Teaching Method and Effect on Learning Piagetian ... - CiteSeerX

Psychology Learning and Teaching Volume 12 Number 1 2013 www.wwwords.co.uk/PLAT

Teaching Method and Effect on Learning Piagetian Concepts DAVID J. SWIDERSKI & DEAN M. AMADIO Siena College, Loudonville, New York, USA

Instructors of psychology typically use a variety of methods to teach concepts. The present doubleblind experiment is intended to determine the effectiveness of popular television clips as exemplars of Piagetian concepts compared to verbal descriptions of the same exemplars among a sample of 86 undergraduate students enrolled in an introductory psychology course in a US college. Results indicated an advantage in learning the concept of conservation at follow-up stage for students exposed to the popular television exemplars, but there were no differences in overall learning at initial assessment, or on the three other Piagetian concepts.

Psychologist Jean Piaget is widely regarded as one of the founding fathers of developmental psychology. Piaget’s extensive research led him to postulate a set of stages that all children go through during development. During each separate stage, children reach different cognitive milestones that signify they have progressed onto the next stage of development. There are many examples of cognitive milestones that Piaget said children needed to reach to be classified into the next stage. These milestones include goal-directed behaviour, symbolic thought, class inclusion and idealism (Gruber & Voneche, 1977). Piaget’s influence on the psychological world is seen in the teaching of his theory in many introductory psychology undergraduate courses. Some of the more popular Piagetian concepts found in introductory psychology textbooks include object permanence (the awareness that objects exist regardless of whether they can be seen), conservation (physical properties of an object remain the same despite changes in appearance), egocentrism (the inability to take another person’s point of view), and abstract reasoning (imagined realities and symbols) (Lilienfeld, Lynn, Namy, & Woolf, 2011; Myers, 2010). The way in which Piaget is taught might be accomplished through a variety of methods. We hypothesized in the current study that exemplars from popular television could be an ideal way to teach Piagetian concepts. However, no previous research known to the authors has been conducted using this method to teach Piaget. The results of multiple studies have suggested that the use of videos as exemplars in the classroom can be beneficial to a student’s learning experience (Moreno & Ortegano-Layne, 2008; Moreno & Valdez, 2007). Using popular media could possibly draw in the student’s attention and help them become more interested in the subject material. The dual coding theory also provides supporting evidence that the combined effects of both audio and visual cues have greater learning advantages over audio cues alone (Clark & Paivio, 1991; Paivio, 1975). Studies like this could provide evidence as to whether using video clips in a classroom setting improves students’ overall understanding of the concepts that are to be learned. Moreover, enjoyment of course material is also a key component when learning new concepts; motivation and learning improve when the subject views the topic as more interesting (Krapp, Hidi, & Renninger, 1992; Pekrun, Goetz, Titz, & Perry, 2002). Research on using popular movies and television to teach psychology and sociology in a classroom environment has been extensive but is lacking in methodological rigour. The difficulty in replicating a real classroom environment with strict experimental controls has challenged many 55

http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/plat.2013.12.1.55

Downloaded from plj.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 18, 2016

