The present study investigated the effectiveness of interteaching versus traditional lecture-based teaching in two 9-week online asynchronous classes. Participants were undergraduate students enrolled in one of two sections of a psychology of learning course (N ϭ 62). The study used an alternating-treatments design, switching between interteaching and lecture-based teaching throughout the term. Type of instruction was counterbalanced across sections, so that material taught using interteaching in one section was taught using a standard lecture format in the other section. Results showed that weekly exam scores were significantly higher following interteaching compared to standard lecture-based teaching, p Ͻ .001, p 2 ϭ 0.18, 95% CI [0.03, 0.35]. Students also scored more points on the final exam on material that had been taught using interteaching, p Ͻ .001, p 2 ϭ 0.20, 95% CI [0.04, 0.36], which indicates that interteaching improves long-term retention of information. Students reported learning more during interteaching and rated the overall quality of interteaching as significantly higher than standard lecture, p ϭ .002, p 2 ϭ 0.18, 95% CI [0.03, 0.35]. Overall, the present findings showed that interteaching was more effective and preferred than standard lecture in an online asynchronous classroom, which suggests that the benefits of interteaching are not limited to traditional classroom environments.

Interteaching is a behavioral teaching method that departs from the traditional lecture format (Boyce & Hineline in BA 25:215–226, 2002). We updated and expanded previous interteaching reviews and conducted a meta-analysis on its effectiveness. Systematic searches identified 38 relevant studies spanning the years 2005–2018. The majority of these studies were conducted in undergraduate face-to-face courses. The most common independent variables were manipulations of the configuration of interteaching or comparisons to traditional-lecture format. The most common dependent variables were quiz or examination scores. Only 24% of all studies implemented at least five of the seven components of interteaching. Prep guides, discussions, record sheets, and frequent assessments were the most commonly implemented. Meta-analyses indicated that interteaching is more effective than traditional lecture or other control conditions, with an overall large effect size. Furthermore, variations in the configuration of the interteaching components do not seem to substantially limit its effectiveness, as long as the discussion component is included. Future research informed by the present review includes: (a) investigating the efficacy of interteaching in additional academic areas, online environments, workplace training, and continuing education, (b) testing alternative outcome measures, generalization, and procedural integrity, (c) conducting systematic component analyses, and (d) measuring social validity from the instructor’s perspective. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10864-021-09452-3.

The present study investigated the effect of adding optional preparation guides to traditional lecture-based teaching in an online, asynchronous undergraduate psychology class. Specifically, the study compared (a) interteaching that used a preparation guide, a written group discussion in Canvas, and a brief clarifying lecture; (b) standard teaching that consisted of a video lecture; and (c) standard teaching plus an optional preparation guide. Total average exam scores following interteaching were significantly higher than scores following standard teaching with or without optional preparation guides. In addition, students performed better on final exam questions that covered material previously taught using interteaching than on questions taught using either standard teaching condition. Most participants reported learning more during interteaching weeks and preferred interteaching more than standard lecture. These results indicate that access to optional preparation guides in the absence of other components of interteaching was not enough to significantly improve exam grades.

No abstract

Interteaching is a strategy that shifts the emphasis from passive student learning to active engagement through the use of preparation guides, small group discussions, clarifying lectures, and frequent testing. Several classroom studies have demonstrated that interteaching leads to better student comprehension and higher test scores. However, the specific strategies used in these studies vary slightly. The goal of the present study was to compare two different ways of implementing the preparation guide and group discussions to determine which method led to higher academic success. A group design was used in two sections of a psychology course over two semesters. One section experienced the standard interteaching method, where students completed the entire preparation guide prior to class and engaged in small group discussions during class. The second section was divided into two groups and each group was given half of the preparation guide to complete. Students, then, went through two rounds of group discussions: first, in a dyad with a member that completed the same portion of the preparation guide and then in a larger group with another dyad who completed the other portion of the preparation guide. Students in the second section scored more points on exam questions that came from their half of the preparation guide and they demonstrated less of a preference for interteaching than those who experienced the standard interteaching method. Results from this study indicate that instructors should have students read and complete the entire preparation guide to allow for more effective implementation of interteaching.