Running head: MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
MSHE Shanghai Cohort Co-Curricular Interventions: Using PTP Model
Sara Coney, John Nguyen, Sandra Ponce, & Giovanni Rodriguez
California State University Fullerton
1
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
2
MSHE Shanghai Cohort Co-Curricular Interventions: Using PTP Model
“Learning is a treasure that will follow its owner everywhere” (Chinese proverb, author
unknown). Chinese international students are choosing to pursue higher education in the United
States at an alarming rate, especially due to the prestigious reputation of universities in the
United States of America (Lee, 2015; Lowinger, He, Lin, & Chang 2014). The partnership
between Shanghai Normal University (SNU) and California State University, Fullerton (CSUF)
is an example of the increase of commitment to global learning (CSUF, 2015). The upcoming
fall 2015 semester will enroll 18 international graduate students, collectively named the
Shanghai cohort, in the Masters of Science in Higher Education (MSHE) program(Cloud, 2015).
By using Knefelkamp’s Practice-to-Theory-to-Practice (PTP) model, as outline by Evans,
Forney, Guido, Patton, and Renn (2010), we will design co-curricular interventions to address
the challenges associated with transition for the incoming Shanghai cohort. We begin by
identifying some limitations and biases: most student engagement and student development
theories were not created by empirical studies on Chinese international students or Chinese
students, we do not have previous knowledge in working with Chinese international students,
and our preliminary informal theory based interventions were made with limited experience.Our
initial thoughts were that students would need support in academics and psychosocial
development as they are studying abroad.The theory informed interventions will employ the
theoretical frameworks described in Jarvis’ experiential learning model and Schlossberg’s
transition theory and will draw additional support from Chickering’s identity development
theory, Tinto’s integrative model, Rendon’s validation theory, and Kuh’s engagement theory,
among others. While the interventions will benefit from being theory-informed, an area of
concern lies in the fact that these theories were not conceived in relation to international
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
3
students. To alleviate this, we will draw on empirical research to increase our understanding of
international student characteristics and cultures.
This paper will begin by describing the critical barriers typically experienced by
international graduate students including: academic challenges, social engagement, and cultural
connections. Through programmatic interventions, students are expected to establish
competency in four learning domains as prescribed by theMSHE program and in alignment with
the Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS): leadership, personal
and professional development, education, and social justice and advocacy (California State
University Fullerton, 2015). To facilitate learning in these domains, the co-curricular program
will emphasize: peer mentorship, study halls, cross-cultural exchanges, and a professional
development series. We expect students to gain deeper understanding of their own and host
culture, identify diverse approaches to learning, and engage in meaningful social interactions by
the end of their six-month stay in the United States.
Literature Review
California State University, Fullerton (CSUF) is among universities in the United States
of America aspiring to be a model comprehensive university in the nation. CSUF is a public
four-year university offering 109 degree programs, including 54 graduate degree programs
(CSUF, 2015). CSUF serves a diverse population group and is recognized as a Hispanic Serving
Institution.Its College of Education distinguished faculty are transformative scholar-practitioners
devoted to advancing equity within education and preparing educational leaders who are
interested in change and committed to diversity. According to International Programs at CSUF,
of the 1,541 international students enrolled at the university at the end of spring 2014, 265 were
from the Republic of China (California State University Fullerton, 2015).
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
4
Lee (2015), in Quaye and Harper’s Student Engagement in Higher Education, suggested
that the challenges that international students have are: acculturation, academics, and social
integration. Positive perceptions of the host institution by international students occur when
faculty, staff, support resources, and domestic students work together to create learning
interactions through academic and social programming (Glass, 2012; Mamieishvli&Ketevan,
2012). International students reported being satisfied with their participation in programs, such
as personal and professional programs, and described it as beneficial to their adjustment,
including promoting academic success and reducing feelings of both social and cultural isolation
(Menzie& Baron, 2013; Spivey-Mooring and Aprey, 2014).
Goodman, Schlossberg, and Anderson (2006) introduced the 4 S Model to help identify
interventions to assist an individual transition; the four “S” stands for: situation, self, support,
and strategies. Studies were used to identify areas of support and strategies to guide the design
of the interventions. Understanding that psychosocial development is recycled when students
undergo new circumstance, Chickering and Reisser (1993), as cited in Evans et al. (2010),
developed seven vectors that focus on psychosocial development; making meaning of one’s self
and their relationships is critical for international students (Glass, 2012; Menzie& Baron,
2013).
Acculturation
International students may experience acculturated stress to the host culture while
studying abroad (Lowinger et al., 2014; Sullivan, &Kashubeck-West, 2015). In their transition,
the discrepancy between their educational experiences from their home country and that of the
host country can result in confusion and frustration (Sadykova, 2014). As described by
Lowinger et al. (2014), Chinese international students do not commonly participate in class or
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
5
socialize with their new host community due to feelings of insufficient English speaking skills,
contributing to this acculturated stress. Brown & Jones (2013) also note that the attitude of the
host community is key in the welcome of international students and their impression of the host
country.
According to Jarvis (2006), the learning process starts with the whole person and takes
into account the social context along with the type of learning and the experience. To encourage
a connection with the host culture it is important to establishing bonds with domestic peers
(Sadykova, 2014).
Academics
Asian international students not only benefit from personal contact in gains of learning,
but also benefit from having a higher level of English proficiency to reduce stress in the area of
academics (Bista, 2015; Poyrazli&Kavanaugh, 2006). Rientes, Beausaert, Grohnert,
Niemantsverdriet, and Kommers (2012) recommended that higher education institutions provide
international students more information about the specific academic and social culture of the host
institution; the MSHE program understands that the Shanghai cohort will need additional support
in American Psychological Association (APA) academic style writing and as
Angelova&Riazantseva (1999) suggested, faculty and staff should explicitly address this
academic need. Recognizing the cultural differences in academic and stress management, as
stated byMisra, & Castillo (2004), we can better address the academic adaptation needs and
design the appropriate strategies for adjustment (Zhou, Frey, & Bang, 2011).