David J. Swiderski & Dean M. Amadio researchers in this area. Pedagogical studies have been conducted on a variety of subjects within the field of psychology including family systems (Alexander & Waxman, 2000), psychotherapeutic techniques (Hesley & Helsey, 1998; McNeilly & Wengel, 2001), and social psychology (Kennedy, Şenses, & Ayan, 2011). Many studies do not use random assignment or attempt to control for extraneous variables, thus lowering the internal validity of the studies (e.g., Badura, 2002; Christopher, Walter, Marek, & Koenig, 2004; Paddock, Terranova, & Giles, 2001). Although these studies suggest that popular television and media did improve the students’ grasp on the concepts, their design does not allow one to draw direct causal and accurate conclusions from them. Another problem with these studies is that some rely solely on self-report data from students on how they felt they have learned. For example, Curch (2010) used a self-report survey design and did not use exam data or questions on the subject material to analyze the level of student learning from popular television clips. Most studies employ a quasi-experimental design where an instructor, acting also as researcher, uses their own class as a basis for research (e.g., Scanlan & Feinberg, 2000). While this strategy clearly is advantageous since a classroom setting is simulated, it also suffers from many common obstacles seen in research, including experimenter bias and preexisting differences between groups. Though randomized design in educational research is not common, it is considered essential to include this component as part of a rigorous design (Mosteller & Boruch, 2002). Recently, attempts have been made in moving towards a more methodologically rigorous approach. Eaton and Uskul (2004) used the strategy of teaching only certain concepts using a popular television show, The Simpsons, and leaving other concepts to be taught like a regular lesson (e.g., verbal examples). Results indicated better comprehension of clip-related concepts, and students indicated that they learned the concepts taught by clips more effectively. However, the authors acknowledge more time was spent on the concepts taught using television clips. Moreover, there was no control for experimenter bias. Poonati and Amadio (2010) attempted to control outside variables in a double-blind, randomized experiment regarding operant conditioning concepts. Students in the experimental group were presented with exemplars from popular television shows, whereas the control group was presented with the same exemplars verbally described. All other aspects of the educational session (description of concepts via pre-recorded PowerPoint presentation; layout of classroom) were identical. The results of this study were marginally positive; students in the experimental group overall performed better than the control group. There was also limited evidence the experimental group learned negative reinforcement more effectively. Students in the experimental group also enjoyed the educational session more than the control group. The current study aims to implement a strong methodological design while trying to provide supporting evidence that the use of popular television clips in the classroom will improve students’ learning of Piagetian concepts. We hypothesized that using the video clips as exemplars would result in an increase in students’ assessment scores. We also hypothesized that the students in the experimental condition would enjoy their educational session more than those in the control condition. Method The study was conducted at a small, Franciscan liberal arts college in the northeastern United States. Eighty-six students from various undergraduate introductory psychology courses at the college participated in the study as one way of gaining credit for a departmentally required research component built into the course. Equivalent alternatives (e.g., summarizing psychological journal articles), as required by the American Psychological Association’s Ethical Code (American Psychological Association, 2010) were also often offered by the department. Students only received credit for participation in the study; study performance was not a part of students’ introductory psychology course grades. The majority of the participants were Caucasian. A large portion of the sample were freshmen. One of the driving forces behind this study was to design a methodologically rigorous experiment to test our hypothesis. The experiment we conducted was a double-blind study that randomly assigned participants to either the control condition or the experimental condition. Once 56


Teaching Method and Effect on Learning Piagetian Concepts the participant list was finalized, a table of random numbers was used to assign participants an odd or even number and then to a condition (e.g., odd-numbered participants were assigned to the control condition, whereas even numbered participants were assigned to the experimental condition). Both participants and research assistants were blind to the hypotheses and to which condition they and participants had been assigned. In fact, participants and research assistants were unaware the study was a double-blind experiment and were told only that it was a study about learning. Several experiments were run over the course of the semester, primarily mid-semester. Scheduling of the experiment was contingent on when the students were learning about Piaget in their introductory course. The experiment for students in a particular instructor’s course was scheduled within a few days of students learning about Piagetian concepts in their course. Both conditions were run simultaneously in 2 identical classrooms that were located across the hall from one another. Participants in each condition viewed a 10-minute videotaped lecture on Piagetian concepts. The format of exemplar used operated as the independent variable. The description of each concept was identical but differed in the presentation of the exemplars. The video showed one concept followed by an exemplar and repeated this process for each of the four concepts that were taught throughout the session. The four concepts presented were object permanence, conservation, egocentrism and abstract reasoning. In the experimental condition, the examples used came from popular American television shows such as The Simpsons (egocentrism and abstract reasoning), Mythbusters (conservation) and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (object permanence). Mythbusters is a program intending to evaluate the veracity of common myths. The Daily Show with John Stewart is a program dedicated to a comedic review of political news. Each video clip displayed a single concept by demonstrating it in the context of the show. For the control condition the clip was not shown but verbally described. To make sure there was no connection made to the shows, the actor’s or character’s names were not used but were replaced with more general terms to describe them. For example, the characters Homer and Bart Simpson became a father and his son. Refer to Table 1 for a listing of what clips were used in the experiment. Table 1. Exemplars of Piagetian concepts. Concept Object permanence

