Browsing by Author "Peter A. Hessling, Member"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Determining Curricular Components of Living-Learning Programs: A Delphi Study
    (2002-03-28) Leibowitz, Seth L.; George B. Vaughan, Co-Chair; Deborah C. Luckadoo, Co-Chair; Peter A. Hessling, Member; Timothy R. Luckadoo, Member
    From the evolution of the first colleges, residence halls have been viewed as more than a place to eat and sleep. The Oxford and Cambridge models offered residential settings where students and faculty lived, ate, and studied together (Rowe, 1981). The living-learning residential model emerged from the present day American university's desire to practice learning as a part of living. The Educational Resources Information Center defines living-learning programs as "Residential facilities of higher education institutions designed to enhance students' educational experiences by enabling them to integrate their academic activities with their ordinary living activities (ERIC, 1982, p. 143). Riker (1965) and Rowe (1981) created eight components that give living-learning program administrators a broad based foundation on which to build living-learning program curricula. Twenty living-learning program administrators listed how their programs incorporate Riker (1965) and Rowe's (1981) components and then prioritized the curricula on these lists. A three round Delphi surveying technique was used to structure this process. In the first round of the process administrators generated lists of program curricula that exist at established programs across the country. Rounds two and three of the process were a tool for building consensus on the most heavily valued living-learning program curricula. Results indicate that curricula providing opportunities for students to pursue an academic life style were most valued by the group of twenty administrators. Specific curricula that were valued include active learning experiences, student involvement and participation in programs, student accessibility to faculty, and spaces that facilitate discussion and study.