Although International students were not a focus for Validation theory, marginalized
identities were, and Réndon (1994) stated the importance of being active agents of affirmation
early on in their transition in a higher education institution operating on the dominant narrative
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
6
through reassuring marginalized students’ abilities, this concept can serve crucial in the situation
of being in a host country and having a different academic culture.
Social
According to Suspitsyna (2013), the challenge of understanding the social norms from
the United States of America, specifically with social norms in college, can pose more difficulty
for international students than academic courses. To address this issue, it is important for
universities to educate international students on the dominant culture and social norms of the
host country (Baba, &Hosoda, 2014). Research also suggests that international students who
demonstrate a strong desire for personal growth tend to adjust better regardless of the various
challenges associated to learning a new culture with different social norms; networking is a goal
salient as a graduate student (Gardner, & Barnes, 2007;Yakunina, Weigold, Weigold,
Hercegovac, &Elsayed, 2013). Providing co-curricular engagement opportunities enhances
social interactions between domestic and international students (Arkoudis, Watty, Baik, Yu,
Borland, Chang, Lang, Lang, & Pearce, 2013).
Kuh (1995) can provide us with the context to understand how offeringmultiple
opportunities for engagement is important for social development, these opportunities can
increase a student’s perception of feeling connected to their environment and can promote
interactions with other students and faculty (Farley, McKee, & Brooks, 2011).
Theory to Practice
International student engagement in academic and social co-curricular programs allows
them to navigate the university effectively and report greater levels of learning and development
(Glass, 2012). Transition theory, psychosocial theory, adult learning theory, and student
engagement theories were used to design academic and social co-curricular interventions for the
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
7
Shanghai cohort. Drawing upon Knefelkamp’s Practice-to-Theory-to-Practice model as outlined
by Evans et al. (2010), we were able to identify: challenges and support, learning interventions,
and educator responsibilities.
Identifying Challenge and Support
The 4 S Model, described by Goodman et al. (2006), can be used to perform initial intake
of the MSHE Shanghai cohort to identify challenges and create co-curricular opportunities. The
situation can identify this transition as being an anticipated transition in the context of choosing
to participate in a hybrid MSHE program that contains six months of instruction abroad. Self can
be used to identify that the Shanghai cohort are adult students coming from various academic
disciplines that have taken the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). Lee (2015)
presented challenges in acculturation, academics, and social integration with international
student populations, challenges specific to Chinese international students were caused due to
differences in academic and social cultures (Bista, 2015; Lowinger et al., 2014; Zhou et al.,
2011). The identified support can be building a partnership between faculty, staff, student
service departments, and domestic students to build strong academic and social support systems
(Baba &Hosoda, 2014). The strategy, based on findings,can be used to create the interventions
of: peer mentorship, study halls, cross-cultural exchanges, and the professional development
series.
Application to Learning Interventions
After the co-curricular interventions that addressed the challenges were identified, Kuh’s
(1995) definition of engagement as the time and energy spent was used as a framework to
measure how engaged a student was. Since the Shanghai cohort are adult students, it was fitting
to draw upon an adult learning theory. Jarvis’ (2006) model of experiential learning, specifies
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
8
three areas of learning: emotion, thought/reflection, and action, are used to define energy in
Kuh’s (1995) definition of engagement. It is important to note that Ranjita et al. (2004) states
that cultural differences exist in emotional, behavioral, and cognitive management of stress, and
Lowinger et al. (2014) recommended that host universities help Chinese international students
with psychosocial adjustment. Using Jarvis’ (2006) three learning areas as a framework for
creating interventions, an integration of Chickering and Reisser’s (1993) seven vectors of
psychosocial development would ensure that the content of the interventions will focus on
holistic development of the Shanghai cohort while at CSUF.
Educator Responsibilities
It is important to understand that the Shanghai cohort have chosen to pursue graduate
studies at CSUF and come with self-motivation, determination, and qualifications. The cultural
strengths that the Shanghai students bring will be marginalized coming to an institution with
different dominant cultural expectations. Drawing on Réndon (1994), faculty and staff can make
the initial welcoming efforts by actively creating opportunities for strong engagement early on
with support and understanding. Taking into consideration Sadykova (2014) regarding the need
to create close bonds with the host institution among collectivist cultures, it is crucial that faculty
and staff also engage in co-curricular programming to achieve student success
(Mamieishvli&Ketevan, 2012; Réndon, 1994).
Intervention Design
The conceptual framework of our co-curricular program originates from four of the
MSHE core learning domains: leadership, education, social justice and advocacy, and personal
and professional development (CSUF, 2015). Each of these domains associates with
components from Part 5: The Curriculum, of CAS’s Masters-Level Student Affairs Professional
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
9
Preparation Programs and with various competencies for the profession outlined by the
American College Personnel Association (ACPA) and the National Association of Student
Personnel Administrators – Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education (NASPA)
(ACPA/NASPA, 2010). By aligning to the CAS guidelines, the learning domains meet
professional standards and assure high quality to the implemented programs. As a result, the cocurricular programs encompass a wide range of student learning and development through the
perspective of what establishes best practices (Council for the Advancement of Standards in
Higher Education, 2015).
Peer Mentorship
Our first learning intervention, the peer mentorship program, pairs current MSHE
students with members of the Shanghai cohort (see Appendix A). Through intentional pairing, a
mentor-mentee retreat, and structured meetings, students will be able to develop interpersonal
relationships in line with Chickering’s theory of identity development. This intervention
addresses all four learning domains and is framed using Schlossberg’s Transition Theory and the
4 S model. The mentor-mentee retreat seeks to identify situational aspects, characteristics of
self, and psychological coping resources as students “move in” to the American institution.
Moreover, as students “move through” the semester, peer mentors provide support and aid
students in designing strategies to address academic, social, and cultural challenges. At the
conclusion of the semester, students “move out” of their transition, assessing their individual
growth in the learning areas identified by Jarvis’ experiential learning model.
