Training in Human Relations for Dormitory Resident Assistants

Quirk, Michael

doi:10.2466/pr0.1976.39.1.123

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, a total of 27 effect sizes were ultimately regressed onto the various study attributes. Overall, 8 effect sizes were coded as 0 (Bailey, 1967/1968; Bledsoe & Layser, 1977; Chambers & Ficek, 1970; Geitgey, 1966; Katz & Schwebel, 1976; Norton, 1973; Selfridge et al, 1975; Shapiro & Ross, 1971), and 19 were coded as 1 (Avery, 1978; Bledsoe & Layser, 1977; Dua, 1971; Evans, Uhlemann, & Hearn, 1978; Fraser & Vitro, 1975; Heck, 1971; Holder & Hicks, 1977; Kennelly, 1981; Long et al, 1978; Mendelsohn, 1978; Norton, 1973; Quirk, 1976; Rennie, Brewster, & Toukmanian, 1985; Selfridge et al, 1975; Tosi & Eshbaugh, 1978; Toukmanian & Rennie, 1973; Vogelsong, 1978; Waldo, 1989; Woodburn, 1976/1977).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Group sensitivity training: Update, meta-analysis, and recommendations.

Faith

Wong

Carpenter

1995

Journal of Counseling Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This investigation was a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of group sensitivity training. Analysis of 63 studies revealed a moderate size, heterogeneous effect (weighted mean d = 0.62) on all outcome measures. Categorical model testing indicated that group sensitivity training had significantly larger effects on behavioral measures than on self-report measures (mean ds = 1.03 and 0.44, respectively). Moreover, effect sizes for behavioral measures were moderated by the size of treatment groups, the number of sessions, and the precision of measurement recording. That is, interventions involving larger groups and meeting for more sessions had larger effect sizes, as did studies involving more discrete outcome measures. As recommended elsewhere, future studies need to explore group processes and mechanisms of change in group sensitivity training.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Group sensitivity training: Update, meta-analysis, and recommendations.

Faith

Wong

Carpenter

1995

Journal of Counseling Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The title Resident Assistant implies the primary function of the role, to assist residential students in the co-curricular residential environment of higher education. Training on human relations skills such communication, community building, empathic listening, mediation, and recognition of and response to differences (gender, sexual, racial, socioeconomic, generational) build essential softskills for Resident Assistants (Quirk, 1976).…”

Section: Inclusivity Community Building and Training On Other "Soft mentioning

confidence: 99%

Resident assistant training design : a narrative analysis

McConnell¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Resident Assistant (RA) position is arguably the most demanding and time-intensive student leadership position on a university campus with responsibilities that include crisis management, counseling, referral, administrative tasks, teaching, leadership, community building, individual student assistance and role modeling (Blimling, 2003). The critical functions of the Resident Assistant role necessitate training with appropriate breadth and depth to prepare them for their role; "because of the importance of the RA role, high quality and effective training is imperative" (Taub & Servaty-Seib, 2011, p.13).This qualitative narrative study examined the experiences of five residence life practitioners whose experience with Resident Assistant training design ranged from 9-17 years.Participants each represented different institution types including a specialized institution of higher education, a large public institution, a small private religiously-affiliated institution, a mid-sized public institution and a gender-specific institution. Each participant was interviewed twice and data were analyzed using holistic, in vivo and evaluative coding.The analysis produced five primary research-based themes for Resident Assistant training design with an additional twenty-five sub-themes. These primary themes included holistic approach to the training design process, training session considerations within training design, alignment of training to the unique needs of the Resident Assistants receiving the training, logistical considerations in training design and use of assessment in training design.

show abstract

Impact of experimental design on effect size: Findings from the research literature on training.

Carlson¹,

Schmidt²

1999

Journal of Applied Psychology

168

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines whether differences in the equations commonly used to calculate effect size for single group pretest-posttest (SGPP) designs versus those for control group designs can account for the finding that SGPP designs yield larger mean effect sizes (e.g., M. S. Lipsey & D. B. Wilson, 1993). It was found that the assumptions of no control group effect and the equivalence of pretraining and posttraining dependent variable standard deviations required for these equations to produce equivalent estimates of effect size were violated for some dependent variable types. Results indicate that control group effects and inflation in the standard deviation of the posttraining dependent variable measure account for most of the observed difference in effect size. The most severe violations occurred when the dependent variable was a knowledge assessment. Methods for including data from SGPP designs in meta-analyses that minimize potential biases are discussed.In an extensive review of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment research, Lipsey and Wilson (1993) examined results from meta-analyses reporting effect size estimates for studies subgrouped by research design. Data from studies employing single group pretest-posttest (SGPP) designs were compared with data from studies using control or comparison group designs (i.e., pretestposttest with control, PPWC; and posttest only with control, POWC). Across 45 meta-analyses, mean effect sizes (dvalues) for SGPP designs were 0.29 SDs larger (0.76 versus 0.47) than effect sizes for studies using control or comparison group designs. Research by Guzzo, Jette, and Katzell (1985) has found similar differences. The common conclusion among these researchers is that data from SGPP designs "clearly are capable of upwardly biasing the mean treatment effect estimates derived from meta-analysis" (Lipsey & Wilson, 1993, p. 1194.Lipsey and Wilson's (1993) solution to the perceived upward bias in effect size for SGPP designs was not to

show abstract

Training in Human Relations for Dormitory Resident Assistants

Cited by 4 publications

References 9 publications

Group sensitivity training: Update, meta-analysis, and recommendations.

Group sensitivity training: Update, meta-analysis, and recommendations.

Resident assistant training design : a narrative analysis

Impact of experimental design on effect size: Findings from the research literature on training.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About