Running head: SERVICE-LEARNING OUTCOMES 1

Short-­‐term  Immersion  Experiences:      

Assessing  for  Student  Learning  and  
Attitudinal  Change

Bryan W. Sokol, Peter D. Marle, Nicole M. Summers, and John Burke

~ Center for Service & Community Engagement and Department of

Campus Ministry ~ May 2015

“When the heart is touched by direct experience, the

mind may be challenged to change.”

(Rev. Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, S.J., 2000)

SHORT-TERM IMMERSION ASSESSMENT 2

BACKGROUND

Immersion experiences are a form of experiential learning which typically involve intensive
educational instruction and exposure to complex social issues, often taking students outside of their
“comfort zones” to critically examine their own pre-conceived notions and biases. Beyond case-
studies and other more qualitative work (e.g., Jones, Rowan-Kenyon, Ireland, Niehaus, & Skendall,
2012), empirical research and assessment practices that explore the impact of short-term immersion
experiences are limited. Bowman, Brandenberger, Mick, and Smedley (2010) conducted one of the
few quantitative studies using questionnaires to show that well-structured immersion experiences can
positively influence college students’ attitudes and understanding of social justice issues; this work
even suggested that short-term immersions can be as effective, and sometimes even more impactful,
than traditional semester-long courses.

The impact areas that Bowman et al. (2010) and others have targeted for study are generally consistent
with the intent and goals of most service-learning programs (Eyler, 2002), including:

o Instilling positive attitudes toward community engagement,

o Deepening understanding of social issues,
o Developing skills for community action and involvement, and
o Enhancing a sense of personal agency and commitment.

Still, most studies of immersion experiences have not used validated measures for all of these areas.
Moreover, meaningful assessment of service-learning, and particularly immersion experiences, should
consider longer term impact. How truly transformational are these experiences if the changes in
participants are short-lived? The few studies that have explored long-term impact (e.g., Kiely, 2004)
suggest that students struggle to sustain changes in their attitudes and actions after these experiences
have ended.

Study Overview

This study is a 3-part effort to better understand both short- and long-term impacts of SLU’s
immersion experiences, with particular emphases on students’:

o Civic Action
o Interpersonal and Problem-Solving Skills
o Political Awareness
o Leadership Skills
o Social Justice Attitudes
o Diversity Attitudes
o Spiritual Life

A validated instrument, the Civic Attitudes and Skills Questionnaire (Moely, Mercer, Ilustre, Miron, &
McFarland, 2002) or CASQ (see Appendix A for details), was used. Responses were scored on a 5-
point Likert scale (1 = no agreement; 5 = complete agreement). To help interpret results, the findings
between participants of immersion experiences and students in university residential learning
SHORT-TERM IMMERSION ASSESSMENT 3

communities—both of which share similar learning outcomes and community-building dimensions—

were compared. The impact on participants’ spiritual lives was assessed using a mix of questionnaire
items and written reflections. Finally, the analyses distinguished between immersion experiences that
place a heavy emphasis on educational outcomes and student reflection (learner-focused) versus those
experiences emphasizing direct service and less frequent reflection (doer-focused).

PART 1: COMPARING IMMERSION & LEARNING COMMUNITY EXPERIENCES

Participants from 13 immersion experiences (N = 46; M = 11, F = 33 [2 participants did not report
gender]) occurring during 2014 and 2015 were compared to students participating in SLU’s residential
learning communities (N = 30; M = 14, F = 11 [5 participants did not report gender]) in the fall and
spring semesters of the 2014-15 academic year. The LC sample was drawn from the Honors Learning
Community, the Leadership and Social Change Learning Community, and the Diversity & Unity
Learning Community, all of which completed the questionnaire in the last week of the spring semester.
Because all three LC’s generated similar results, they were combined for easier comparisons. The
immersion experiences involved a range of topics and destinations, from immigration issues at the US-
Mexico border, to educational access in Belize City, to rural poverty in West Virginia, just to name a
few. Although the immersion experiences were shorter in duration (all between 7 and 14 days), they
were predicted to yield higher scores on the CASQ subscales, as well as the spiritual life questions,
because of the highly structured and intentional programming used to prepare participants (usually
weekly meetings for 4 to 6 weeks in advance) and because of the intensity of the trip experiences
themselves. Please see Appendix B for further results of Part 1.

