1. Dare to Compare: An Examination of Initial Individual Differences in Students Enrolled in a Service-Learning Course Compared to Students Enrolled in a Traditional Course Kimberly K. Hardy Boise State University REFERENCES [1] Astin, A. W., Vogelgesang, L. J., Ikeda, E. K., & Yee, J. A. (2000). How service learning affects students. Los Angeles, CA: Higher Education Research Institute, University of California. [2] Scarr, S. & McCartney, K. (1983). How people make their own environments: A theory of genotype- environmental effects. Child Development, 54, 424-435. [3] Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO five- factor inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. [4] Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public-domain, personality inventory measuring the lower- level facets of several five-factor models. In I. J. Deary, I. Mervielde, F. Ostendorf, & F. De Fruyt (Eds.). Personality psychology in Europe (vol. 7, pp. 7-28). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press. [5] McAdams, K. K., & Donnellan, M. B. (2009). Facets of personality and drinking in first-year college students. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 207-212. RESULTS CONTINUED Service-Learning vs. Traditional Classroom Initial Assessment Traditional classroom participants tended to be slightly more trusting, orderly, dutiful, achievement striving, self-disciplined, assertive, and active and had slightly higher levels of self-efficacy than the service-learning participants when comparing d-effect sizes. Traditional classroom participants tended to be moderately more conscientious overall compared to the service-learning participants. The service-learning participants tended to be slightly more excited, anxious, depressed, immoderate, neurotic, intellectual, and open to experience than the traditional classroom participants. Service-Learning vs. Traditional Classroom Final Assessment Service-learning students were moderately higher on intellect and slightly higher on sympathy, gregariousness, excitement, anxiety, anger, depression, vulnerability, overall Neuroticism, emotionality, and overall Openness to Experience compared to the traditional students. Traditional students were moderately higher on cooperation and self-discipline, and were slightly higher on trust, morality, overall Agreeableness, self-efficacy, cautiousness, overall Conscientiousness, and cheerfulness than the service-learning students. Although personality traits remained fairly stable longitudinal, there were a few changes. Service-learners were lower on morality at the end of the semester than at the beginning. Likewise, service-learning students were slightly more friendly, active, vulnerable, and adventuresome at the end of the semester, and they were slightly less orderly, dutiful, Conscientious, and immoderate at the end of the semester compared to the beginning of the semester. Traditional students were lower on order, dutifulness, cautiousness, overall Conscientiousness, anxiety, and emotionality at the end of the semester than at the beginning. Likewise, traditional students scored higher on modesty at the end of the semester. Similarly, traditional students were slightly less sympathetic, self-efficacious, achievement striving, and artistically interested, and were slightly more angry, at the end of the semester compared to the beginning of the semester. DISCUSSION Initial personality trait differences between students who opt into service-learning classes and students who opt into traditional classes exist. Therefore, we need to consider these differences when examining the effectiveness of service-learning at the end of the semester [1]. We were better able to understand group differences when examining personality facets [e.g. 5] compared to when only the overarching factors [3] were investigated. Teaching the same content in different ways appears to have different effects on personality development. Service-learning may be useful to facilitate development of personality facets related to Extraversion and Emotional Stability (opposite of Neuroticism). Future research should examine different types of courses and control for classroom similarity. Likewise, future studies should control for previous levels of service-learning experience. RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1)Do students who opt into a Service-Learning class have different personality traits than students who opt into a more traditional class? 2)Do students who take a Service-Learning course change in ways that are different from students who take a traditional course covering the same content? ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was supported through the Boise State University Service-Learning Faculty Fellows Program. Special thanks to Faith Beyer-Hansen for her help and guidance on this project. Additionally, thanks to the other Service-Learning Faculty Fellows, Whitney Douglas, Casey Keck, and Sasha Wang, for their support and feedback on the project. Also, thanks to Matthew Genuchi for letting me recruit participants from his class. Additionally, thanks to my research assistants who helped managed the data set: Nathan Aiken, Travis Applebaum, Sara Couture, Kimberly Hayes, and Amanda Lynch. Finally, thanks to Sharlynn Thompson for displaying this poster as I am unable to travel due to medical issues. For more information about this project, please contact Kimberly Hardy at kimhardy@boisestate.edu. INTRODUCTION Service-learning, or the act of incorporating a service project related to course content into the classroom, has been associated with several positive outcomes in students [e.g. 1]. However, most of these outcomes are based on perceptions of change at the end of the semester. Active processes in personality development refer to the idea that not only do we have certain genetic-predispositions for certain traits, but these genetic predispositions cause us to choose our environments. In turn, these chosen experiences will help us to develop or enhance our inherited personality traits [2]. Therefore, people who opt into service-learning courses may be more likely to see a greater change in personality traits compared to individuals who do not select this option because they may have personality traits at the beginning of the semester that make them more likely to benefit from service-learning. The main aim of the current study was to determine whether or not there are initial individual differences in individuals who opt into a service- learning course compared to those students who opt into a more traditional classroom, and to determine if these students change in different ways at the end of the semester. METHOD Participants Participants were recruited from two different sections of abnormal psychology offered at a Western University in exchange for extra credit. 43 students (M age = 25.85, SD = 8.44) were enrolled in a service-learning abnormal psychology course. 56 students (M age = 26.20, SD = 7.83) were enrolled in a more traditional abnormal psychology course that did not include service-learning. 23 service-learning students and 38 traditional students completed the second wave of data collection. Procedure Participants completed the online survey during the first week of the semester, prior to the service-learning students starting their required service projects. The second wave of data collection occurred between the last week of classes and finals week. Data was collected after the service-learning students had completed their final projects related to their service-learning experiences. Participants provided informed consent before starting the survey at each wave. Participants were partially debriefed after completing wave 1 in order to prevent student expectations from altering the results of wave 2. Participants were fully debriefed upon completing wave 2. All participants received extra credit for their participation. Other options for extra credit were made available so participants were not coerced. MEASURES The Big Five Factors of Personality The Big Five Factors of Personality [3] were measured using the 120-item International Personality Item Pool Big Five Inventory [IPIP; 4]. This inventory assess the 5 overarching factors of Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience. Participants rated each item on a scale from “1 = Strongly Disagree” to “5 = Strongly Agree.” Items were coded so that a higher scored reflected a higher degree of the construct. Additionally, the IPIP includes items to assess the 6 facets associated with each Big Five Factor (Extraversion: Friendliness, Gregariousness, Assertiveness, Activity Level, Excitement, and Cheerfulness; Agreeableness: Trust, Morality, Altruism, Cooperation, Modesty, and Sympathy; Conscientiousness: Self-Efficacy, Orderliness, Dutifulness, Achievement Striving, Self-Discipline, and Cautiousness; Neuroticism: Anxiety, Anger, Depression, Self- Consciousness, Immoderation, and Vulnerability; Openness to Experience: Imagination, Artistic Interest, Emotionality, Adventurousness, Intellect, and Liberalism. RESULTS:. Service-Learning vs. Traditional Students Single-Course Longitudinal Comparison Variable Initial dFinal d Service-Learning d Traditional d Extraversion-.13.04-.15.07 Friendliness-.16-.04-.25.07 Gregariousness-.01.24-.06.02 Assertiveness-.21-.03.11.15 Activity Level-.20-.04-.26-.03 Excitement.26.35-.15-.08 Cheerfulness-.08-.350.07 Agreeableness-.10-.33-.020 Trust-.19-.37-.10-.04 Morality.04-.28.45.07 Altruism-.08-.11.05.06 Cooperation-.11-.570.08 Modesty.04-.11-.10-.30 Sympathy-.10.22-.11.24 Conscientiousness-.41-.27.22.37 Self-Efficacy-.36-.38.07.21 Orderliness-.22.05.18.27 Dutifulness-.23-.16.23.32 Achievement Striving -.32-.11.07.26 Self-Discipline-.38-.50.09.16 Cautious-.14-.17.14.30 Neuroticism.28.23.04-.04 Anxiety.23.34.17.34 Anger.16.19-.15-.18 Depression.33.30.10-.07 Self- Consciousness.06.040-.08 Immoderation.22.00.23.02 Vulnerability.15.20-.18-.19 Openness to Experience.23.35-.02.16 Imagination.17.11.03 Artistic Interest.14.16-.01.17 Emotionality.05.22-.04.23 Adventurousness-.02.15-.17-.03 Intellect.34.54.00.16 Liberalism.12.07.01-.06 Note: A positive d-effect size indicates that the service-learning students scored higher on the trait than the traditional students in the group comparison. Positive d-effect sizes indicate that students had more of the trait at the beginning of the semester than at the end of the semester for the single-course longitudinal comparisons. Table 1. Comparisons of personality traits between service-learners and traditional students.