SUPPORTING PROVISIONAL AND PROBATIONAL STUDENTS:

Increasing Classroom Participation and Retention Rates through Active Learning

Christina M. Frederick, Constance A. Barnes, Kallie B. Day, Sarah A. Fricke, & Robert D. King
A challenge provisional and probational students and
those who work with them face is their tendency to
employ PABs (Hsieh et al., 2007; see Table 1).
Self-caused learning practices assist in developing skill
sets capable of reducing PABs.
Skill sets include:
Improvement in student self-efficacy and self-esteem
(Prihadi, Hairul, & Hazri, 2012).
Increased confidence in the teacher-student
relationship (Hong et al., 2011).
Familiarity with pedagogical techniques designed to
enhance willingness to perform in the classroom
(Frederick, Day, Barnes, Courtney, Crespo, & King,
2014).

Self-caused learning (Prihadi et al., 2012) aids in

shifting a students Locus of Control (LOC; see Table 1)
from external to internal (Park & Kim, 1998).

Table 1. Operational Definitions

Active Learning

Product of teaching methods requiring

students to engage in activities that explicitly
demand self-caused participation in the
learning process (Frederick et al., 2014).

Attributional Style

Explanation of an individuals behavior via the

situation (external) or disposition (internal;
Heider, 1958).

Locus of Control

Extent to which people perceive outcomes as

internally controllable by their
own efforts or as externally controlled by
chance or outside forces (Rotter, Seeman, &
Liverant, 1962).

Performance Avoidance
Behavior (PAB)

Actions taken by students to avoid

participating in class and/or course work
(Hsieh et al., 2007).

Provisional/Probational
Retention

METHOD

RESULTS

Participants
8 provisional/probational undergraduates
10 non-provisional/probational undergraduates

Procedure
Developed Student Participation Rubric (SPR) to
evaluate student participation behaviors in the
classroom
SPR used to track low- and high-risk participation
events

Materials
Provisional and probational student/course list
provided by Academic Support Services
Classes for observation
Materials to design workshop series incorporating
active learning techniques with the goal of reducing
PABs by shifting LOC.
SPR

Student
Participation
Rubric

8.5
8
7.5

8.6

8.1

p = .859

7
Provisional/Probational

Non-provisional

Figure 2. A two-sample t-test

showed no significant
difference (p = .358) between
provisional/probational and
non-provisional students in
non-verbal participation
frequency.

Non-verbal

24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10

21.0

17.5

p = .358

Provisional/Probational

Non-Provisional

DISCUSSION
Results of the current study indicate verbal and nonverbal participation frequency does not vary between
provisional/probational students and nonprovisional/probational students.
Provisional/probational students do not appear to
engage the classroom participation PAB.
Active Learning Workshop development in progress

REFERENCES
ACTIVE LEARNING TEAM

Frederick, C.M., Day, K.B., Barnes, C.A., & King, R. (2014). Active learning in practice:
Alignment and misalignment of undergraduate and faculty perspectives. Paper
presented at the 26th annual Association for Psychological Science, San Francisco, CA.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York, NY: Wiley.
Hong, B.S.S., Shull, P.J., & Haefner, L.A. (2011). Impact of perceptions of faculty on
student outcomes of self-efficacy, locus of control, persistence, and commitment.
Journal of College Student Retention, 13(3), 289-309.

Research Questions

Do active learning workshops focused on (1) the value

of active learning, (2) discussion of attribution style and
LOC, and (3) providing strategies for academic success
(e.g., attendance, active listening, note-taking methods,
etc.) impact academic performance for provisional and
probational student populations?

Effectiveness for influencing student performance

will be considered
LOC shift assessment will occur

College students with a cumulative GPA lower

than 2.50.
Students who remain enrolled either full-time
or part-time until graduation.

Do provisional and probational students perform PABs

with greater frequency than their counterparts in highrisk classroom participation events?

Figure 1. A two-sample t-test

showed no significant
difference (p = .859) between
provisional/probational and
non-provisional students in
verbal participation
frequency.

Verbal

Participation Frequency

The current research focuses on

provisional and probational students
enrolled in Strategies for College Success
courses. Nationally, retention within this
group is decreasing (Hsieh, Sullivan, &
Guerra, 2007). We are motivated to
strengthen our existing support network
for this growing population and to
positively impact retention. This
research addresses potential issues
leading to disenrollment of provisional
and probational students. Focus will be
placed on bringing awareness to and
reducing performance avoidance
behaviors (PABs), or, "hiding lack of
ability" (Hsieh et al., 2007, p. 2) in
classroom settings. PABs are common in
populations at academic risk (Hsieh et al.,
2007). Active learning techniques are
poised to overcome PABs by engaging
students in self-caused learning and
deeper engagement. Evaluation of
potential PABs related to classroom
participation allows us to teach students
how to shift attribution style from an
external to internal locus of control
(Hong, Shull, & Haefner, 2011). Doing
this should increase student confidence
in the student-teacher relationship,
impact self-efficacy by providing study
strategies, address accountability
concerns, etc. Concretely, we have
begun an observational study to track
provisional/probational vs. nonprovisional/probational student
participation rates and types via an
independently constructed Student
Participation Rubric. We also propose
development of a workshop series for
students enrolled in Strategies for
College Success courses. These
workshops will be designed with the
findings of our observational tracking in
mind and with focus on the value of
active learning, increasing classroom
participation rates, and reducing PABs.
It is our hypothesis that the presence of
a more robust support network will
increase academic satisfaction and
improve retention in this group of
students at academic risk.

INTRODUCTION

Participation Frequency

ABSTRACT

Hsieh, P-H., Sullivan, J.R., & Guerra, N.S. (2007). A closer look at college students: Selfefficacy and goal orientation. Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(3), 454-476.
Kallie B. Day, BA, Christina M. Frederick, Ph.D., Robert D. King, Ph.D., & Constance A. Barnes, MAT

Sarah A. Fricke

Park, Y.S., & Kim, U. (1998). Locus of control, attributional style, and academic
achievement: Comparative analysis of Korean-Chinese, and Chinese Students.
Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 1(2), 191-208.
Prihadi, K., Hairul, N.I., & Hazri, J. (2012). Mediation effect of locus of control on the
causal relationship between students perceived teachers expectancy and selfesteem. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 10(2), 713-736.
Rotter, J. B., Seeman, M., & Liverant, S. (1962). Internal versus external control of
reinforcement: A major variable in behavior theory. In N. E. Washburne (Ed.),
Decisions, values and groups (Vol. 2). London: Pergamon Press.

Our team leading workshops on topics as diverse as strategies for using active learning in the classroom to survey and interview design.

Christina M. Frederick, Ph.D. cfrederick@sierranevada.edu

Constance A. Barnes, MAT cbarnes@sierranevada.edu