Study Halls
The second learning intervention offers open study halls that provide opportunities for
peer learning assistance (see Appendix B). This structure allows the Shanghai cohort to
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
10
participate in group-oriented learning that directly addresses academic challenges and benefits
from social engagement framed in a collectivistic mindset. The intervention focuses on three
learning domains: leadership, education, and social justice and advocacy. It is guided by
Knefelkamp’s developmental instruction model, which aligns with Perry’s intellectual and
ethical development theory. Proximal development is achieved when the developmental
instruction strategies are used in a scaffolding manner. In this way, students exhibiting attributes
associated with Perry’s dualism schema, for example, can benefit from diverse points of view, a
technique associated with the adjacent schema of multiplicity. This intervention effectively
involves students in their learning process.
Cross-Cultural Exchange
The third learning intervention, cross-cultural exchanges, provides the Shanghai cohort
with multiple opportunities for exploration of self through multicultural learning (see Appendix
C). Students attend monthly field trips in the local region focused on the diverse history and
cultures of California. The intervention addresses the domains of education and social justice
and advocacy through the introduction of Baxter Magolda’s epistemological reflection model
and Phinney’s theory of ethnic identity development. Baxter Magolda’s model allows students
to explore their identities through socially constructed patterns. Guided tours exemplify concrete
ways of knowing, while the debrief activity challenges students to progress in the more advanced
areas of reflection. In doing this, students are able to examine their ethnic identity within their
new environment.
Professional Development Series
In the final intervention, Shanghai students are given a series of professional
development workshops similar to a case study.Student groups receive ongoing instruction and
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
11
guidance to design interventions in light of their chosen student affairs role. The intervention
encompasses all four learning domains and is framed in Kolb’s experiential learning model.
Students first complete an inventory to examine their learning styles based on Kolb’s theory,
keeping these in mind as they draft the various aspects of the case study project. Each
component of the project focuses on the aspects of feeling, watching, thinking, or doing, which
relate to the elements of concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization,
and active experimentation, respectively. Through this intervention, students engage in realworld application of course concepts.
Conclusion
The proposed interventions will be implemented by: the Education Leadership
Department, MSHE faculty, MSHE cohort 7 graduate students, and additional support as needed.
The Shanghai cohort students will be strongly advised by the MSHE leadership to participate in
all interventions. Students will experience multiple opportunities of co-curricular interventions
that will address their social and academic needs. The co-curricular interventions, in addition to
the assessment measures, occur throughout the six-month attendance of the Shanghai cohort at
CSUF.Evaluation of the interventions can be made using the built in assessments and student
learning outcomes outlined in the lesson plans (see Appendices A, B, C, & D). In addition, focus
groups can be made to collect qualitative feedback and add assessment measures beyond the
scope of the initial measurement focus. The combined feedback can then be used to make
further adjustments for improvement to the co-curricular interventions for future Shanghai
cohorts by the Educational Leadership Department and MSHE leadership.
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
12
References
ACPA/NASPA. (2010). Professional competency areas for student affairs practitioners.
Washington, DC: Author.
https://www.naspa.org/images/uploads/main/Professional_Competencies.pdf
Angelova, M. &Riazantseva, A. (1999). “If you don’t tell me, how can I know?” A case student
of four international students learning to write the U.S. way.Written Communication,
16(4), 491-525.
Arkoudis, S., Watty, K., Baik, C., Yu, X., Borland, H., Chang, S., & ... Pearce, A. (2013).
Finding common ground: Enhancing interaction between domestic and international
students in higher education. Teaching In Higher Education, 18(3), 222-235.
Baba, Y., &Hosoda, M. (2014). Home away home: Better understanding of the role of social
support in predicting cross-cultural adjustment among international students. College
Student Journal, 48(1), 1-15.
Bista, K. (2015). Asian international students' college experience: Relationship between quality
of personal contact and gains in learning. Journal of International & Global Studies, 6(2),
38-54.
Brown, L., & Jones, I. (2013). Encounters with racism and the international student
experience.Studies in Higher Education, 38(7), 1004-1019.
California State University Fullerton. (2015). Educational leadership: Core learning domains.
California State University Fullerton.Retrieved July 2, 2015 from:
http://ed.fullerton.edu/edleadership/future-students/higher-education-m-s/
core-learning-domains/
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
13
California State University Fullerton. (2015). International Student Demographics.California
State University Fullerton.Retrieved July 3, 2015 from:
http://www.fullerton.edu/international/assessments/demographics/sp14.aspx.
Cloud, T. (2015). CSUF will train 18 graduate students from Shanghai Normal University.
College of Education, California State University Fullerton.Retrieved from:
http://news.fullerton.edu/2015su/shanghai-grant.aspx
Counsel for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education. (2012). The role of masterslevel student affairs professional preparation programs.Washington, DC: Author.
http://standards.cas.edu/getpdf.cfm?PDF=E86DA70D-0C19-89ED-0FBA230F8F2F3F41
Counsel for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education. (2015). Mission, vision, and
purpose.http://www.cas.edu/mission
Farley, K., McKee, M., & Brooks, M. (2011). The effects of student involvement on graduate
student satisfaction: A pilot study. Alabama Counseling Association Journal, 37(1), 3338.
Evans N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., &Renn, K. A. (2010). Student
Development in College: Theory, Research, and Practice(2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass
Gardner, S. K. & Barnes, B. J. (2007). Graduate student involvement: Socialization for the
professional role. Journal of College Student Development, 48(4), 369-387.
Glass, C. (2012). Educational experiences associated with international students’ learning,
development, and positive perceptions of campus climate. Journal of Studies in
International Education, 16(3), 288-251.
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
14
Goodman, J. , Schlossberg, N. , & Anderson, M. (2006). Counseling Adults in Transition :
Linking Practice with Theory. New York, NY: Springer Pub. Co.
Jarvis, P. (2006). Towards a Comprehensive Theory of Human Learning.London ; New York,
NY: Routledge.
Kuh, G. D. (1995). The other curriculum: Out-of-class experiences associated with student
learning and personal development. The Journal of Higher Education, 66(2), 123-155.
Lee, J. J. (2015). Engaging International Students. In S. J. Quaye& S. R. Harper (Eds.), Student
engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for
diverse populations(pp. 105-120). New York, NY: Routledge.
Lowinger, R. J., He, Z., Lin, M., & Chang, M. (2014). The impact of academic self-efficacy,
acculturation difficulties, and language abilities on procrastination behavior in Chinese
international students.College Student Journal, 48(1), 141-152.
