Global Perspective Inventory (GPI) Four Year Summaryassessment.tamu.edu/assessment/files/e6/e6464a40-3921... · 2016. 7. 8. · 1 Global Perspective Inventory (GPI) Four Year Summary

1

Global Perspective Inventory (GPI) Four Year Summary

Executive Summary

Seniors display higher levels of global competence than freshmen in all of the GPI scales except for the interpersonal social responsibility scale. Study-abroad participants display higher levels of global competence than freshmen and seniors in all of the GPI scales. Freshmen met or outperformed the national averages for freshmen in all of the GPI scales except for intrapersonal affect. Seniors met or outperformed the national average for seniors in the following GPI scales: intrapersonal identity and interpersonal social interaction. Study-abroad participants outperformed the national averages for all public doctoral institutions in all GPI scales except for intrapersonal affect. Overview

In 2009, the Academic Master Plan’s Teaching and Learning Roadmap Committee (TLRC) was given the task of better preparing graduates of Texas A&M University (TAMU) for the 21st century. The TLRC developed a teaching and learning goal for the university that states, “Students at Texas A&M University will achieve a set of university student learning outcomes [SLOs] through high-impact experiences that position them for a lifetime of success” (TAMU, 2009, p. 1). Seven university-wide SLOs were developed for undergraduate students to attain prior to graduation. Two of these outcomes state that students will “practice personal and social responsibility” and “demonstrate social, cultural, and global competence.” The Global Perspectives Inventory (GPI) was selected to gather student data related to these two outcomes. Assessment projects like the GPI are essential to Texas A&M’s compliance efforts with both the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) and the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC). This report is a University-wide summary of the four-years of administration of the GPI. Instrument

The GPI is a nationally recognized instrument designed to measure a student’s global perspective. The GPI asks questions related to student cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal development. The GPI instrument has 64 items including a few biographical items. It has been specifically designed to provide a self-report of a person's perspectives in three dimensions of global learning and development—cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal. Respondents record their views on the community and also report the level of involvement in twelve curricular and co-curricular activities.

2

The GPI instrument originally consisted of eight GPI scales. In 2011, a revision was made to the test and two scales were deleted (Well-being and Global Citizenship). The GPI now consist of six scales which are described in the section below.

GPI Scales

Cognitive Knowing – Degree of complexity of one’s view the importance of cultural context in judging what is important to know and value. Cognitive Knowledge – Degree of understanding and awareness of various cultures and their impact on our global society and level of proficiency in more than one language. Intrapersonal Identity – Level of awareness of one’s unique identity and degree of acceptance of one’s ethnic, racial, and gender dimensions of one’s identity. Intrapersonal Affect – Level of respect for and acceptance of cultural perspectives different from one’s own and degree of emotional confidence when living in complex situations, which reflects an “emotional intelligence” that is important in one’s processing encounters with other cultures. Interpersonal Social Responsibility – Level of interdependence and social concern for others. Interpersonal Social Interaction – Degree of engagement with others who are different from oneself and degree of cultural sensitivity in living in pluralistic settings. 2010-2014 Administrations

For the last four years, Texas A&M University has sent an email invitation to administer the GPI to all freshmen and senior students (College Station, Galveston, and Qatar campuses). Additionally, each year study abroad participants were invited to complete the GPI, Table 1. Table 2 provides a four-year summary of the GPI participation by college/campus, department, and classification. Table 1. 2010-2014 Texas A&M Student Participation

Year Freshmen Seniors Study Abroad Total GPI Participants

2010-2011 422 620 177 1219 2011-2012 314 409 111 834 2012-2013 360 408 233 1001 2013-2014 362 459 131 952

Texas A&M University Total 1458 1896 652 4006

3

Table 2. College/Campus Sample

College/Campus Department Participation Within College/Campus Freshmen Seniors Study

Abroad

College/ Campus % of

Sample

Agriculture and Life Sciences (N=504)

Agricultural Economics 1 20 6

13%

Agricultural Leadership, Education, and Communication 7 37 22

Animal Science 34 33 2 Biological and Agricultural

Engineering 7 18 9

Biochemistry & Biophysics 14 12 2 College Interdisciplinary 10 24 15

Entomology 13 6 1 Ecosystem Science and Management 3 10 1

Horticultural Sciences 1 12 7 Nutrition & Food Science 13 38 7

Plant Pathology and Microbiology 6 30 6 Poultry Science 1 4 2

Recreation, Park & Tourism Sciences 3 20 3 Soil & Crop Sciences 2 3 --

Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences 13 18 8

Architecture (N=109)

