Class G
In Class G, backward stepwise multiple regression was used to explain students'
total stress using variables of cognitive style gap and student demographics including
age, gender, number of similar courses taken, and college classification. However, no
model significantly explained student stress with these independent variables.
Total student motivation was regressed with the same independent variables to
find the best fitting model. Again, no significant model had explained student motivation
in Class G.
Class H
In Class H, two independent variables explained the dependent variable student
stress using a backward stepwise regression analysis. They include rules/group
conformity cognitive style gap (P=-.36) and number of similar courses taken by the
student (P =.21). In this model, rules/group conformity cognitive style gap was more
important in explaining the variance of student stress. In Class H, students with an
adaptive 5-point rule/group conformity cognitive style gap have an average 2.55 points
higher than students with no rule/group conformity gap while controlling for number of
similar courses taken by the student. The total stress scale used in this study had an 88-
point range. The data suggests that students in Class H with a higher adaptive rule/group
conformity gap with this innovative faculty member have higher total stress scores. This
finding indicated that in Class H, as student rule/group conformity cognitive style gap
moved from more innovative to adaptive, students have higher levels of stress. The
model had an adjusted R2 of .13 indicating that 13% of the variance of stress in Class H
was from these two variables (p<.05). See Table 4-73 for the unstandardized coefficient
(B), intercept (Constant), and standardized coefficient (0) for Class H total stress.