Replacing lecture with peer-led workshops improves student learning.

Peer-facilitated workshops enhanced interactivity in our introductory biology course, which led to increased student engagement and learning. A majority of students preferred attending two lectures and a workshop each week over attending three weekly lectures. In the workshops, students worked in small cooperative groups as they solved challenging problems, evaluated case studies, and participated in activities designed to improve their general learning skills. Students in the workshop version of the course scored higher on exam questions recycled from preworkshop semesters. Grades were higher over three workshop semesters in comparison with the seven preworkshop semesters. Although males and females benefited from workshops, there was a larger improvement of grades and increased retention by female students; although underrepresented minority (URM) and non-URM students benefited from workshops, there was a larger improvement of grades by URM students. As well as improving student performance and retention, the addition of interactive workshops also improved the quality of student learning: Student scores on exam questions that required higher-level thinking increased from preworkshop to workshop semesters.

[1]  E. Seymour,et al.  Talking About Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave The Sciences , 1997 .

[2]  David R. Arendale,et al.  Pathways of persistence: A review of postsecondary peer cooperative learning programs: Readings on theory, research, and best practice , 2004 .

[3]  Diane Ebert-May,et al.  Innovation in large lectures—teaching for active learning , 1997 .

[4]  Robert E. Fullilove,et al.  Mathematics Achievement Among African American Undergraduates at the University of California, Berkeley: An Evaluation of the Mathematics Workshop Program , 1990 .

[5]  Kirsten Crossgrove,et al.  Using clickers in nonmajors- and majors-level biology courses: student opinion, learning, and long-term retention of course material. , 2008, CBE life sciences education.

[6]  W. Wood.  Clickers: A Teaching Gimmick that Works , 2004 .

[7]  J D Walker,et al.  A delicate balance: integrating active learning into a large lecture course. , 2008, CBE life sciences education.

[8]  Regina F. Frey,et al.  Peer-Led Team Learning in General Chemistry: Implementation and Evaluation , 2008 .

[9]  William B Wood,et al.  Teaching more by lecturing less. , 2005, Cell biology education.

[10]  Thomas P. Dick,et al.  Collaborative Workshops and Student Academic Performance in Introductory College Mathematics Courses: A Study of a Treisman Model Math Excel Program , 2000 .

[11]  J. Postlethwait,et al.  Workshop Biology: Demonstrating the Effectiveness of Active Learning in an Introductory Biology Course , 2002 .

[12]  William Revelle,et al.  Improving Biology Performance with Workshop Groups , 2002 .

[13]  Randy Moore,et al.  Cooperative Learning--Part 3. Electronic Cooperative Quizzes. , 2002 .

[14]  C. Simons,et al.  Supplemental Instruction: Short- and Long-Term Impact. , 2003 .

[15]  K. Gattis.  Long-term knowledge gains due to supplemental instruction in college chemistry courses , 2000 .

[16]  R. Hake.  Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses , 1998 .

[17]  Lydia T. Tien,et al.  Implementation of a Peer-Led Team Learning Instructional Approach in an Undergraduate Organic Chemistry Course. , 2002 .

[18]  Ralph W. Preszler.  Student- and Teacher-Centered Learning in a Supplemental Learning Biology Course. , 2006 .

[19]  Deborah Allen,et al.  Infusing active learning into the large-enrollment biology class: seven strategies, from the simple to complex. , 2005, Cell biology education.

[20]  B. Sinervo,et al.  The rock–paper–scissors game and the evolution of alternative male strategies , 1996, Nature.

[21]  Daniel J. Klionsky,et al.  Constructing Knowledge in the Lecture Hall. , 2002 .

[22]  Shu-Mei Chang,et al.  Cooperative learning in industrial-sized biology classes. , 2007, CBE life sciences education.

[23]  K. Rath,et al.  Supplemental instruction in introductory biology I: enhancing the performance and retention of underrepresented minority students. , 2007, CBE life sciences education.

[24]  R. Preszler.  Cooperative Concept Mapping: Improving Performance in Undergraduate Biology. , 2004 .

[25]  Joseph D. Novak,et al.  Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited or inappropriate propositional hierarchies leading to empowerment of learners , 2002 .

[26]  Michèle Shuster,et al.  Assessment of the effects of student response systems on student learning and attitudes over a broad range of biology courses. , 2007, CBE life sciences education.

[27]  Leonard Springer,et al.  Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis , 1997 .

[28]  Charles E. Lamb,et al.  Developmental Mathematics Education and Supplemental Instruction: Pondering the Potential. , 2002 .

[29]  David Arendale,et al.  Supplemental Instruction (SI): Review of Research Concerning the Effectiveness of SI from the University of Missouri-Kansas City and Other Institutions from across the United States. , 1997 .

[30]  Irene M. Duranczyk,et al.  Best Practices for Access and Retention in Higher Education. , 2004 .

[31]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Cooperative Learning Returns To College What Evidence Is There That It Works , 1998 .

[32]  P. Varma-Nelson,et al.  Peer-Led Team Learning: Evaluation, Dissemination, and Institutionalization of a College Level Initiative , 2008 .

[33]  B. Sinervo,et al.  An experimental test of frequency-dependent selection on male mating strategy in the field , 2007, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[34]  Mary Lundeberg,et al.  Supplemental instruction in chemistry , 1990 .