Architecture 8 10 6

3%

Construction Science 6 18 5 Landscape Architecture and Urban

Planning 9 10 2

Visualization 10 10 7 College Interdisciplinary 1 2 5

Dwight Look College of Engineering (N=870)

Aerospace Engineering 37 32 15

22%

Biomedical Engineering 25 29 16 Chemical Engineering 30 64 15

College Interdisciplinary 7 -- -- Computer Science and Engineering 36 43 3

Civil Engineering 36 58 18 Electrical and Computer Engineering 46 35 9

Engineering Technology and Industrial Distribution 5 48 9

Industrial and Systems Engineering 7 20 5 Mechanical Engineering 44 66 21

Materials Science and Engineering -- -- 1 Nuclear Engineering 16 22 6

Petroleum Engineering 12 29 5

4

Education and Human Development (N=283)

College Interdisciplinary 36 72 16

7%

Educational Administration and Human Resource Development 4 25 1

Educational Psychology 1 1 1 Health & Kinesiology 39 71 11

Teaching, Learning and Culture -- 1 4

Geosciences (N=82)

Atmospheric Sciences 8 6 2

2% College Interdisciplinary 3 14 8

Geography -- 12 8 Geology and Geophysics 12 8 1

Liberal Arts (N=766)

Anthropology 8 10 8

19%

College Interdisciplinary -- 6 1 Communication 20 48 8

Economics 10 25 8 English 27 39 15

Hispanic Studies 5 7 3 History 14 33 10

International Studies 15 92 67 Philosophy and Humanities 4 6 2

Performance Studies 5 4 -- Political Science 25 40 25

Psychology 22 81 27 Sociology 11 29 6

Mays Business School (N=408)

Accounting 122 56 42

10%

College Interdisciplinary -- 23 29 Finance -- 26 9

Information and Operations Management -- 26 13

Management -- 25 6 Marketing -- 20 11

Science (N=258)

Biology 72 67 17

6% Chemistry 20 11 1

College Interdisciplinary 1 2 -- Mathematics 24 19 6

Physics 13 4 1

5

*Note. This sample number does not match the demographic characteristics sample due to missing demographic data for participants who did not provide their correct student identification number. Findings

This section provides the presentation of the findings. Once descriptive statistics were determined, analysis of variance was conducted to compare the means scores of the three groups. ANOVA was used to determine whether there was a statistically significant difference in global competence based on classification. Post hoc (Tukey) tests were conducted to further analyze the nature of statistically significant findings. These tests specify between which classification(s) the statistically significant finding(s) lie.

Sample and Demographics

1458 freshmen completed the GPI: 562 males and 896 females. 1896 seniors completed the GPI: 755 males, 1133 females, and 8 did not disclose their gender. 652 study abroad participants completed the GPI: 237 males, 415 females; 21 freshmen, 57 sophomores, 178 juniors, 317 seniors, 72 graduate students, and 7 other.

Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences (N=206)

College Interdisciplinary 131 61 14 5%

Texas A&M Galveston (N=184)

General Academics 25 4 1

5%

Maritime Administration 7 18 1 Marine Biology 50 28 8

Marine Engineering 5 8 -- Marine Sciences 7 6 --

Marine Transportation 5 4 -- Marine Systems 3 4 --

Undergraduate Studies (N=205)

General Studies 128 -- 2 5%

Blinn TEAM 75 -- --

Did Not Disclose (N=131) Student ID Missing 38 73 20 3%

Texas A&M University (N=4006*)

76 Departments 1458 1896 652 100%

6

Table 3. International Student Breakdown

International Student Status Count Percentage of Sample

Not an International Student 3772 94.2%

International Student 212 5.3%

Did Not Respond 22 0.5%

Texas A&M University 4006 100% Table 4. Ethnicity Breakdown

Ethnicities Count Percentage of Sample

Multiple Ethnicities 216 5.4%

African/African American/Black 82 2.0%

Asian/Pacific Islander 247 6.2%

European/White 2811 70.2%

Hispanic/Latino 502 12.5%

Native American 10 0.3%

I Prefer Not to Respond 138 3.4%

Texas A&M University 4006 100%

7

Results

The results in Table 5 reveal the descriptive statistics for each GPI scale by classification (freshmen, seniors, study abroad participants). Mean scores for each GPI scale operates on a 5-point Likert-type scale. Table 5. Descriptive Statistics by Classification