Conservation Egocentrism Abstract reasoning

Television programme, season, episode, and approximate timing (min:sec) The Daily Show with John Stewart, Season 14, Episode 143, http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-november-9-2009/the-men-who-stare-at-votes, 4:15-5:15 Mythbusters, Season 7, ‘Birds in a Truck’, 29:14-29:25, 34:04-34:09, 35:21-35:30, 35:56-36:03 The Simpsons, Season 9, ‘Bart Start’, 16:45-18:07 The Simpsons, Season 4, ‘Last Exit to Springfield’, 10:08-10:45

Three different methods were used to assess the participants’ learning and enjoyment of the topic. The effectiveness of the clips and the students’ enjoyment of the learning session were both assessed immediately upon conclusion of the education session. Eight applied multiple-choice items, adapted from several introductory psychology test banks and the second author’s previous exams, assessed learning, whereas a Likert scale item assessed enjoyment. To test for any long-term effects on learning, the same 8-item assessment was given to the students online (see Appendix A for the assessment). The evaluation was activated approximately two weeks after the initial viewing of the lecture and coincided exactly with the time students were tested on Piagetian concepts in their own introductory psychology course. The third assessment of student learning was conducted only amongst a subsample consisting of students in one instructor’s course on introductory psychology. This assessment was 2 Piaget-related items from an in-class exam in the students’ course administered about two weeks after the educational research session and coverage of Piaget in their introductory course. This instructor was blind to the hypotheses of the study. A total of 86 participants volunteered for the study. During the initial instructional session, 41 participants were assigned to the control condition and 45 to the experimental condition. There was some attrition for the follow-up assessment; 38 and 41 participants from the control and experimental conditions, respectively, completed the online follow-up assessment. The subsample data from an instructor’s exam included 10 participants from the control condition and 15 57


David J. Swiderski & Dean M. Amadio participants from the experimental condition. Randomization of participants prior to the initial session and failure of several control participants to show up for the experiment resulted in a lower n for the control condition. Results Student performance on the two 8-item assessments was scored as the number correct out of a total of 8 possible questions. The KR-20 reliability for the initial assessment was .21, whereas the KR-20 reliability for the same follow-up assessment was .60. A t-test was performed to see whether or not the experimental and control conditions were statistically significantly different from one another. The mean number correct out of 8 items for the experimental condition at initial assessment was 7.06 (SD = .78), and 7.00 (SD = 1.05) for the control condition. At follow-up, the mean number correct for the experimental condition was 6.59 (SD = 1.43), and 6.39 (SD = 1.64) for the control condition. The control and experimental conditions did not differ significantly in the number correct in the initial assessment t (84) = 0.336, p = 0.737. In our assessment of long-term learning no difference was found between the two conditions t (77) 0.55, p = 0.58. When performance on the concepts themselves (object permanence, abstract reasoning, egocentrism and conservation) was evaluated, a t-test was conducted on the initial assessment data and follow-up. A difference was found for the combined 2 items assessing the concept of conservation during the follow-up assessment with the experimental condition outperforming the control condition t (77) = 2.406, p = .019. The mean correct for the experimental condition was 1.88 (SD = .46), and 1.55 (SD = .72) for the control condition. For the subsample of participants whose Piaget classroom exam data was examined, a difference was found with the experimental condition performing better t (23) = 2.77, p = .011. Out of the combined score of the 2 exam items, the experimental group averaged 1.80 correct (SD = .41), and the control condition 1.30 correct (SD = .48). See Table 2 for a full summary of group means by experimental condition. Table 2. Mean number correct by concept and time tested (two questions per item).

Object permanence Conservation Egocentrism

Initial (n = 86) Control Experimental (n = 41) (n = 45) 1.634 1.711 1.854 1.956 1.561

1.533

1.447

1.439

1.895

1.756

(n = 10) 1.300^

(n = 15) 1.800^

Abstract reasoning

1.951

1.867

Enjoyment rating

3.537**

4.022**

Exam items correct

Follow-up (n = 79) Control Experimental (n = 38) (n = 41) 1.500 1.512 1.553* 1.878*

Note: *indicates significant results (p = 0.019), ** indicates significant results (p = .002); ^ indicates significant results (p = .011).

