Biomedical subjects

Shane V Caswell

Publications and source records attributed to Shane V Caswell.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Preferred teaching and testing methods of athletic training students and program directors and the relationship to styles.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was (1) to investigate differences between athletic training students' and program directors' preferences for teaching and testing methods and (2) to investigate the relationship between style and preferred teaching and testing methods using the Gregorc Style Delineator (GSD) and the Preferred Teaching and Testing Method Inventory (PTTMI). PARTICIPANTS: We cluster sampled 200 undergraduate students (100% return; 68 men, 132 women; mean age, 20.12 +/- 2.02 yrs) and simple random sampled 100 program directors (43% return; 22 men, 21 women; mean age, 40.05 +/- 9.30 yrs) from Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs-accredited athletic training education programs. DESIGN AND MEASUREMENT: We used a correlational research design to compare the preferred teaching and testing methods of undergraduate students and program directors. All subjects completed a demographic survey, the GSD, and the PTTMI. Our analyses included two separate 2 (role: student and program director) x 8 (method: teaching or testing techniques) and two separate 4 (style: concrete sequential, abstract sequential, abstract random, concrete random) x 8 (method: teaching and testing techniques) mixed-model analyses of variance. RESULTS: We found that athletic training students and program directors had significantly different preferences for teaching (p < 0.01) and testing (p < 0.01) methods, respectively. No significant relationships were revealed between athletic training students' and program directors' Mind Style typologies and their preferences for teaching or testing method. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that athletic training and allied health educators consider implementing pedagogy that accentuates students' styles and consider self and students' preferences for preferred teaching and testing methods as time and topic permit.

Administrative Personnel↗

PubMed2002

Lacrosse Helmet Designs and the Effects of Impact Forces.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of repetitive impact forces on lacrosse helmets and increase awareness of helmet safety standards about reconditioning and recertification practices. DESIGN AND SETTING: The independent variables for this study consisted of 4 lacrosse helmets of various design: 2 contemporary helmets (Sport Helmets Cascade and Cascade Air) and 2 traditional helmets (Sport Helmets Ultralite and Bacharach Ultralite). The dependent variable was attenuation of impact forces as measured by the Gadd Severity Index (GSI). Helmets were tested at an independent testing facility certified by the National Athletic Equipment Reconditioners Association. MEASUREMENTS: Helmets were raised to 152 cm and released onto an anvil padded with a 1.27-cm rubber modular elastomer programmer. Ten treatments to a front (FD) and right rear boss drop site (RD) were performed. A triaxial accelerometer within the head form measured impact force. Peak acceleration data were integrated into the GSI. We performed a 1-way analysis of variance and calculated descriptive statistics and the Tukey post hoc test. RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was seen in FD GSI score (F(3,36) = 9.680, P <.05) and in the RD GSI score (F(3,36) = 28.140, P <.05) between helmet types. Mean GSI scores were 1166.1, 1117.6, 857, and 1222.8 for the FD and 974.5, 1022.1, 1376.3, and 1496.5 for the RD for Sport Helmets Cascade, Cascade Air, Ultralite, and Bacharach Ultralite, respectively. With repetitive drops, GSI scores increased, indicating a greater chance for cerebral injury. Percentage increases in GSI scores from drops 1 to 10 were 48.8, 54.3, 45.6, and 18.8 on the FD and 22.6, 35.9, 71.7, and 57.4 on the RD for the Sport Helmets Cascade, Cascade Air, Ultralite, and Bacharach Ultralite, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate differences between helmets at the 2 drop sites and decreasing capacity of the helmets to dissipate forces with repetitive impacts.

Journal Article↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Stylistic learning differences between undergraduate athletic training students and educators: Gregorc mind styles.

CONTEXT: Learning theory and pedagogic research are unfamiliar to many educators trained in the sciences. Athletic training educators must learn to appreciate the theoretic and practical value of pedagogic research, including learning styles. OBJECTIVE: To extend the learning styles research in athletic training by introducing the Mind Styles model and Gregorc Style Delineator instrument to investigate students' and program directors' baseline style preferences and to study the effects of sex, education level, and academic role on mean composite Gregorc Style Delineator scores. DESIGN: Correlational research design. SETTING: Instruments were mailed to program directors and administered in classroom settings. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Ten of 10 athletic training programs accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs formed sample 1, with 200 undergraduate athletic training students (68 men, 132 women, age = 20.12 +/- 2.02 years). A total of 43 program directors (22 men, 21 women, age = 40.05 +/- 9.30 years) created sample 2. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We used the Gregorc Style Delineator to measure participants' perceptual and ordering abilities, combining them in a quaternary design to create mean composite scores for the Concrete Sequential (CS), Abstract Sequential (AS), Abstract Random (AR), and Concrete Random (CR) Mind Styles subscales. We also noted each subject's sex, education level, and academic role. RESULTS: We obtained a response rate of 100% of undergraduates and 43% of program directors. The CS style was preferred by 44.5% (n = 89) of students and 58.1% (n = 25) of program directors. Program directors preferred the CS style more (P < .001) and the AS and AR styles less (P < .001) than predicted by chi(2) testing. Students preferred the CS style more (P < .001) and the AS style less (P < .001) than expected also. Men students preferred the AS style more (P < .01) and the AR style less (P < .01) than women students. Students by chi2 testing were also less likely to prefer the CS style (P < .01) and more likely to prefer the AR style (P < .001) than program directors. No significant main effect was noted for education level (P = .310) or the interaction (P = .108). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings add 2 unique elements to the athletic training literature by extending the investigation of styles to an original model (Mind Styles) and the effect of academic role on style. Program directors should strongly consider sex and academic role style differences when designing and implementing pedagogic methods.

Journal Article↗