Results and Interpretation

• Compared with LC students, immersion participants reported higher scores, indicated by

statistically significant effect sizes (Cohen’s d), on the following subscales of the CASQ:

o Civic Action
o Social Justice Attitudes Participant’s Reflection
o Diversity Attitudes “Surprise, education, new acquaintances,
o In addition, they reported significant changes to and spiritual understanding of oneself all
their spiritual life played a role in shaping me as a whole.
This was my first immersion experience
• Similar responses (i.e., no difference statistically ever, and the people I met, the work I did,
speaking) were found for: was one of the most satisfying and
o Interpersonal & Problem Solving Skills effortless giving I have ever done.”
o Political Awareness
o Leadership Skills
SHORT-TERM IMMERSION ASSESSMENT 4

5
* (d = .56) * (d = 1.36)
4.5 * (d = 1.02)
* (d =0 .66)
4

3.5

Immersion Experience
Learning Community
* p < .05

Based on these results, the benefits of immersion experiences appear to grow from the intersection of
responsible citizenship—reflected by responses to questions on civics, social justice, and diversity—
with spiritual development. The Catholic, Jesuit identity of SLU places significant emphasis on the
integraton of faith and justice. Many times this integration remains an abstraction, but immersion
experiences provide a concrete way to experience faith and justice in action together. As one
participant noted in her reflections, “I was very surprised by how little I knew and how inter-related
the social justice issues are in the U.S. I have learned that faith and justice are so closely tied
together. That was something I hadn't really thought about before. I determined how I can make
justice a bigger part of my faith life and vice versa.”

PART 2: EXPLORING SHORT- & LONG-TERM IMPACT

To further examine the impact of immersion experiences—and provide at least a prelimary answer to
whether the changes attributed to these experiences are sustained over time—analyses for Part 2
compared participants’ responses who completed the questionnaire immediately following their
immersion (Spring 2015; N = 22) to those whose experience occurred at least 4-months earlier (i.e.,
Spring 2014, Summer 2014, Winter 2014; N = 24). Additional analyses also compared participants’
perceptions of whether their experiences were more learner-focused (N = 17) or doer-focused (N = 29).
This distinction explored the importance of critical reflection, particularly in group exchanges, for
promoting the educational benefits of immersion experiences. Service-learning researchers Youniss
and Yates (1997, p. 160) have remarked, “whereas private reflection serves the purpose of
coordinating thoughts [perspectives] within an individual, reflection through discussion helps
coordinate thoughts [perspectives] among individuals. In exchanging ideas, arguing, defending points
SHORT-TERM IMMERSION ASSESSMENT 5

of view, and the like, students implicitly work toward mutual understanding.” Learner-focused
experiences were more effective in creating the conditions for richer group dialogue, interaction, and
reflection. See Appendix B for more details about Part 2 results.

Results and Interpretation

• The analyses of immediate versus delayed (≥ 4-months)
questionnaire respondents showed relative stability across
the various subscales of the CASQ and spirituality items,
with statistically significant differences only for Civic
Action and Interpersonal/Problem-Solving subscales.
Participant’s Reflection
I learned that people’s stories are what
motivate me to serve. I learned that
immersing myself in a social justice
issue is where I find purpose, meaning
and motivation. This trip has affirmed
gifts of building relationships.

5 * (d = .90) * (d = .70)
4.5
4
3.5
3

Immediate
* p < .05 ≥ 4 Months

The findings suggest that civic action and interpersonal dialogue are challenging for students to
sustain, at least at the same level of intensity, beyond their immersion experiences. Given the depth of
opportunity that most immersions provide for cultivating dimensions of collective action and
exchange, this is not an unexpected outcome. The kind of “civic life” and engagement modeled on
immersion experiences stands well beyond the more normative levels students experience on a day-to-
day basis. The results here are consistent with Kiely’s (2004) research indicating that students often
struggle with a “chameleon complex” upon reentry to “normal life” from immersion experiences.
“They feel disillusioned that people seemed detached from issues of global poverty and/or get annoyed
when they question cultural norms that value consumption and materialism….Frequently, students feel
compelled to hide their ‘true colors’, and blend in as a defense mechanism to avoid being chastised for
having ‘radical views.’” (Kiely, 2004, p. 15). Moreover, many students grapple with the complexity
and seeming enormity of the social issues they confront, often for the first time, through immersion
experiences. As one student remarked in his reflection, “My expectation to come up with a solution
was not met, and I realize now why that was really an impossible expectation to have.” This statement
SHORT-TERM IMMERSION ASSESSMENT 6

expresses less disillusionment than uncertainty. Students often grapple with the best way to move
forward upon reentry, having now been firsthand witnesses to the suffering and injustices of the world.

