Stacie M. Spencer & Marin Gillis
94
they discussed in their respective reaction papers and to use the information they have
collected from the peer evaluations of their measure and from evaluating other stress meas-
ures to revise their original instrument. Revised instruments are posted to the virtual
learning environment (Blackboard and WebCT).
All of Appleby’s six critical thinking skills (retention, comprehension, application, ana l-
ysis, synthesis, and evaluation) are assessed through the final project. After students revise
and post their original stress measures, they print and complete each group’s newly revised
stress measures. They then write reaction papers that describe the changes made to their
measure; indicate the reason for each change (better understanding of reliability and valid-
ity, peer feedback, reflects one of the sample lay or professional stress measures); and
identify the specific definition of stress that is reflected in the revised stress measure.
Evaluation of the Process
This approach to teaching the concept of stress was evaluated using a supplemental teach-
ing evaluation form that specifically addressed the steps described previously. Feedback
collected from 62 students (from two sections of the course) indicated that the approach
was successful in moving students from a superficial level of understanding to a deeper
level that included all six of Appleby’s skills of a critical thinker.
Students were asked to describe what they learned about stress and measurement by
going through this process. Comments reflected three general themes. Students spontane-
ously indicated that these activities helped them (a) learn that there are different defini-
tions of stress; (b) understand the importance of the distinction between stress and other
concepts such as coping, anxiety, and depression; and (c) understand that a good instru-
ment takes time to develop and should demonstrate reliability and validity.
Students were also asked to indicate whether or not they recommended these activities
be used in future Stress and Illness courses. Only 3 out of 62 students indicated that they
did not recommend these activities be used again. Of these three, two indicated that they
did not believe the process helped them learn about stress, and one student commented
that too many points (toward the final grade) were given to the process. In contrast, the
remaining 59 students indicated that the process engaged them in the material and helped
them understand and apply the material better because it required them to think. Students
also commented that the process included a welcome variety of class discussion (lecturing)
and activity and indicated that working as a group allowed them to benefit from others’
perspectives and knowledge and provided the added benefit of pooling ideas.
Discussion
This approach has been used successfully over several semesters and across several sections
of a Stress and Illness course, a course that is primarily enrolled with nonpsychology majors
and with students from different levels of academic development (freshman through
advanced undergraduates). This approach is learner-centered and is designed to foster the