All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Learning Political Engagement from the Experts: Advocacy Groups, Neighborhood Councils, and Constituency Service
Unformatted Document Text:  Freyss 19 At the time of the pretest, a smaller number of experimental group students had visited city hall than comparison group students, 13.3 percent versus 22.6 percent. But this difference was wiped out at the time of the posttest (See Table 12). If this trend holds up in future surveys, it would signal a very desirable outcome. It would demonstrate that the service-learning experience brings city hall closer to the students – and by extension, raises the students’ sense of political efficacy. 5. Question: Effectiveness of Campaign ContributionsH o : At the end of the quarter, there is no difference between the two classes concerning their perception of the effectiveness of a $1,000 campaign contribution in influencing government and politics.H 1 : Section 8 students are more likely to have switched toward increased effectiveness on this question. Table 13: Student’s Perception of Effectiveness of Giving $1,000 to Political Candidate—Change from Pretest to Posttest* Section 8 (with S-L) Section 7 (no S-L) No. % No. % Decreased 7 38.9 3 10.3 No change 7 38.9 13 44.8 Increased 4 22.2 13 44.8 Total 18 100.0 29 100.0 * Differences between sections statistically significant; p<.05. The outcome, shown in Table 13, is somewhat surprising. One would have expected that the field experience would have shown the students the importance of money in politics. But other influences, such as instructors and textbooks, can lead to alternative outcomes. 6. Question: Effectiveness of Money Given by Interest GroupsH o : At the end of the quarter, there is no difference between the two classes concerning their perception of the effectiveness of money given by interest groups in influencing government and politics.H 1 : Section 8 students are more likely to have switched toward increased effectiveness on this question. Table 14: Student’s Perception of Effectiveness of Money Given by Interest Groups—Change from Pretest to Posttest* Section 8 (with S-L) Section 7 (no S-L) No. % No. % Decreased 5 27.8 3 10.7 No change 8 44.4 9 32.1 Increased 5 27.8 16 57.1 Total 18 100.0 28 100.0 * Differences between sections statistically significant; p<.05. At the time of the pretest, there was no difference between the two groups. But at the end of the quarter, the trend findings did not support the research hypothesis. Indeed, more of the

Authors: Freyss, Siegrun.
first   previous   Page 19 of 24   next   last



background image
Freyss
19
At the time of the pretest, a smaller number of experimental group students had visited city hall
than comparison group students, 13.3 percent versus 22.6 percent. But this difference was wiped
out at the time of the posttest (See Table 12). If this trend holds up in future surveys, it would
signal a very desirable outcome. It would demonstrate that the service-learning experience
brings city hall closer to the students – and by extension, raises the students’ sense of political
efficacy.
5. Question: Effectiveness of Campaign Contributions
H
o
: At the end of the quarter, there is no difference between the two classes concerning their
perception of the effectiveness of a $1,000 campaign contribution in influencing government
and politics.
H
1
: Section 8 students are more likely to have switched toward increased effectiveness on this
question.
Table 13: Student’s Perception of Effectiveness of Giving $1,000 to Political Candidate—
Change from Pretest to Posttest*
Section 8 (with S-L)
Section 7 (no S-L)
No.
%
No.
%
Decreased
7
38.9
3
10.3
No change
7
38.9
13
44.8
Increased
4
22.2
13
44.8
Total
18
100.0
29
100.0
* Differences between sections statistically significant; p<.05.
The outcome, shown in Table 13, is somewhat surprising. One would have expected that the
field experience would have shown the students the importance of money in politics. But other
influences, such as instructors and textbooks, can lead to alternative outcomes.
6. Question: Effectiveness of Money Given by Interest Groups
H
o
: At the end of the quarter, there is no difference between the two classes concerning their
perception of the effectiveness of money given by interest groups in influencing government
and politics.
H
1
: Section 8 students are more likely to have switched toward increased effectiveness on this
question.
Table 14: Student’s Perception of Effectiveness of Money Given by Interest Groups—
Change from Pretest to Posttest*
Section 8 (with S-L)
Section 7 (no S-L)
No.
%
No.
%
Decreased
5
27.8
3
10.7
No change
8
44.4
9
32.1
Increased
5
27.8
16
57.1
Total
18
100.0
28
100.0
* Differences between sections statistically significant; p<.05.
At the time of the pretest, there was no difference between the two groups. But at the end of the
quarter, the trend findings did not support the research hypothesis. Indeed, more of the


Convention
All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 19 of 24   next   last

©2008 All Academic, Inc.