Literature DB >> 19119232

Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions.

M K Smith1, W B Wood, W K Adams, C Wieman, J K Knight, N Guild, T T Su.   

Abstract

When students answer an in-class conceptual question individually using clickers, discuss it with their neighbors, and then revote on the same question, the percentage of correct answers typically increases. This outcome could result from gains in understanding during discussion, or simply from peer influence of knowledgeable students on their neighbors. To distinguish between these alternatives in an undergraduate genetics course, we followed the above exercise with a second, similar (isomorphic) question on the same concept that students answered individually. Our results indicate that peer discussion enhances understanding, even when none of the students in a discussion group originally knows the correct answer.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19119232     DOI: 10.1126/science.1165919

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Science        ISSN: 0036-8075            Impact factor:   47.728


  106 in total

1.  Techniques and Technology to Revise Content Delivery and Model Critical Thinking in the Neuroscience Classroom.

Authors:  Kurt R Illig
Journal:  J Undergrad Neurosci Educ       Date:  2015-07-07

2.  Talking to learn: why biology students should be talking in classrooms and how to make it happen.

Authors:  Kimberly D Tanner
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.325

3.  Cloning the professor, an alternative to ineffective teaching in a large course.

Authors:  Jennifer Nelson; Diane F Robison; John D Bell; William S Bradshaw
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.325

4.  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

5.  Non-STEM undergraduates become enthusiastic phage-hunters.

Authors:  Steven M Caruso; James Sandoz; Jessica Kelsey
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.325

6.  Female peers in small work groups enhance women's motivation, verbal participation, and career aspirations in engineering.

Authors:  Nilanjana Dasgupta; Melissa McManus Scircle; Matthew Hunsinger
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-04-06       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Near-peer STEM Mentoring Offers Unexpected Benefits for Mentors from Traditionally Underrepresented Backgrounds.

Authors:  Gloriana Trujillo; Pauline G Aguinaldo; Chelsie Anderson; Julian Bustamante; Diego R Gelsinger; Maria J Pastor; Jeanette Wright; Leticia Márquez-Magaña; Blake Riggs
Journal:  Perspect Undergrad Res Mentor       Date:  2015-11-11

8.  Graduate education. Interdisciplinary graduate training in teaching labs.

Authors:  Ronald D Vale; Joseph DeRisi; Rob Phillips; R Dyche Mullins; Clare Waterman; Timothy J Mitchison
Journal:  Science       Date:  2012-12-21       Impact factor: 47.728

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.  Learn before lecture: A strategy that improves learning outcomes in a large introductory biology class.

Authors:  Marin Moravec; Adrienne Williams; Nancy Aguilar-Roca; Diane K O'Dowd
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.