In congruence with our hypothesis, the students who received the popular television clips rated the educational session significantly higher in enjoyment than those in the control condition. The rating scale used was a 5-point Likert scale with higher numbers indicating increased enjoyment t (84) = -3.14, p = .002. The experimental condition averaged 4.02 (SD = .72) and the control condition 3.54 (SD = .71). Discussion Our results provide evidence suggesting that using popular television clips as exemplars leads to more enjoyable educational sessions. Video clips from popular television create entertaining and memorable examples that might increase student interest in the subject material. This increased engagement can also lead to more student participation in class discussion and therefore an 58


Teaching Method and Effect on Learning Piagetian Concepts increase in overall understanding of the material by the classroom as a whole, however, we did not assess for increase in class participation. Limited conclusions can be made currently regarding the effectiveness on students’ performance as influenced by video clip exemplars, based on our findings that students learned conservation more effectively at follow-up, but not the three other concepts singularly at either assessment interval. We also did not find an advantage for popular television clips overall, with the exception of 2 items from an in-class exam for a subsample of participants. Our example for conservation involved a somewhat challenging example of conservation of weight (e.g., if birds in a truck take flight does the truck weigh less than when the birds are at rest?). This more difficult aspect of the concept may have required extra thought, or, given its difficulty, viewing the exemplar increased clarity more than just exposure to a verbal description of the exemplar compared to easier exemplars for the other concepts. Perhaps not coincidentally, the television program Mythbusters, from where the exemplar for conservation was obtained, is more educational in nature compared to the other programs used in this study. Future research might compare the effectiveness of exemplars from popular television designed solely for entertainment purposes with exemplars from popular educational television. Despite a handful of positive findings in our study, these findings must be interpreted with caution, given the number of tests conducted and the possibility of Type I error. Replication seems prudent. This study provides some evidence for future research into the use of incentives to increase students’ motivation towards completing the assessments to the best of their abilities. In our experiment, participation was completely voluntary and the results of our assessments had no personal reward for the students. However, as shown by the subsample in our study in which exam data was obtained, increased motivation, for example the desire to do well in the exam, might make group differences more apparent. Strangely, the items on the exam from the subsample were related to Piaget, but not specifically to the concepts that were taught in our study. It is possible the video clips in the session helped students recall the material on Piaget as a whole. Future educational research should attempt to look at motivation and its role in accurate assessment of learning. However, given the hypothesized advantage of exposure to popular television exemplars, ethical issues become more prominent if actual in-class exam data (i.e., part of an actual course grade) are primarily used as the ultimate motivator for students to put in maximal effort on measures of the dependent variable of learning. In our study, with the exception of 2 items out of 40 on one faculty member’s exam, which applied to slightly under a third of our sample, results on the assessments were likely inconsequential to students. One of the decisions made in designing this experiment was that we held this as a separate lecture outside of students’ normal classrooms. Doing this allowed us to have more experimental control yet lowered the external validity of our experiment. Much of the pedagogical research found uses real classrooms to test hypotheses, but random assignment is non-existent. Therefore, studies which used comparison groups utilized samples which were not equal in many variables that could possibly have an effect on the experimental results, such as intelligence level of the students, level of conscientiousness, undergraduate year, and prior knowledge of the material taught. Nor could it be assured that teacher expectations did not influence the learning of the students, hence our double-blind design. While our study is limited by some artificiality, it benefits from much greater experimental control. However, we could not be assured in our study about the possibility of contamination between groups after initial assessment. Discussion between those in the control and experimental groups could have resulted in smaller group differences at follow-up, especially given participants were often from the same section of introductory psychology and conditions were conducted simultaneously in rooms located across from each other. Another potential limitation of this study could be the use of a brief, multiple-choice assessment rather than qualitative measures. All assessment items were posed in the form of applied multiple-choice questions rather than having students simply recognize definitions of the concepts. The rationale behind using multiple-choice questions was to remove any subjective element in grading the students’ responses to the questions. However, the reliability for the initial assessment was very low, most likely due to the lack of performance variability in 6 of the 8 items (most participants got these 6 items correct), which could indicate either similarly successful instructional techniques for both the control and experimental conditions, or an assessment which was too easy. Curiously, the variability was greater and reliability much higher on the same assessment at follow-up, even though overall performance was lower for both conditions; this was 59