Participant’s Reflection
“I was surprised by how little I knew. Going into each encounter I thought I knew the main message
of pretty much every perspective we were going to hear. But actually seeing the emotional delivery
really put a new meaning behind the words they were saying. This trip really helped me get in touch
with a more compassionate side of myself and has inspired me in relation to the resiliency of the
human spirit.”

5
* (d = .81) * (d = .85)
4.5
p = .07
* (d = .70) (d = .56)
4

3.5

Learner-Focused
Doer-Focused
* p < .05

• Students who reported a learner-focused experience

Participant’s Reflection
scored significantly higher on Civic Action,
“I will never forget some of these stories I
Political Awareness, and Social Justice Attitudes
when compared to their doer-focused counterparts. heard or the emotions laced with every
perspective and perception….I learned also
• There was also a large difference on the Leadership
that I have so much more to learn and I really
Skills subscale, which approached statistical
think that this trip has encouraged me to
significance (i.e., p<.05). All other comparisons
investigate more….”
suggested deeper impact for learner-focused
experiences, although none reach statistical
significance in these analyses.
SHORT-TERM IMMERSION ASSESSMENT 7

Learning during immersion experiences often occurs through affective channels that, in turn, reinforce
much of the information to which participants had previously been exposed through more intellectual
channels. Father Kolvenbach (2000), former Superior General of the Society of Jesus, while
commenting on the broader goals of Jesuit higher education, argued that direct experiences or
“contact” with other people is a more effective catalyst for intellectual inquiry and moral reflection
than the abstract “concepts” conveyed in textbooks and classroom lectures. Students’ questionnaire
responses and reflections support Fr. Kolvenbach’s (2000) contention and the value of experiential
learning that is coupled with critical reflection.

Participant’s Reflection
“My immersion experience provided me with the
opportunity to further explore the complications I
have faced with discerning my faith. Through
prayer, mass, and discussions, I was able to
further understand where I stand in my beliefs,
and I have been motivated to continue searching
for the answers to the meaning of life.”

PART 3: PRE- & POST-IMMERSION COMPARISON

A stronger method for capturing the impact of immersion experiences involves pre- and post-
assessment of participants—that is, to track potential changes longitudinally over time. One of the
SLU Spring 2015 immersion experiences was able to use the CASQ in this way, administering the
questionnaire to participants shortly before and after the trip portion of the immersion. Nine
undergraduate students (M = 4, F = 5) contributed to this part of the study. The students explored
immigration issues and human rights abuses at the U.S.-Mexico Border through a 9-day excursion to
Nogales, Arizona, and other destinations in the U.S. Southwest. Most of their time was spent at the
Kino Border Initiative (KBI)—a bi-national, faith-based organization responding to the urgent needs of
migrant people at the border and dedicated to promoting long-term change in three areas: humanitarian
aid to migrants, raising public awareness of injustices at the border, and applied scholarly research and
social justice advocacy for changes in immigration policy. For a detailed description of the results,
please refer to Appendix B.
SHORT-TERM IMMERSION ASSESSMENT 8

Results and Interpretation

• Participants reported significant increases (pre- to post-immersion) on the CASQ subscales for:
o Interpersonal & Problem Solving Skills
o Social Justice Attitudes

• The sample size (N=9) was essentially too small to show statistical increases in the predicted
direction for the other subscales. Still, these findings suggest that the KBI experience was
impactful across all areas of the CASQ, especially when also considering students’ reflections.

5
* (d = .79)
* (d = .37)
4.5

3.5
Pre
3
Post

* p < .05

Participant’s Reflection
“My world perspective was greatly broadened after learning about the challenges that immigrants
face at the border. It made me empathize with their struggles, and coming from a faith lens, I saw
these people as those greatly in need of a compassionate response. Overall, it strengthened my
personal sense of responsibility toward others.”

GENERAL DISCUSSION

Overall, the three parts of this study demonstrated the positive impact of immersion experiences,
indicating that many changes students experience are sustained over time. Because of the relative
paucity of research on the long-term outcomes of immersion experiences, as well as limited use of
quantitative methods, this study adds some depth to the existing scholarly literature. In particular, the
current study:

• Used a matched control group (i.e., the learning community) to investigate and interpret
differences between groups,
SHORT-TERM IMMERSION ASSESSMENT 9

• Compared across immersion experience cohorts to detect differences over time (although this
was not a within-subjects design),
• Analyzed differences between learner-focused and doer-focused experiences to stress the
significance of critical reflection, and finally,
• Explored pre- and post-immersion impact, using the CASQ with a small sample of participants.