Mamiseishvili, K. (2012). International student persistence in U.S. postsecondary
institutions.Higher Education, 64, 1-17.
Misra, R., & Castillo, L. G. (2004). Academic stress among college students; Comparison among
American and international students. International Journal of Stress Management, 11(2),
132-148.
Menzies, J. L. & Baron, R. (2013). International postgraduate student transition experiences: The
importance of student societies and friends. Innovations in Education and Teaching
International, 51(1), 84-94.
Poyrazli, S. &Kavanaugh, P. R. (2006). Marital status, ethnicity, academic achievement, and
adjustment strains: The case of graduate international students. College Student Journal,
40(4), 767-680.
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
15
Rendon, L. I. (1994). Validating culturally diverse students: Toward a new model of learning
student development. Innovative Higher Education, 19(1), 33-51.
Rienties, B., Beausaert, S., Grohnert, T., Niemantsverdriet, S., &Kommers, P. (2012).
Understanding academic performance of international students: The role of ethnicity,
academic and social integration. Higher Education, 63(6), 685-700.
Sadykova, G. (2014). Mediating knowledge through peer-to-peer interaction in a multicultural
online learning environment: A case study of international students in the US. The
International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(3), 24-49.
Spivey-Mooring, T. &Apprey, C. B. (2014). University of Virginia graduate mentoring institute:
A model program for graduate student success. Peabody Journal of Education, 89, 393410.
Sullivan, C. &Kashubeck-West, S. (2015). The interplay of international students’ acculturative
stress, social support, and acculturation modes.Journal of International Students, 5(1), 111.
Suspitsyna, T. (2013). Socialization as sensemaking: a semiotic analysis of international graduate
students' narratives in the USA. Studies In Higher Education, 38(9), 1351-1364.
Yakunina, E. S., Weigold, I. K., Weigold, A., Hercegovac, S., &Elsayed, N. (2013). International
students' personal and multicultural strengths: Reducing acculturative stress and
promoting adjustment. Journal Of Counseling & Development, 91(2), 216-223.
Zhou, Y., Frey, C., & Bang, H. (2011). Understanding of international graduate students’
academic adaptation to a U.S. graduate school.International Education, 41(1), 76-94.
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
16
Appendix A
SHANGHAI COHORT CO-CURRICULAR PROGRAM LESSON PLAN
Peer Mentorship
Student Learning Outcomes
1. SWiBAT share (values) three aspects of their self-identities with their mentors.
2. SWiBATcompare and contrast (analysis) at least two of the three areas of support with strategies
(transition theory)as it pertains to their transition as a Shanghai MSHE student at CSUF.
3. SWiBAT connect (contextualize) their experience as a mentee to their learning by sharing two
concrete experiences.
Primary Learning Domains Addressed
 Leadership
 Education
 Social Justice &Advocacy
 Personal & Professional Development
Connections to Theory and/or Student Characteristics
Theory
1. The first student learning outcome will assist Shanghai MSHE students in their development of
identity. Utilizing Chickering and Reissner’s (1993) theory of identity development, they will focus
on three vectors; establishing identity, developing mature interpersonal relationships and
managing emotions.
2. To second student learning outcome will support the transition of Shanghai MSHE students by
providing activities that have been designed focusing on the self and support of the 4 S Model
along with Schlossberg’s (1981) transition theory.
3. The third student learning outcome will allow students to draw on Jarvis’ (2006) emotion and
thought/reflection learning areas.
4. Drawing on Kuh (1995), various amounts of activities will provide Shanghai MSHE students
multiple engagement opportunities.
5. Retreat activities will allow mentors will serve as active agents of affirmation for Shanghai MSHE
students incorporating Rendon’s (1994) Validation Theory.
6. To avoid feelings of isolation, the three student learning outcomes provide Shanghai MSHE
students opportunity for social integration pulling on Vincent Tinto Theory of Student Departure
(1993).
Student Characteristics
 Academic challenges
 Social engagement
 Cultural connections
Assessment Strategy
Advanced
SLO#1 Students qualified three
aspects of their selfidentities by sharing
them with their mentor
and provided clear
context.
SLO#2
Students were able to
synthesize all three
areas of their support
with strategies (transition
theory) as it pertains to
their transition as a
Competent
Students shared three
aspects of their selfidentities by sharing
them with their mentor
and provided context.
Students were able to
compare and contrast
(analysis) at least two of
the three areas of
identified support with
strategies (transition
Basic
Students disclosed
(responded) three
aspects of their selfidentities by sharing
them with their mentor
and provide little to no
context.
Students were able to
apply at least two of the
three areas of identified
support with strategies
(transition theory) as it
pertains to their
Needs Improvement
Student chose three
aspects of their selfidentity by sharing them
with their mentor and
provided no context.
Students were able to
identify at least one of
the three areas of
identified support with
strategies (transition
theory) as it pertains to
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
17
Shanghai MSHE student
at CSUF.
theory) as it pertains to
transition as a Shanghai
their transition as a
their transition as a
MSHE student at CSUF.
Shanghai MSHE student
Shanghai MSHE student
at CSUF.
at CSUF.
Student connected
Student recognized that
Students observed their
SLO#3 Student integrated their
experience as a mentee
(contextualize) their
their experience as a
experience as a mentee
to their learning by
experience as a mentee
mentee to their learning
to their learning by
sharing two concrete
to their learning by
by sharing two
sharing one experience.
experiences that showed sharing two concrete
experiences.
personal growth.
experiences.
*Student Learning Outcomes are based from Hoffman (2015) Designing Theory-Informed Rubrics
Component 1: Pairing Reveal and Peer Mentor Retreat
Set-Up, Materials Needed, etc.
 Current MSHE students (cohort 7) willing to serve as mentors
 Questionnaire (for pairing)
o Each student receives an email with a link to the online questionnaire.
o Questionnaire gathers information about individuals’ characteristics and preferences and
is used in a pairing system based on Chickering’s identity development theory.
o Questionnaires must be submitted within one week.
 HELO ice-breaker/activity
o HELO provides materials.