David J. Swiderski & Dean M. Amadio somewhat disappointing, as students had recently studied similar material for their in-class exams. Perhaps using a combination of multiple-choice and qualitative measures, such as short answer or essay questions, might have given us a more complete picture of student learning. This study provides the basis for designing a method to assess both short-term and long-term learning of psychological concepts using strict experimental controls. Further study is needed on whether the motivation of the subjects participating in our experiment had a significant effect on their scores in the assessments. Methods which incorporate sound methodological design in a real classroom would be ideal in creating the best condition that would also mimic a realistic learning environment. Testing these experimental controls in a real classroom would continue to strengthen the hypothesis that using popular media in the classroom improves student learning. References Alexander, M., & Waxman, D. (2000). Cinemeducation: Teaching family systems through the movies. Families, Systems, & Health, 18(4), 455-466. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0091869 American Psychological Association (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx Badura, A. S. (2002). Capturing students’ attention: Movie clips set the stage for learning in abnormal psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 29, 58-60. Christopher, A. N., Walter, J. L., Marek, P., & Koenig, C. S. (2004). Using a ‘new classic’ film to teach about stereotyping and prejudice. Teaching of Psychology, 31, 199-202. Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3(3), 149-210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01320076 Curch, L. M. (2010). Using prime-time animation to engage students in courses on aging. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education, 31(4), 361-382. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02701960.2010.528276 Eaton, J., & Uskul, A. K. (2004). Using The Simpsons to teach social psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 31, 277-278. Gruber, H. E., & Voneche, J. J. (Eds.). (1977). The Essential Piaget. New York: Basic Books. Hesley, J. W., & Hesley, J. G. (1998). Rent two films and let’s talk in the morning: Using popular movies in psychotherapy. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley. Kennedy, N. F., Şenses, N., & Ayan, P. (2011). Grasping the social through movies. Teaching in Higher Education, 16(1), 1-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2010.507305 Krapp, A., Hidi, S, & Renninger, K. A. (1992). Interest, learning, and development. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.). The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 3-25). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., Namy, L. L., & Woolf, N. J. (2011). Psychology: From inquiry to understanding (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. McNeilly, D. P., & Wengel, S. P. (2001). The ‘ER’ seminar: Teaching psychotherapeutic techniques to medical students. Academic Psychiatry, 25, 193-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1176/appi.ap.25.4.193 Moreno, R., & Ortegano-Layne, L. (2008). Do classroom exemplars promote the application of principles in teaching education? A comparison of videos, animations, and narratives. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 56(4), 449-465. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9027-0 Moreno, R., & Valdez, A. (2007). Immediate and delayed effects of using a classroom case exemplar in teacher education: The role of presentation format. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 194-206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.194 Mosteller, F., & Boruch, R. (2002). Evidence matters: Randomized trial in education research. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Myers, D. G. (2010). Psychology (9th ed.). New York: Worth. Paddock, J. R., Terranova, S., & Giles, L. (2001). SASB goes Hollywood: Teaching personality theories through movies. Teaching of Psychology, 28, 117-121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15328023TOP2802_11 Paivio, A. (1975). Coding distinctions and repetitions effects in memory. In Bruer, G. H. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 9, pp. 179-214). New York: Academic Press. Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of quantitative and qualitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37, 91-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3702_4

60


Teaching Method and Effect on Learning Piagetian Concepts Poonati, S., & Amadio, D. (2010). Use of popular television to enhance students’ understanding of operant conditioning. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 9(1), 25-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/plat.2010.9.1.25 Scanlan, J. T., & Feinberg, S. L. (2000). The cartoon society: Using The Simpsons to teach and learn sociology. Teaching Sociology, 28(2), 127-139. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1319260