Findings from all three parts of the study suggest the CASQ is a worthwhile instrument to use in future
studies and assessment of short-term immersion experiences.

Limitations and Future Directions

• Ideally, future work will use a pre/post design such as in Part 3, with a larger sample and an
additional 6-month follow-up assessment to better understand long-term impact.

• Additional measures should be used to demonstrate learning outcomes and impact, especially
related to spiritual growth. A better measure for faith/spirituality would be helpful in
understanding students’ reflections, such as this one: “The experience challenged my faith
tradition and worldview, but helped provide a support system to help me rebuild and reclaim
them as well.”

• A deeper analysis and direct connections between more explicit learning objectives and
particular outcomes are needed to better inform and evaluate instructional practices, as well as
the content of critical reflection exercises, for the different immersion experiences.

• Additional comparison groups, particularly those who have some sort of intellectual
background with the immersion topics and issues, would help with understanding the role that
direct experience, or “contact,” has in the transformational changes that participants report.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

• This report was created as part of a graduate seminar in psychology taught by Dr. Bryan Sokol,
Director of SLU’s Center for Service and Community Engagement.

• Special thanks go to the immersion experience leaders in the Department of Campus Ministry,
Kaleigh Mrowka, the Learning Community Coordinator in the Division of Student
Development, and Tony King, the Residential Hall Coordinator for Griesedieck Complex, as
well as all the students who took the time to share their thoughts and respond to the research
team’s questionnaire.

• Photos in this report are compliments of Dr. Sokol, and taken with permission at:

o KBI in Nogales, Sonora, Mexico

SHORT-TERM IMMERSION ASSESSMENT 10

o Casa Vides, a house of hospitality for political asylum applicants and other migrants, in
El Paso, Texas, U.S.A.

REFERENCES

Bowman, N. A., Brandenberger, J. W., Mick, C. S. & Smedley, C. T. (2010). Sustained immersion
courses and student orientations to equality, justice, and social responsibility: The role of short-
term service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service, 20-31.

Eyler, J. (2002). Reflection: Linking service and learning – linking students and communities. Journal
of Social Issues, 58 (3), 517-534.

Jones, S. R., Rowan-Kenyon, H., T., Ireland, S. M., Niehaus, E., & Skendall, K. C. (2012). The
meaning students make as participants in short-term immersion programs. Journal of College
Student Development, 53, 201-220. doi: 10.1353/csg.2012.0026.

Kiely, R. (2004). A chameleon with a complex: Searching for transformation in international service-
learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 5-20.

Kolvenbach, P. H. (2000). The service of faith and the promotion of justice in American Jesuit higher
education. Keynote address presented at the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities,
Santa Clara, CA.

Moely, B. E., Mercer, S. H., Ilustre, V., Miron, D., & McFarland, M. (2002). Psychometric properties
and correlates of the civic attitudes and skills questionnaire (CASQ): A measure of students’
attitudes related to service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, Spring,
15-26.

Youniss, J., & Yates, M. (1997). Community service and social responsibility in youth. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
SHORT-TERM IMMERSION ASSESSMENT 11

Appendix A
CASQ Items
All items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = no agreement; 5 = complete agreement).
Civic Action
I plan to do some volunteer work.
I am committed to making a positive difference.
I plan to participate in a community action program.
I plan to become an active member of my community.
In the future, I plan to participate in a community service organization.
I plan to help others who are in difficulty.
I plan to become involved in programs to help clean up the environment.
I plan to become involved in my community.
Interpersonal & Problem-Solving Skills
I can work cooperatively with a group of people.
When trying to understand the position of others, I try to place myself in their position.
I can successfully resolve conflicts with others.
I can easily get along with people.
I can communicate well with others.
I can think analytically in solving problems.
I can listen to other people’s opinions.
I can think logically in solving problems.
I try to find effective ways of solving problems.
I find it easy to make friends.
I tend to solve problems by talking them out.
I try to place myself in the place of others in trying to assess their current situation.
Political Awareness
I understand the issues facing this nation.
I plan to be involved in the political process.
I am aware of the events happening in my local community.
I am knowledgeable of the issues facing the world.
I am aware of current events.
I understand the issues facing (my city’s) community.
Leadership Skills
I am a better follower than a leader.*
I am a good leader.
I would rather have somebody else take the lead in formulating a solution.*
I have the ability to lead a group of people.
I feel that I can make a difference in the world.
Social Justice Attitudes
In order for problems to be solved, we need to change public policy.
I don’t understand why some people are poor when there are boundless opportunities available to them.*
We need to change people’s attitudes in order to solve social problems.
We need to institute reforms within the current system to change our communities.
Individuals are responsible for their own misfortunes.*
People are poor because they choose to be poor.*
We need to look no further than the individual in assessing his/her problems.*
It is important that equal opportunity be available to all people.
Diversity Attitudes
I enjoy meeting people who come from backgrounds very different from my own.
I find it difficult to relate to people from a different race or culture.*
Cultural diversity within a group makes the group more interesting and effective.
I prefer the company of people who are very similar to me in background and expressions.*
It is hard for a group to function effectively when the people involved come from very diverse backgrounds.*
(* denotes reverse-scored item)
SHORT-TERM IMMERSION ASSESSMENT 12