 Retreat handout
o Lists suggestions for conversation starters and nearby activities.
o Each pair receives one handout.
 Gifts (suggested)
o Gifts are up to the discretion of the mentor and should reflect their own culture,
preferences, etc.
Activity Outline
1. Members of the Shanghai cohort and current cohorts (7 and 8) receive an email with the link to a
Google form questionnaire, along with a brief description of the peer mentorship program, the
roles of mentor/mentee, and how the pairing system is set up. Printed copies of the
questionnaire are made available upon request. The Google form questionnaire serves to gather
information about individuals’ characteristics and preferences.
a. The last question on the form (not pictured) asks Shanghai students to draft a letter to
their future selves. This letter is meant to be reflective in nature and draws on Jarvis’
experiential learning model as students write about their holistic selves in their “life
world.” As students express characteristics of their self in light of their situation, they are
also incorporating the 4 S model.
b. Example questions for Google form questionnaire:
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
18
b. Google form questionnaires must be submitted within one week.
2. HELO Professional Development Coordinators pair a Shanghai student with a member of cohort
7. In a similar instance, a second pairing occurs between a member of cohort 8 and a member of
cohort 7. This presents the possibility for an interdependent relationship wherein mentoring may
additionally occur between the member of cohort 8 and the Shanghai student, as shown below.
C7
C8
Shanghai
a. In line with Chickering’s identity development theory, pairings consider both
commonalities and differences between individuals’ cultural and personal experiences in
an effort to create healthy relationships among peers.
3. No more than 2 weeks later, a pairing reveal and peer mentor retreat takes place.
a. Participants meet on campus in a designated location. Mentors are encouraged
beforehand to bring a small gift for their mentee(s) that reflects their own culture,
preferences, etc.
b. HELO Professional Development Coordinators execute an ice-breaker/activity to reveal
the pairings (10 minutes).
c. Facilitators provide suggestions for conversation starters and nearby activities in a
handout (5 mintues). Some conversation starters are reflective of Schlossberg’s
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
19
transition theory and the 4 S model. For example, learning an individual’s basic
information may encompass characteristics of situation, self, and support if individuals
disclose their concurrent stressors, personal and demographic characteristics, or existing
support systems. Conversations will likely incorporate Rendon’s validation theory as
mentors take on a confirming and supportive role.
Conversation Starters:
 Basic information: name, age, identities, upbringing, etc.
 Student Affairs: functional areas of interest, MSHE expectations, etc.
 Role Expectations: for mentor and mentee
 Personal: hobbies, interests, favorites, current feelings, etc.
Nearby Activities:
 Parks and recreation
 Dining
 Mall
 On-campus locations
d. Instruct mentors to choose an activity to participate in with their mentee(s). Activities may
be from list or can be decided among pairs. Encourage pairs to discover and value the
commonalities and differences between them in order to build mature interpersonal
relationships, keeping in mind Chickering’s vectors.
e. All pairs must arrive back on campus after 2 hours.
4. When all pairs return, a group discussion takes place. Encourage participants to share one thing
they learned about their mentor/mentee (30 minutes).
Component 2: Structured Meetings
Set-Up, Materials Needed, etc.
 Handout
o Each student receives one handout.
o One handout from each pair is collected when all 6 meetings are completed.
o Handout provides information pertaining to critical barriers of international graduate
students and Schlossberg’s transition model along with a structured meeting chart.
Activity Outline
1. Each mentor receives a handout outlining critical barriers typically experienced by international
graduate students including: academic challenges, social engagement, and cultural connections.
Along with this, Schlossberg’s transition model is provided to help examine the mentee’s current
state of self and situation and serves as a guideline for identifying support and strategies. A
chart, similar to the one below, follows the brief descriptions to provide structure for the peer
mentor meetings.
a. Meeting date, time, and location are up to the pairing’s discretion
Support
Academic
Date:
Time:
Notes:
Strategies
Date:
Time:
Notes:
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
Initials: ______ & ______
Mentor
Initials: ______ & ______
Mentee
Date:
Time:
Notes:
20
Mentor
Mentee
Date:
Time:
Notes:
Social
Initials: ______ & ______
Mentor
Initials: ______ & ______
Mentee
Date:
Time:
Notes:
Mentor
Mentee
Date:
Time:
Notes:
Cultural
Initials: ______ & ______
Mentor
Mentee
Initials: ______ & ______
Mentor
Mentee
2. Instruct mentors to assist in identifying support and strategies during their meetings. Meetings
should be at least 1 hour and all 6 meetings should be completed within the first 2 months of
receiving their mentee(s).
a. Due to the nature of the meeting topics and mentors’ existing knowledge of student
development theory, we encourage mentors to use other student development theories to
support their assertions. For example, mentors may use Knefelkamp’s +1 staging to aid
students in moving from diffusion to moratorium in Phinney’s model of ethnic identity
development during one of their “cultural” meetings.
Component 3: Banquet
Set-Up, Materials Needed, etc.
 Room Reservation
o Event takes place in the TSU. Reservation is made as soon as possible.
o University Conference Center takes care of set-up, breakdown, and equipment use.
 Decorations
o HELO provides decorations for venue and sets up at least 1 hour in advance.
o Programs printed by Digital Print Services at least 2 days in advance.
 Slideshow Presentation
o Request pictures 3 weeks in advance.
o Equipment for slideshow presentation is provided by University Conference Center.
 Catering
o Gastronome caters dinner for all attendees. Gastronome sets up serving area and cleans
after event.
 Letters
o Bring letters from Component 1.
o Pass out paper and writing utensils for revised letter activity.
Activity Outline
1. At the end of the semester (approximately 4 months later), pairs participate in an informal
banquet. Faculty and administration may also attend.
2. We provide opening remarks about the mentorship program and present highlights via a
presentation of pictures (10 minutes).
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
21
3. Participants receive dinner. During dinner, participants are able to mingle with MSHE students,
faculty, and administration (30 minutes).