APPENDIX A Please indicate the one choice that best answers the question or completes the statement and place that letter in the appropriate blank: 1. Sammy is upset that his older sister Lucy has two cookies while he only has one. His father realizes there are no more cookies left, so he decides to break Sammy’s cookie in half. Sammy gleefully responds, ‘Yeah! Now I have two cookies.’ It appears Sammy a) is egocentric. b) cannot conserve. c) displays abstract reasoning. d) has not developed object permanence. 2. Marsha overhears her father discussing the day’s errands with her mother. Her father states: ‘If we go grocery shopping and clothes shopping at Super Walmart, we’ll kill two birds with one stone.’ Marsha begins to cry, believing her parents are leaving to kill birds. It appears Marsha a) is not egocentric. b) can conserve. c) lacks abstract reasoning. d) has not developed object permanence. 3. Wanda’s babysitter is concerned that Wanda will break her new necklace and choke on a piece. The babysitter hides the necklace completely under her shirt. Unfortunately, Wanda now grabs at the babysitter’s shirt for the necklace and fusses endlessly. It appears Wanda a) is egocentric. b) cannot conserve. c) displays abstract reasoning. d) has developed object permanence. 4. Milton’s mother tells him another name for the internet is the ‘information superhighway.’ The next time his mother is online, Milton yells at her for not wearing her seatbelt. It appears Milton a) is egocentric. b) cannot conserve. c) lacks abstract reasoning. d) has not developed object permanence. 5. Dan watches a puppet show where Polly Puppet puts a candy bar in a desk drawer in front of Penny Puppet. Penny steps outside for a moment and Polly removes the candy bar from the desk drawer and puts it in her pocket instead. When Dan is asked where Penny will search for the candy bar upon her return he states confidently, ‘In Polly’s pocket.’ It appears Dan a) is egocentric. b) can conserve. c) lacks abstract reasoning. d) has not developed object permanence. 6. Vivian cries voraciously for her father after he leaves the room. It appears Vivian a) is not egocentric. b) cannot conserve. c) displays abstract reasoning. d) has developed object permanence. 61


David J. Swiderski & Dean M. Amadio 7. Janice is inside her dark living room on a cold but sunny afternoon. Her friend Joe is standing outside in the bright sun looking in her direction. Janice waves to Joe, who does not acknowledge her. Janice says aloud, ‘What a jerk. He doesn’t even want to wave back.’ It appears Janice a) is egocentric. b) cannot conserve. c) displays abstract reasoning. d) has not developed object permanence. 8. Vincent’s aunt takes five pennies and lays them out in a row so that each penny touches another. She takes another five pennies and lays them out in a row but with spaces between the pennies. When she asks Vincent which row of pennies he would like, Vincent says he would like the second row because the row is longer and therefore it is, ‘…more.’ It appears Vincent a) is egocentric. b) cannot conserve. c) lacks abstract reasoning. d) has developed object permanence. Please circle the response that best indicates which is most true for you: 9. My motivation to complete the above questions was Very low 1

Low 2

Moderate 3

High 4

Very high 5

10. I found the educational session enjoyable. Strongly disagree 1

Disagree 2

Neither agree nor disagree 3

Agree 4

Strongly agree 5

11. I believe I understand the basics of the four Piaget concepts presented as a result of this session. Strongly disagree 1

Disagree 2

Neither agree nor disagree 3

Agree 4

Strongly agree 5

12. Prior to today’s session, I have been presented at least some of these concepts in my General Psychology class or another class. No 1

Yes 2

DAVID SWIDERSKI is a recent graduate of Siena College, Loudonville, New York, obtaining his BA in psychology in December 2011. David is currently working towards attaining a PhD in industrial-organizational psychology at the University at Albany, State University of New York. His research interests include the application of popular television clips in the classroom, the effects of communication method on decision-making, organizational justice, and organizational politics. DEAN M. AMADIO* is an associate professor of psychology at Siena College in Loudonville, New York. Dr Amadio received his PhD in counseling psychology from Georgia State University. Dr Amadio has taught a wide variety of courses at Siena including general psychology, abnormal psychology, sexual behavior, and tests and measurements. His research interests include

62


Teaching Method and Effect on Learning Piagetian Concepts internalized heterosexism, alcohol- and drug-related issues, and the pedagogical use of popular cinema and television’s portrayal of psychological concepts. Correspondence: [email protected] *Contact author Manuscript received 09 January 2012 Revision accepted for publication 05 December 2012

63