Appendix B

Part 1 Results:

In order to collapse the three individual learning communities into a single comparison group,
these communities were first analyzed upon the dependent measures using a one-way ANOVA.
Results suggested that the three communities were similar on all measures (i.e., Civic Action,
Interpersonal & Problem Solving Skills, Political Awareness, Leadership Skills, Social Justice
Attitudes, and Faith [all F values < 1.12]), with one exception—Diversity Attitudes, F(2, 26) = 3.77, p
= .037. Within the Diversity Attitudes subscale, the Diversity and Unity (M = 3.30, SD = 0.35)
community scored significantly lower than the Honors community (M = 4.01, SD = 0.52), and the
Leadership and Social Change community (M = 3.68, SD = 0.51) was not significantly different than
either of the former groups. Because of the similarities among the learning communities, it was
decided to combine these groups for comparison to students in immersion experiences.

Regarding the Civic Action scale, students taking part in immersion experiences (M = 4.39, SD
= 0.43) reported significantly higher scores than students involved in learning communities (M = 4.11,
SD = 0.58), t(74) = 2.40, p = .019, d = 0.56. Additionally, social justice attitudes were significantly
higher for the immersion experience group (M = 4.29, SD = 0.50) than the learning community group
(M = 3.77, SD = 0.52), t(74) = 4.42, p < .001, d = 1.02. Diversity attitudes scores were also
significantly higher for the immersion experience group (M = 4.08, SD = 0.37) than the learning
community group (M = 3.82, SD = 0.54), t(47.15 [Welsh’s t test performed due to unequal group
variances]) = 2.27, p = .028, d = 0.66. Finally, students participating in immersion experiences
reported significantly higher changes in their faith due to their participation (M = 4.48, SD = 0.48) than
students in the learning communities (M = 3.67, SD = 1.02), t(30.40 [Welsh’s t test used due to
unequal group variances]) = 3.76, p = .001, d = 1.36.

Participants did not report any significant differences regarding their interpersonal and
problem-solving skills scores (M = 4.43, SD = 0.33) compared to the learning community group (M =
4.31, SD = 0.46), t(48.47 [Welsh’s t test used due to unequal group variances) = 1.15, p = .258, d =
0.33. Nor were any differences noted in political awareness comparing immersion experiences (M =
3.75, SD = 0.59) and learning communities (M = 3.88, SD = 0.62), t(74) = -0.88, p = .383, d = 0.20.
Further, participants reported similar leadership skills comparing immersion experiences (M = 3.95,
SD = 0.44) and learning communities (M = 3.97, SD = 0.55), t(74) = -0.23, p = .819, d = 0.05.

Part 2 Results:

Immediate Compared to Delayed Follow-up

Regarding the Civic Action scale, participants who took the survey immediately following their
immersion experience reported significantly higher scores (M = 4.57, SD = 0.35) than the delayed
follow-up participants (M = 4.22, SD = 0.43), t(44) = 2.99, p = .005, d = 0.30. Additionally,
participants who took the survey immediately following their immersion experience reported
significantly higher interpersonal and problem-solving skills scores (M = 4.54, SD = 0.33) than the
delayed follow-up participants (M = 4.33, SD = 0.31), t(44) = 2.33, p = .024, d = 0.70.
SHORT-TERM IMMERSION ASSESSMENT 13

