Relationship of match/mismatch of student-teacher learning styles, stress, and academic achievement

This exploratory study investigated the relationship between student-teacher learning style match/mismatch and perceived stress and the effect on academic achievement. Subjects were 167 undergraduate college students enrolled in one of two courses (psychology and mathematics) at Iowa State University;Data-gathering consisted of the administration of the Kolb Learning Style Inventory (LSI) to determine the learning style of each student and the learning/teaching styles of the respective instructors. Spielberger\u27s State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-Y) was administered to the subjects during the class period week prior to a major examination in each course. The scores on the State portion were used as an indicator of perceived stress. ACT scores were used as indicators of prior ability and this influence was removed through regression analysis to obtain course grade residuals. Final course grade residuals were then used as the measure of academic achievement;Statistical techniques employed in this study included descriptive statistics, correlation coefficients, simple regression analysis, and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The level of statistical significance accepted was the.05 probability level;Results did not support the speculation that mismatch between learning styles of student and instructor would affect stress levels of students and subsequent academic achievement. Significant relationships were not determined for any of the variables studied. Findings did not affirm research on learning styles;Suggestions for further research were offered including: (1) the inclusion of several instructors with differing learning styles from each discipline, (2) the use of interviews with subjects to obtain a clearer picture of difficulties they may be having with the course, and (3) the use of blood pressure checks to more accurately identify elevated stress levels

The Citizen Participation Act of 2009: Federal Legislation as Effective Defense Against SLAPPs

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution expressly guarantees the right of citizens to petition the government. Citizen efforts have been particularly crucial to the process of creating, shaping, and enforcing environmental laws. Nevertheless, citizen participants in government can often find themselves facing retaliation in the form of a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP). SLAPPs are lawsuits brought to interfere with a party\u27s exercise of its right to petition the government, typically by draining the party\u27s time and resources. Although many states have adopted anti-SLAPP protections, similar protections are lacking at the federal level. Because so many federal environmental statutes allow for citizen participation, the threat of a SLAPP is especially high. This Note argues that current federal anti-SLAPP protections are inadequate, and that legislation proposed in 2009 would better protect the right of citizens to petition the government

Now I Know My “ACBs”: The Right to Literacy Following an Incremental Path

It is a tragic irony that a nation with enormous wealth will not provide the most basic of education rights to its citizens. Despite continual judicial and legislative measures to ensure access to education, or a facsimile thereof, no judicial or legislative body has taken the step to ensure that literacy is a fundamental right for the citizens of the United States. The issue has been, and continues to be, presented to both Congress and the courts. While Congress has passed legislation to some degree, both institutions have largely failed to ensure the population receives the fundamental right of literacy. There is not much pushback to the argument that education and literacy are important. But questions remain: How much education is necessary to claim that literacy is a right? Is literacy important enough to shine brightly on the national consciousness