Literature DB >> 12189125

Problem-based writing with peer review improves academic performance in physiology.

Nancy J Pelaez1.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine whether problem-based writing with peer review (PW-PR) improves undergraduate student performance on physiology exams. Didactic lectures were replaced with assignments to give students practice explaining their reasoning while solving qualitative problems, thus transferring the responsibility for abstraction and generalization to the students. Performance on exam items about concepts taught using PW-PR was compared with performance on concepts taught using didactic lectures followed by group work. Calibrated Peer Review, a Web-delivered program, was used to collect student essays and to manage anonymous peer review after students "passed" three calibration peer reviews. Results show that the students had difficulty relating concepts. Relationship errors were categorized as (1) problems recognizing levels of organization, (2) problems with cause/effect, and (3) overgeneralizations. For example, some described cells as molecules; others thought that vesicles transport materials through the extracellular fluid. With PW-PR, class discussion was used to confront and resolve such difficulties. Both multiple-choice and essay exam results were better with PW-PR instead of lecture.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12189125     DOI: 10.1152/advan.00041.2001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Physiol Educ        ISSN: 1043-4046            Impact factor:   2.288


  11 in total

1.  Student peer assessment in evidence-based medicine (EBM) searching skills training: an experiment.

Authors:  Jonathan D Eldredge; David G Bear; Sharon J Wayne; Paul P Perea
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2013-10

2.  Writing and Thinking.

Authors:  Nancy F Fjortoft; Jacob Gettig; Nathaniel J Rhodes; Marc Scheetz
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 2.047

3.  Inter-Rater Reliability of Web-Based Calibrated Peer Review within a Pharmacy Curriculum.

Authors:  Alex N Isaacs; Monica L Miller; Tianyang Hu; Bailey Johnson; Zach A Weber
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 2.047

4.  How accurate is peer grading?

Authors:  Scott Freeman; John W Parks
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 3.325

5.  Writing to learn: an evaluation of the calibrated peer review™ program in two neuroscience courses.

Authors:  J Roxanne Prichard
Journal:  J Undergrad Neurosci Educ       Date:  2005-10-15

6.  Writing-to-learn in undergraduate science education: a community-based, conceptually driven approach.

Authors:  Julie A Reynolds; Christopher Thaiss; Wendy Katkin; Robert J Thompson
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.325

7.  Writing Assignments with a Metacognitive Component Enhance Learning in a Large Introductory Biology Course.

Authors:  Michelle Mynlieff; Anita L Manogaran; Martin St Maurice; Thomas J Eddinger
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.325

8.  We must teach more effectively: here are four ways to get started.

Authors:  Erin L Dolan; James P Collins
Journal:  Mol Biol Cell       Date:  2015-06-15       Impact factor: 4.138

9.  Identifying and Remediating Student Misconceptions in Introductory Biology via Writing-to-Learn Assignments and Peer Review.

Authors:  Audrey S Halim; Solaire A Finkenstaedt-Quinn; Laura J Olsen; Anne Ruggles Gere; Ginger V Shultz
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 3.325

10.  Peer vs. Self-Grading of Practice Exams: Which Is Better?

Authors:  Mallory A Jackson; Alina Tran; Mary Pat Wenderoth; Jennifer H Doherty
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 3.325

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.