Jim Taylor ’99 (Sociology) is an Associate Professor of Sociology-Criminology at Ohio University Zanesville. He continues to serve on OHIO’s Faculty Senate and maintain a robust research agenda.
Jim remains active in research on stigma management techniques and masculine sub-cultures, plays with his three kids every day and still logs about 5,000 miles each year on his vintage Harley Heritage Softail.
This year Jim published a couple of scholarly articles. The first appears in Sociology Compass: Taylor, J. D., & Ibañez, L. M. (2015). Sociological Approaches to Self‐injury. Sociology Compass, 9(12),1005-1014.
Abstract:
This paper reviews the burgeoning sociological literature on non-suicidal self-injury, in which individuals intentionally harm themselves by cutting, burning, scratching, or smashing their body parts. We identify challenges to studying self-injury, such as conflicting definitions and categorizations. Comparing self-injury to other behaviors such as suicide, body modification, and self-mutilation, we assert that non-suicidal self-injury deserves its own conceptual category. We explain how a critical sociological approach provides a valuable counterweight to medical and psychological studies of self-injury. In particular, this paper advances the deviance perspective. Finally, we highlight how technology has allowed self-injurers to build supportive communities in cyberspace, blurring the line between hidden and public acts. We conclude with suggestions for future directions in the study of self-injury.
Jim also has a quantitative article (forthcoming) published ahead of print via OnlineFirst, Gibbs, J.C. & Taylor, J.D. (2016). Comparing Student Self-Assessment to Individualized Instructor Feedback. Active Learning in Higher Education.
Abstract:
The literature confirms the commonsense belief that feedback promotes learning. However, personalized feedback, especially in an online environment, can be exceedingly time-consuming for the instructor and may not improve student learning. To test this, a non-random sample of students in three sections of an online statistics course received individualized feedback on weekly homework assignments that were graded solely on completion as pass/fail; students in another three sections of the course were responsible to assess their own homework (but not other projects or examinations) via posted answer keys. A total of 47 students voluntarily completed objective questions testing their knowledge of the subject matter at the end of the course. Overall, there was no difference in learning between the two groups, nor were there any differences in student satisfaction of the course or the instructor. Caveats and implications are discussed.
Comments