4. Shanghai students receive their letters from Component 1 (5 minutes).
5. Instruct Shanghai students to read their letters to their mentor. Together, the pairs draft a revised
letter addressing their learning in three areas described by Jarvis’ experiential learning model:
emotion, thought/reflection, and action (30 minutes).
a. Students may choose to work individually on their revised letters if they are
uncomfortable sharing it with their mentor.
b. Collect revised letters to assess student learning.
5. Instruct pairs to reflect on their experiences with one another, including final thoughts and
expressions of gratitude (10 minutes).
6. Take group photo (1 minute).
Anticipated Budget
Component 1: $0
Component 2: $0
Component 3: $600+tax
Catering: 50 people (anticipated) x $12 (per person) = $600+tax
Assessment Results
TBD
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
22
Appendix B
SHANGHAI COHORT CO-CURRICULAR PROGRAM LESSON PLAN
Study Hall
Student Learning Outcomes
1. SWiBAT connect (contextualize) their academic needs with the study hall by identifying two
“muddiest points” at sign-in.
2. SWiBATdistinguish (analyze) what methods of interventions were most helpful clarifying their
“muddiest points” by indicating one from each of the four sections of Knefelkamp’s
Developmental Instruction Model.
Primary Learning Domains Addressed
 Leadership
 Education
 Social Justice & Advocacy
 Personal & Professional Development
Connections to Theory and/or Student Characteristics
Theory
7. The first student learning outcome will support the academic growth of Shanghai MSHE students
by providing an opportunity for academic integration pulling on Vincent Tinto Theory of Student
Departure (1993).
8. The second student learning outcome uses Knefelkamp’s Developmental Instruction Model to
assist Shanghai MSHE students in analyzing the muddiest points during study hall activity.
9. The student learning outcomes will assist Shanghai MSHE students in their development of
identity. Utilizing Chickering and Reissner’s (1993) theory of identity development, they will focus
on two vectors; developing competence, developing mature interpersonal relationships.
10. The student learning outcomes will integrate two clusters of student development theory – the
intended shifts in learning to include emotion, thought/reflection, and action are consistent with
Jarvis’(2006) experiential learning theory; students will additionally draw upon specific aspects of
Schlossberg’s(1981) transition theory and the 4 S Model.
11. Drawing on Kuh (1995), study halls will provide Shanghai MSHE students multiple engagement
opportunities.
12. Study halls will allow facilitators to serve as active agents of affirmation for Shanghai MSHE
students incorporating Rendon’s (1994) Validation Theory.
Student Characteristics
 Academic challenges
 Social engagement: peer learning
 Cultural connections: group oriented (collectivistic)
Assessment Strategy
Advanced
Students
transcended
SLO#1
SLO#2
(contextualize) their
academic needs with the
study hall by identifying
two “muddiest points” at
sign-in and provide
context and analysis.
Students evaluated what
methods of interventions
were most helpful
Competent
Basic
Needs Improvement
Students connected
(contextualize) their
academic needs with the
study hall by identifying
two “muddiest points” at
sign-in.
Students recognized
(aspect
identification)their
academic needs with the
study hall by identifying
one “muddiest point” at
sign-in.
Students completed
(applying/doing) what
methods of interventions
Student was not able to
recognize a “muddiest
point” when signing-in to
study hall.
Students distinguished
(analyze) what methods
of interventions were
Students reported
(understanding) what
methods of interventions
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
23
clarifying their “muddiest
most helpful clarifying
were most helpful
were most helpful
points” by indicating at
their “muddiest points”
clarifying their “muddiest
clarifying their “muddiest
least one from each of
by indicating one from
points” by indicating one
points” by indicating one
the four sections of
each of the four sections
from at least three of the
from at least tone of the
Knefelkamp’s
of Knefelkamp’s
four sections of
four sections of
Developmental
Developmental
Knefelkamp’s
Knefelkamp’s
Instruction Model, and
Instruction Model.
Developmental
Developmental
provided qualitative
Instruction Model.
Instruction Model.
feedback.
*Student Learning Outcomes are based from Hoffman (2015) Designing Theory-Informed Rubrics
Set-Up, Materials Needed, etc.
 Room reservation
o Reservation made through University Conference Center
o Room is available on a weekly basis for one hour
o Request projector, white board, and dry erase markers
 Projector will continuously display Knefelkamp’s Developmental Instruction
Model
 White board and dry erase markers can be used for visual study purposes
 People
o Study hall is open to Shanghai cohort, Cohort 7, and Cohort 8 students
o Students may come and go as they please
o Faculty member(s) may be present, if available
 Schedule of present faculty is sent via email prior to study hall
 Flip chart (large Post-its) and markers
o Can be used for visual study purposes
Activity Outline
1. Students enter room at various times. As they enter, they write name on sign in sheet and
disclose their “muddiest points” (areas in which they will need help with clarity).
2. As students enter, facilitator (faculty, if present) reminds students to utilize Knefelkamp’s
developmental instruction model (displayed on projector screen).
Structure
Diversity
Experiential
Learning
Personalism
Knefelkamp’s Developmental Instruction Model*
 Rehearse evaluation tasks
 Give detailed explanations of assignments
 Use specific examples that reflect students’ experiences
 Introduce variety in:
o readings,
o assignments,
o points of view, and
o instructional methods.
 Include case studies
 Conduct role plays
 Introduce exercises that facilitate a reflection on and application of the
material
 Have enthusiasm for the material
 Be available
 Provide comprehensive feedback
*Information is directly cited from Evans et al., 2010.
3. Facilitator continuously walks around room, encouraging students to approach peers if
clarification of course content or further understanding of material is needed.
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
a. Facilitator applies Knefelkamp’s plus-one staging by pairing individuals who exemplify
adjacent schemas in Perry’s intellectual and ethical developmental model.
4. As students exit, facilitator gives them an assessment survey (see below).
Sample Study Hall Assessment*
1.
2.
3.
4.