Participants did not report any significant differences regarding their political awareness
comparing immediate (M = 3.86, SD = 0.53) and delayed follow-up (M = 3.65, SD = 0.63), t(44) =
1.22, p = .229, d = 0.37. Nor did participants report a significant gain regarding their leadership skills
comparing immediate (M = 3.88, SD = 0.49) and delayed follow-up (M = 3.65, SD = 0.39), t(44) = -
1.03, p = .311, d = 0.31. Additionally, social justice attitudes did not show any differences comparing
immediate (M = 4.28, SD = 0.50) and delayed follow-up (M = 4.31, SD = 0.50), t(44) = -0.20, p = .846,
d = 0.06. Nor did diversity attitudes show any significant differences comparing immediate (M = 4.07,
SD = 0.37) and delayed follow-up (M = 4.08, SD = 0.38), t(44) = -0.15, p = .882, d = 0.05.

However, faith scores showed a marginally significant difference in that participants who
completed the survey immediately after their immersion experience reported significantly higher faith-
based changes (M = 4.63, SD = 0.38) than students who completed the survey following at least a 4-
month delay (M = 4.35, SD = 0.53), t(41) = 2.00, p = .052, d = 0.62.

Learners Compared to Doers

Regarding the Civic Action scale, service-learners reported significantly higher scores (M =
4.58, SD = 0.32) than service-doers (M = 4.28, SD = 0.45), t(42.17 [Welsh’s t test performed due to
unequal group variances]) = 2.63, p = .012, d = 0.81. Service-learners also reported significantly higher
political awareness scores (M = 3.98, SD = 0.42) than service-doers (M = 3.62, SD = 0.64), t(43.41
[Welsh’s t test performed due to unequal group variances]) = 2.31, p = .026, d = 0.70. Additionally,
service-learners reported significantly higher social justice attitude scores (M = 4.54, SD = 0.38) than
service doers (M = 4.15, SD = 0.50), t(44) = 2.82, p = .007, d = 0.85.

Service-learners reported similar interpersonal and problem-solving skills scores (M = 4.51, SD

= 0.32) as service-doers (M = 4.39, SD = 0.34), t(44) = 1.23, p = .225, d = 0.37. Nor did diversity
attitudes show any significant differences comparing service-learners (M = 4.13, SD = 0.33) and
service-doers (M = 4.04, SD = 0.40), t(44) = 0.80, p = .426, d = 0.24. In addition, faith scores showed
no differences comparing service-learners (M = 4.61, SD = 0.45) and service doers (M = 4.40, SD =
0.49), t(41) = 1.41, p = .164, d = 0.44.

Finally, service learners showed a marginally higher leadership skills score (M = 4.10, SD =
0.35) compared to service-doers (M = 3.86, SD = 0.47), t(44) = 1.84, p = .072, d = 0.55.

Part 3 Results:

All t-tests performed were paired, and Type I error was set at .05. Also, all items were recorded
on a 1 (Completely Disagree) to 5 (Completely Agree) Likert scale, and the scale means are reported
below. Additionally, due to the repeated analyses, effect size indices (d^ ) have been computed using the
mean gain for the numerator and the participants’ pre-survey standard deviation units for the
denominator. Nine pre-post pairings are reported below.

Regarding the Civic Action scale (hypothesized to increase), although in the hypothesized
direction, students did not report any significant increase from prior to the immersion experience (M =
4.19, SD = 0.66) to afterward (M = 4.39, SD = 0.63), t(8) = 1.70, p = .127, d^ = 0.30. Additionally,
participants did not report a significant gain regarding their political awareness from pre (M = 3.41, SD
= 0.83) to post (M = 3.50, SD = 0.53), t(8) = 0.57, p = .584, d^ = 0.11. Nor did participants report a
SHORT-TERM IMMERSION ASSESSMENT 14

significant gain regarding their leadership skills from pre (M = 3.92, SD = 0.54) to post (M = 4.09, SD
= 0.60), t(8) = 1.33, p = .220, d^ = 0.32. Finally, diversity attitudes did not show a significant gain from
pre (M = 3.88, SD = 0.58) to post (M = 4.00, SD = 0.63), t(8) = 0.66, p = .528, d^ = 0.21.

However, participants reported a significant gain in their interpersonal and problem-solving

skills from pre (M = 4.26, SD = 0.36) to post (M = 4.54, SD = 0.38), t(8) = 2.77, p = .024, d^ = 0.76.
Social justice attitudes also showed a significant gain from pre (M = 4.08, SD = 0.63) to post (M =
4.33, SD = 0.42), t(8) = 2.35, p = .046, d^ = 0.40.