N Mean

Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error

95% Confidence Interval

for Mean

Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

Cognitive

Knowing

Study Abroad 652 3.7759 .44807 .01755 3.7414 3.8104 2.29 5.00

Freshmen 1458 3.5164 .48861 .01280 3.4913 3.5415 2.00 4.86

Seniors 1896 3.6477 .49837 .01145 3.6252 3.6701 1.57 5.00

Total 4006 3.6208 .49521 .00782 3.6054 3.6361 1.57 5.00

Cognitive

Knowledge

Study Abroad 652 3.7718 .56236 .02202 3.7285 3.8150 1.60 5.00

Freshmen 1458 3.6008 .61529 .01611 3.5692 3.6324 1.40 5.00

Seniors 1896 3.6638 .64324 .01477 3.6348 3.6928 1.20 5.00

Total 4006 3.6585 .62307 .00984 3.6392 3.6778 1.20 5.00

Intrapersonal

Identity

Study Abroad 652 4.2201 .45662 .01788 4.1850 4.2552 2.00 5.00

Freshmen 1458 4.1308 .50481 .01322 4.1049 4.1567 1.60 5.00

Seniors 1896 4.2009 .49018 .01126 4.1788 4.2229 1.00 5.00

Total 4006 4.1785 .49156 .00777 4.1633 4.1937 1.00 5.00

Intrapersonal

Affect

Study Abroad 652 3.9487 .39963 .01565 3.9179 3.9794 2.67 4.88

Freshmen 1458 3.8001 .52560 .01377 3.7731 3.8271 1.60 5.00

Seniors 1896 3.8916 .53145 .01221 3.8676 3.9155 1.00 5.00

Total 4006 3.8676 .51293 .00810 3.8517 3.8835 1.00 5.00

Interpersonal

Social

Responsibility

Study Abroad 652 3.8378 .55754 .02183 3.7949 3.8807 1.80 5.00

Freshmen 1458 3.7466 .60558 .01586 3.7155 3.7777 1.00 5.00

Seniors 1896 3.7405 .61368 .01409 3.7129 3.7682 1.00 5.00

Total 4006 3.7586 .60280 .00952 3.7399 3.7772 1.00 5.00

Interpersonal

Social

Interaction

Study Abroad 652 3.7003 .46818 .01834 3.6643 3.7363 2.29 4.86

Freshmen 1458 3.4276 .61756 .01617 3.3959 3.4594 1.00 5.00

Seniors 1896 3.5105 .61855 .01421 3.4827 3.5384 1.00 5.00

Total 4006 3.5113 .60314 .00953 3.4926 3.5299 1.00 5.00

8

The results in Table 6 reveal the ANOVA for the GPI scales by classification. The ANOVA resulted in statistically significant (p <.05) differences in all of the GPI scales. A post-hoc test was necessary to further understand the nature of the statistically significant results.

Table 6

ANOVA for GPI Scales by Classification Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Cognitive Knowing Between Groups 32.949 2 16.474 69.476 .000

Within Groups 949.209 4003 .237

Total 982.158 4005 Cognitive Knowledge Between Groups 13.270 2 6.635 17.230 .000

Within Groups 1541.558 4003 .385 Total 1554.828 4005

Intrapersonal Identity Between Groups 5.391 2 2.696 11.213 .000


Intrapersonal Affect Between Groups 12.014 2 6.007 23.083 .000


Interpersonal Social

Responsibility

Between Groups 4.918 2 2.459 6.787 .001


Interpersonal Social

Interaction

Between Groups 33.499 2 16.750 47.105 .000

Within Groups 1423.407 4003 .356

Total 1456.907 4005 The results of the Tukey post-hoc test in Table 7 further illustrate the nature of the statistically significant results. There was a significantly significant difference (p < .05) between the scores of freshmen and seniors in all of the GPI scales except for interpersonal social responsibility. Further, there was a statistically significant difference between freshmen and study abroad participants in all of the GPI scales. There was a statistically significant difference (p < .05) between seniors and study-abroad participants in all of the GPI scales except for intrapersonal identity.

9

Table 7 Post Hoc Test for Significant ANOVA Results

Dependent Variable (I) Participant Type (J) Participant Type

Mean Difference (I-J)

Std. Error Sig.

95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound

Upper Bound

Cognitive Knowing

Study Abroad Freshmen .25951* .02294 .000 .2057 .3133 Seniors .12823* .02211 .000 .0764 .1801

Freshmen Study Abroad -.25951* .02294 .000 -.3133 -.2057 Seniors -.13129* .01696 .000 -.1711 -.0915

Seniors Study Abroad -.12823* .02211 .000 -.1801 -.0764 Freshmen .13129* .01696 .000 .0915 .1711

Cognitive Knowledge




Intrapersonal Identity

Study Abroad Freshmen .08928* .02310 .000 .0351 .1434 Seniors .01924 .02226 .663 -.0330 .0714


Seniors Study Abroad -.01924 .02226 .663 -.0714 .0330 Freshmen .07005* .01708 .000 .0300 .1101