At any point during the study hall, did you need clarification of course concepts? Y/N
At any point during the study hall, did you require deeper understanding of material? Y/N
Did you engage in peer learning to support your learning? Y/N
If you answered Yes to Question #3, check the strategies employed by the peer(s) that
helped you:
Structure
 Rehearsed evaluation tasks
 Gave detailed explanations of assignments
 Used specific examples that reflect students’ experiences
Diversity
 Introduced variety in readings
 Introduced variety in assignments
 Introduced variety in points of views
 Introduced variety in instructional methods
Experiential Learning
 Included case studies
 Conducted role plays
 Introduced exercises that facilitated a reflection on the material
 Introduced exercises that facilitated an application of the material
Personalism
 Had enthusiasm for the material
 Was available
 Provided comprehensive feedback
*Information is directly cited from Evans et al., 2010.
5. Student completes assessment survey and returns it to facilitator.
Anticipated Budget
$0
Assessment Results
TBD
24
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
25
Appendix C
SHANGHAI COHORT CO-CURRICULAR PROGRAM LESSON PLAN
Cross-Cultural Exchanges
Student Learning Outcomes
1. SWiBAT initiate (values) conversation about own thoughts/feelings regarding the material
observed during the trip by providing input in discussion.
2. SWiBAT connect (contextualize) their self-culture with a different culture by providing two
similarities.
3. SWiBATdistinguish (analyze) difference in past knowledge about cultures by providing two key
findings that differed from initial perception.
Primary Learning Domains Addressed
 Leadership
 Education
 Social Justice &Advocacy
 Personal & Professional Development
Connections to Theory and/or Student Characteristics
Theory
1. The first student learning outcome will allow Shanghai MHSE students to draw on Jarvis’ (2006)
emotion and thought/reflection learning areas integrating self of the 4 S Model of Schlossberg’s
(1981) transition theory.
2. The second student learning outcome provides Shanghai MHSE students the opportunity to
reflect on their ethnic identity through discussions and activity handouts using Phinney’s Model of
Ethnic Identity Development as a guide.
3. The third learning outcome will support the academic growth asShanghi MSHE students as they
analyze their experiences pulling on the academic integration of Vincent Tinto Theory of Student
Departure (1993) and Baxter Magolda’s Model of Epistemological Reflection.
4. Drawing on Kuh (1995), cross-cultural exchanges will provide Shanghai MSHE students multiple
engagement opportunities.
Student Characteristics
 Academic challenges
 Social engagement
 Cultural connections
Assessment Strategy
Advanced
Competent
Basic
Needs
Improvement
SLO#1
Students
Studentsdefended,(Organizes
Values) through conversation,
own thoughts/feelings
regarding the material
observed during the trip by
providing substantial input in
discussion.
Studentsinitiated
(values) conversation
about own
thoughts/feelings
regarding the material
observed during the trip
by providing input in
discussion.
Students did not share
(receive phenomena)
thoughts/feelings
regarding the material
observed during the trip
by not providing input
in discussion.
SLO#2
Students integrate
(synthesize) their self-culture
with a different culture by
providing three wellconceptualized similarities.
Students connect
(contextualize) their
self-culture with a
different culture by
providing two
Students shared
(respond to
phenomena) own
thoughts/feelings
regarding the material
observed during the trip
by naming their
emotional state and
providing little to no
input in discussion.
Students applied their
self-culture with a
different culture by
providing one similarity.
Students could not
provide one similarity
with their self-culture
with a different culture.
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
26
similarities.
Student distinguished
Student recognized
Students could not
(analyze) differences in (Aspect Identification)
observe differences
past knowledge about
differences in past
form past knowledge of
cultures by providing
knowledge about
cultures and new
two key findings that
cultures by providing
findings.
differed from initial
one key findings that
perception, and
differed from initial
describe why.
perception.
*Student Learning Outcomes are based from Hoffman (2015) Designing Theory-Informed Rubrics
SLO#3
Student integrated
(transcendence) past
knowledge about cultures, by
providing two findings that
differed from initial
perception, with adjusted
perceptions.
Set-Up, Materials Needed, etc.
 Transportation
o Buses transport students and instructors to and from select destination.
 Catering
o Catering provided by Subway. Lunch boxes are picked up prior to lunchtime.
 Admission
o Coordinators purchase tickets prior to activity.
o Coordinators arrange tours prior to activity.
 Notepads and writing utensils
o Students bring note-taking items.
Activity Outline*
1. Absolute Learning
a. Prior to activity, instructors pass out handout (1 minute).
b. Students travel on buses or on own to select destinations as a whole group (time varies).
i. Autry National Center, Los Angeles, CA(September)
ii. Various ethnic communities, Los Angeles, CA (October)
iii. Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA), Los Angeles, CA (November)
iv. Disney California Adventure - California Story Tour, Anaheim, CA (December)
c. Instructors and/or tour guides present facts and history relative to location (time varies).
d. Students have break for lunch (30 minutes).
e. Students engage in self-guided tour, exploring areas of interest (time varies).
2. Transitional Learning
a. Following tour, instructors and students meet at designated group location (e.g., picnic
tables, conference room, etc. as available).
b. Instructors ask students to reflect on content learned from the tour by completing first
question on the handout (see below, 5 minutes). Tell students to keep paper until end of
day.
i. Guiding question: What do you know about _____?
3. Independent Knowing
a. In large group, instructors ask students to share their views and opinions regarding the
subject matter (15 minutes).
i. Guiding question: What do you think about _____?
4. Contextual Knowing
a. Divide students into groups of 3 (1 minute).
b. Instructors ask students to make connections between their social life and the subject
matter presented (15 minutes).
i. Instructors encourage students to critique peers’ viewpoints and apply course
content to the subject matter.
5. Assessment
a. Instructors ask students to reflect on their ethnic identity by completing second question
on the handout (see below, 10 minutes).
b. Instructors collect papers to assess in light of the rubric.
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
27
Sample Handout
1. What did you learn about ___________ from the tour?
2. How did the information provided on the tour affect your understanding of your ethnic identity?
Consider your thoughts about ethnic identity prior to the tour and after the debrief.
initial four steps of the lesson plan roughly follow Baxter Magolda’s Epistemological Reflection Model
of cognitive learning.
