as Chi Square analysis produced p values indicating a strong positive relationship between learning by constructivism compared to behaviorism for both skills (p <0.05). Additionally, educators can utilize findings of this study to improve course design and better utilize limited resources.
dc.subjectAnimal Science
dc.subjectEquine, Heart Rate
dc.subjectMixed Method
dc.subjectSelf Efficacy
dc.titleBehaviorism vs. constructivism
dc.title.alternativea comparison of laboratory learning styles
dc.description.departmentAgricultural Leadership, Education and Comm
dc.description.majorAgricultural Leadership
dc.description.advisorDennis Duncan
dc.description.committeeDennis Duncan
dc.description.committeeKari Turner
dc.description.committeeNick Fuhrman
dc.description.committeeRobert C. Dove

Files in this item


There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record