On-ramp engagement is higher in the type 2 timetable: 52% of 1st year students engaged versus 20% of 2nd year students in type 1¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? 20% of students meaningfully engaged in the on-ramp transition in the type 1 timetable prior to their 2nd year lecture, versus 52% of 1st year students in the type 2 timetable. → Luke McCrone & Martyn Kingsbury 2024

Evidence¶

Luke McCrone & Martyn Kingsbury 2024¶

Luke McCrone & Martyn Kingsbury. (2024). An ecological approach to understanding transitions and tensions in complex learning contexts. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00267-1

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Same occupancy monitoring analysis, comparing on-ramp engagement across timetable configurations. The authors report "more (52%) of the 1st year students engaged" in type 2, supporting the potential of the 'bridge' period between 1st year off-ramp and on-ramp transitions.

"In the type 1 timetable, 20% of the students meaningfully engaged in the on-ramp transition in the breakout space prior to their 2nd year lecture, whereas more (52%) of the 1st year students engaged in the on-ramp transition in the type 2 timetable (see Fig.1)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Motivation — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• The type 2 configuration creates a 'bridge' hour of self-directed pedagogic potential between formal teaching in which students discuss difficult lecture content — related
• In an observational comparison of timetable configurations, 43% of students meaningfully engaged in off-ramp transitions during the type 2 'bridge' configuration versus 19% in type 1 — related