*The
Anticipated Budget
September (Autry National Center): $803+tax
Transportation: $400 entire day (estimated)
Admission: $12 per person x 23 people (anticipated) = $288+tax
Food (Subway): $5 per lunch box x 23 people (anticipated) = $115+tax
October (Various ethnic communities): $400
Transportation: $400 entire day (estimated)
Admission: $0
Food: not provided
November (LACMA): $803+tax
Transportation: $400 entire day (estimated)
Admission: $12 per person x 23 people (anticipated) = $288+tax
Food (Subway): $5 per lunch box x 23 people (anticipated) = $115+tax
December: $2507+tax
Transportation: not provided
Admission: $109 per person x 23 people (anticipated) = $2507+tax
Food: not provided
Estimated Total: $4513+tax
Assessment Results
TBD
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
28
Appendix D
SHANGHAI COHORT CO-CURRICULAR PROGRAM LESSON PLAN
Professional Development Series
Student Learning Outcomes
1. SWiBAT share how their learning style (according to Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory) by providing
three examples.
2. SWiBAT analyzed the case study to student services by providing a thorough presentation (12
minutes).
3. SWiBATconnect (contextualization) the needs of the students in the case study with at least two
student services and two theoretical frameworks.
Primary Learning Domains Addressed
 Leadership
 Education
 Social Justice & Advocacy
 Personal & Professional Development
Connections to Theory and/or Student Characteristics
Theory
1. The first student learning outcome will provide Shanghai MSHE students an opportunity to
explore their learning styles from their results of Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory.
2. The second and third student learning outcomes will assist Shanghai MSHE students in their
development of competence and mature interpersonal relationships utilizing Chickering and
Reissner’s (1993) theory of identity development.
3. The thirdstudent learning outcome integrates two clusters of student development theory – the
intended shifts in learning to include emotion, thought/reflection, and action are consistent with
Jarvis’(2006) experiential learning theory; students will additionally draw upon specific aspects of
Schlossberg’s(1981) transition theory and the 4 S Model.
4. Drawing on Kuh (1995), the student learning outcomes will provide Shanghai MSHE students
multiple engagement opportunities.
5. To support their academic growth, the three student learning outcomes provide Shanghai MSHE
students opportunity for academic integration pulling on Vincent Tinto Theory of Student
Departure (1993).
Student Characteristics
 Academic challenges
 Social engagement: peer learning
 Cultural connections: group oriented (collectivistic)
Assessment Strategy
Advanced
SLO#1 Students qualify how
SLO#2
Competent
Basic
Needs Improvement
their learning style
(according to Kolb’s
Learning Style Inventory)
by providing three
examples.
Students shared how
their learning style
(according to Kolb’s
Learning Style Inventory)
by providing two
examples.
Student could not identify
how their learning style
(according to Kolb’s
Learning Style Inventory)
applied to their learning
style.
Students integrate
(synthesize) the case
study to student services
by providing a thorough
presentation (15
minutes).
Students analyzed the
case study to student
services by providing a
well- constructed
presentation (12
minutes).
Students answered
(respond to phenomena)
how their learning style
(according to Kolb’s
Learning Style Inventory)
by providing one
examples.
Students applied the
case study to student
services by providing a
good presentation (9
minutes).
Students were not able
to case study to student
services by providing a
good presentation (9
minutes).
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
29
Student integrated
Student connected
Student recognized
Students observed their
(transcendence) the
(contextualization) the
(Aspect Identification)
experience as a mentee
needs of the students in
needs of the students in
the needs of the
to their learning by
the case study with at
the case study with at
students in the case
sharing one experience.
least three student
least two student
study with at least two
services and two
services and two
student services and two
theoretical frameworks
theoretical frameworks.
theoretical frameworks.
from different clusters.
*Student Learning Outcomes are based from Hoffman (2015) Designing Theory-Informed Rubrics
SLO#3
Set-Up, Materials Needed, etc.
 Room reservations
o University Conference Center reserves meeting room in TSU each month.
 White board, markers, tables
o Final month requires two rooms: (1) presentation room and (2) lunch room
 Presentation room: projector, screen
 Lunch room: catering from Gastronome
 Printed copy of case study and judging criteria
o One handout per student
o Case study is retrieved from past NASPA Annual Case Study Competition.
Activity Outline*
1. Concrete Experience (Month 1)
a. Explain the purpose of the case study. Allow time and space for questions (5 minutes).
b. Divide students into groups of 3 and assign a cohort 7 facilitator (1 minute).
c. Give students printed copies of case study and judging criteria (1 minute).
d. Instruct students to thoroughly read case study and identify key aspects of the case study
including the problems/issues (3 minutes).
e. Allot time for students to read and analyze case study with a cohort 7 facilitator. Program
coordinator is present to clarify concepts or instructions if needed (time varies).
2. Reflective Observation (Month 2)
a. Instruct students to sit with their case study groups.
b. Summarize the details of case study on whiteboard (10 minutes).
c. Instruct students to choose the role of a student affairs professional presented in the case
study (2 minutes).
d. Instruct students to consider background information and context from perspective of the
chosen role. Program coordinator is present to clarify concepts or instructions if needed
(time varies).
3. Abstract Conceptualization (Month 3)
a. Instruct students to sit with their case study groups.
b. Have each group share what role they selected (3 minutes).
c. Pass out list of suggested theories for use in case study (1 minute).
d. Instruct students to use theories, literature, and/or best practices to design interventions in
light of chosen role. Program coordinator is present to clarify concepts or instructions if
needed (time varies).
e. Instruct students to prepare a visual presentation of their case study incorporating all aspects
previously devised.
4. Active Experimentation (Month 4)
a. Case study groups are assigned a presentation time.
b. Each group presents their case study in front a faculty judging panel (15 minutes maximum
per group)
c. Judges can ask questions regarding case study presentation (5 minutes).
d. Students receive lunch after their presentation concludes.
e. Within one week, all presentations are made available on Google Drive for students to
access.
5. Assessment
a. During lunch, students work in their case study groups to complete the assessment form.
MSHE SHANGHAI CO-CURRICULAR INTERVENTIONS
*As
30
demonstrated in Hoffman’s (2015) case study example, the initial four steps of the lesson plan roughly
follow Kolb’s (1984) cycle of experiential learning.
Anticipated Budget
Lunch: 30 people (anticipated) x $8 per person = $240
Assessment Results
TBD