score of 50.05 (SD=7.80) which was 13.69 points lower than the national average for

college seniors (Kuh et al., 2001). Note that the total scores for student engagement

consisted of the three constructs measured in this study. Construct mean scores of student

engagement were also lower than the national college senior average (Kuh et al.) as

academic challenge was 8.66 points lower, active learning was 3.64 points lower and

student-faculty interaction was 1.39 points lower. This provides evidence that students in

Class G had low levels of academic challenge. See Table 4-31 for findings specific to

Class G student engagement.

Table 4-31. Class G Student Mean Scores of Engagement Constructs (n=85)
Construct Mean SD Min Max
Total student engagement 50.05 7.80 34 79
Academic challenge 24.52 4.22 16 37
Active learning 14.28 2.99 9 25
Student-faculty interaction 11.25 2.87 6 18
Note. Engagement was measured by the NSSE with 24 summated items. Possible range:
Total Engagement (24-96), Academic Challenge (11-44), Active Learning (7-28),
Student-Faculty Interaction (6-24). Coded: higher score equals higher level of
engagement.

Class H

 For Class H (N=122, n=70), 50 KAI scores were found acceptable to determine

students' cognitive style. The KAI has 32 items with a theoretical range of 32 to 160 and

mean of 95. A lower score signifies a more adaptive cognitive style and a higher score

signifies a more innovative cognitive style. The most adaptive student in Class H had a

total cognitive style score of 67, while the most innovative student had a total cognitive

style score of 135. The total cognitive style mean of Class H was 95.30 (SD=15.01)

which was 0.30 points higher than the general population mean determined by Kirton

(1999). Cognitive style construct score means were not more than one point lower or