Intrapersonal Affect




Interpersonal Social Responsibility


Freshmen Study Abroad -.09119* .02836 .004 -.1577 -.0247 Seniors .00608 .02097 .955 -.0431 .0552

Seniors Study Abroad -.09726* .02733 .001 -.1613 -.0332 Freshmen -.00608 .02097 .955 -.0552 .0431

Interpersonal Social Interaction



Seniors Study Abroad -.18978* .02707 .000 -.2533 -.1263

Freshmen .08289* .02077 .000 .0342 .1316

*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

10

External Comparisons

The results in Table 8 reveal the 4 year averages for each participant group from Texas A&M University compared to 2013-2014 national averages for other “public doctorate” institutions.

Table 8 Texas A&M Averages Compared to National Averages at Public Doctorate Institutions

GPI Scale

Texas A&M

Average

Freshmen

National Average

Freshmen

Texas A&M

Average

Seniors

National Average

Seniors

Texas A&M

Average

Study Abroad

Texas A&M

Average

Overall

National Average Public

Doctorate

Overall Cognitive Knowing 3.51 3.45 3.65 3.70 3.79 3.62 3.57

Cognitive Knowledge 3.57 3.57 3.66 3.68 3.76 3.66 3.63

Intrapersonal Identity 4.15 4.07 4.19 4.15 4.22 4.18 4.16

Intrapersonal Affect 3.75 4.05 3.83 4.18 3.96 3.87 4.13

Inter. Social Responsibility 3.79 3.66 3.73 3.77 3.86 3.76 3.79

Inter. Social Interaction 3.47 3.42 3.51 3.33 3.66 3.51 3.27

Additionally, Table 9 displays the averages for each participant group from Texas A&M University across the 4 years of GPI administration.

Summary

Additional department-level reports were provided to the designated liaisons. Colleges and departments can use this information to determine the next steps involved in improving student learning. Moving forward, these results will be used as baseline data for assessment projects. During the 2013-14 academic-year, college/campus assessment liaisons will discuss the overall effectiveness of the GPI and recommend modifications and improvements.

11

Table 9. Texas A&M Averages for the four years of GPI Administration

GPI Scale Freshman Seniors Study Abroad Total

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

2013-2014

TAMU Total*

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

2013-2014

TAMU Total*

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

2013-2014

TAMU Total*

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

2013-2014

TAMU Total*

Cognitive Knowing 3.53 3.47 3.51 3.55 3.52 3.62 3.65 3.65 3.68 3.65 3.75 3.81 3.80 3.74 3.78 3.61 3.61 3.63 3.64 3.62

Cognitive Knowledge 3.60 3.59 3.57 3.64 3.60 3.68 3.67 3.65 3.64 3.66 3.74 3.74 3.80 3.79 3.77 3.66 3.65 3.66 3.66 3.66

Intrapersonal Identity 4.12 4.14 4.15 4.12 4.13 4.25 4.20 4.19 4.14 4.20 4.23 4.13 4.23 4.26 4.22 4.20 4.17 4.18 4.15 4.18

Intrapersonal Affect 3.64 3.71 3.74 4.12 3.80 3.77 3.87 3.83 4.13 3.89 3.90 3.92 3.98 3.99 3.95 3.75 3.82 3.83 4.11 3.87

Inter. Social Responsibility 3.76 3.68 3.80 3.74 3.75 3.79 3.71 3.71 3.73 3.74 3.85 3.77 3.85 3.87 3.84 3.79 3.71 3.77 3.75 3.76

Inter. Social Interaction 3.49 3.44 3.47 3.30 3.43 3.55 3.53 3.50 3.46 3.51 3.74 3.66 3.68 3.72 3.70 3.56 3.51 3.53 3.43 3.51

Well-Being 3.75 — — — 3.75 3.84 — — — 3.84 3.87 — — — 3.87 3.81 — — — 3.81

Global Citizenship 3.54 — — — 3.54 3.70 — — — 3.70 3.84 — — — 3.84 3.67 — — — 3.67

*TAMU Total indicates the mean score across all years for each student standing within each GPI scale.

12

References

Texas A & M University. (2009). Teaching and Learning Roadmap Committee Report.

Retrieved from Texas A & M University, Teaching-Learning Roadmap Committee

Charge Web site: http://provost.tamu.edu/academic-master-plan/teaching-learning-

roadmap/documents/TLRCReport2009Jun19.pdf.

Documents

Global Perspective Inventory (GPI) Four Year Summaryassessment.tamu.edu/assessment/files/e6/e6464a40-3921... · 2016. 7. 8. · 1 Global Perspective Inventory (GPI) Four Year Summary