Literature DB >> 17548875

Prescribed active learning increases performance in introductory biology.

Scott Freeman1, Eileen O'Connor, John W Parks, Matthew Cunningham, David Hurley, David Haak, Clarissa Dirks, Mary Pat Wenderoth.   

Abstract

We tested five course designs that varied in the structure of daily and weekly active-learning exercises in an attempt to lower the traditionally high failure rate in a gateway course for biology majors. Students were given daily multiple-choice questions and answered with electronic response devices (clickers) or cards. Card responses were ungraded; clicker responses were graded for right/wrong answers or participation. Weekly practice exams were done as an individual or as part of a study group. Compared with previous versions of the same course taught by the same instructor, students in the new course designs performed better: There were significantly lower failure rates, higher total exam points, and higher scores on an identical midterm. Attendance was higher in the clicker versus cards section; attendance and course grade were positively correlated. Students did better on clicker questions if they were graded for right/wrong answers versus participation, although this improvement did not translate into increased scores on exams. In this course, achievement increases when students get regular practice via prescribed (graded) active-learning exercises.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17548875      PMCID: PMC1885904          DOI: 10.1187/cbe.06-09-0194

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ        ISSN: 1931-7913            Impact factor:   3.325


  8 in total

1.  Evaluating a science diversity program at UC Berkeley: more questions than answers.

Authors:  John Matsui; Roger Liu; Caroline M Kane
Journal:  Cell Biol Educ       Date:  2003

2.  Student retention of course content is improved by collaborative-group testing.

Authors:  Ronald N Cortright; Heidi L Collins; David W Rodenbaugh; Stephen E DiCarlo
Journal:  Adv Physiol Educ       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 2.288

3.  Education. Scientific teaching.

Authors:  Jo Handelsman; Diane Ebert-May; Robert Beichner; Peter Bruns; Amy Chang; Robert DeHaan; Jim Gentile; Sarah Lauffer; James Stewart; Shirley M Tilghman; William B Wood
Journal:  Science       Date:  2004-04-23       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Doing more for Kate.

Authors:  Thomas Cech; Donald Kennedy
Journal:  Science       Date:  2005-12-16       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Teaching more by lecturing less.

Authors:  Jennifer K Knight; William B Wood
Journal:  Cell Biol Educ       Date:  2005

6.  Diversity. Preparing minority scientists and engineers.

Authors:  Michael F Summers; Freeman A Hrabowski
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-03-31       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Enhancing diversity in science: is teaching science process skills the answer?

Authors:  Clarissa Dirks; Matthew Cunningham
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 3.325

8.  A threat in the air. How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance.

Authors:  C M Steele
Journal:  Am Psychol       Date:  1997-06
  8 in total
  94 in total

1.  Using clickers in nonmajors- and majors-level biology courses: student opinion, learning, and long-term retention of course material.

Authors:  Kirsten Crossgrove; Kristen L Curran
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.325

2.  The Genetics Concept Assessment: a new concept inventory for gauging student understanding of genetics.

Authors:  Michelle K Smith; William B Wood; Jennifer K Knight
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.325

3.  A delicate balance: integrating active learning into a large lecture course.

Authors:  J D Walker; Sehoya H Cotner; Paul M Baepler; Mark D Decker
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.325

4.  Sharing in the classroom.

Authors:  William B Wood
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.325

5.  Teaching creativity and inventive problem solving in science.

Authors:  Robert L DeHaan
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.325

6.  Analysis of students' aptitude to provide meaning to images that represent cellular components at the molecular level.

Authors:  Hassen-Reda Dahmani; Patricia Schneeberger; Ijsbrand M Kramer
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.325

7.  Active learning and student-centered pedagogy improve student attitudes and performance in introductory biology.

Authors:  Peter Armbruster; Maya Patel; Erika Johnson; Martha Weiss
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.325

8.  Long-term retention of knowledge and critical thinking skills in developmental biology.

Authors:  Diane C Darland; Jeffrey S Carmichael
Journal:  J Microbiol Biol Educ       Date:  2012-12-03

9.  Does displaying the class results affect student discussion during peer instruction?

Authors:  Kathryn E Perez; Eric A Strauss; Nicholas Downey; Anne Galbraith; Robert Jeanne; Scott Cooper
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 3.325

10.  How accurate is peer grading?

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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.