Learning and Retention in Student-Led Discussion Groups

Clement, David E.

doi:10.1080/00224545.1971.9922497

Cited by 16 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the third block (we shall discuss results from the two other blocks later) our findings are opposite to the hypotheses derived from information-processing theory (Clement, 1971;Cornwall, 1979) and role theory (Sarbin, 1976). It is not so easy to explain why.…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 56%

“…However, it is unclear whether the teacher informally tested student progress during the course and perhaps corrected students from studentled groups more in the two-thirds of class time when "normal" instruction took place. Clement (1971) found no differences between student-led and instructor-led discussion groups on an immediate post-test of cognitive achievement, but found on an achievement test administered six weeks later that the student-led discussion groups outperformed the instructor-led discussion groups. Clement noted that both groups benefited from discussion but student-led groups showed better retention of this effect.…”

mentioning

confidence: 69%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Peer teaching: Academic achievement of teacher-led versus student-led discussion groups

1985

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Problem-based small-group discussions are the cornerstone of health sciences education at the University of Limburg (The Netherlands). In each of three courses, fifteen discussion groups of about eight students were randomly assigned a staff-tutor (control condition) or student-tutor (experimental condition).In two of the courses no significant differences in cognitive test achievement between the two conditions were found. In one course students tutored by staff-tutors performed significantly better than students tutored by student-tutors. However, no significant differences in test performance were found between students tutored by high-achieving versus average-achieving studenttutors. These findings contradict the "congruence" hypothesis from information processing theory. Several other explanations are explored.Health sciences education at the University of Limburg (Maastricht, The Netherlands) features problem-based small-group discussions alternated with periods of self-directed learning. This problem-based self-directed learning method is designed to teach problem-solving skills, self-learning skills and enhance motivation and knowledge retention (Schmidt and De Volder, 1984). One of the cornerstones of this method is the discussion group consisting of about eight students in which health science phenomena (so-called problems) are analyzed and learning goals are formulated (Schmidt, 1983). These groups are guided by tutors who are faculty members. Their role is to stimulate the discussion, not to give lectures. In 1981 it was decided to explore the possibility of assigning the role of tutor not only to faculty staff but also to (undergraduate) students~ The main reason for this was what Goldschmid and Goldschmid (1976, p. 14) called "economic considerations": "Given today's high student-faculty 0018-1560/85/$03.30 9 1985 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.

show abstract

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 56%

mentioning

confidence: 69%

Peer teaching: Academic achievement of teacher-led versus student-led discussion groups

1985

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research comparing achievement of students guided by students or staff members mostly showed no differences (Beach 1974;Bloom, Caul, Fristoe & Thompson 1986;Ten Care 1986;Clement 1971;Govey, Gruber & Terrell 1963). Sometimes, a better performance of student-guided groups (Blunt & Blizzard 1973;White 1945) has been reported, but other research revealed better achievement for students guided by staff members (Beach 1983;Carsrud 1979).…”

Section: Review: Effects Of Peer Tutoring On Student Learningmentioning

confidence: 97%

Effects of staff and student tutors on student achievement

Moust

Schmidt

1994

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In the problem-based curriculum of the faculty of Law, students of the first year are guided by staff tutors or undergraduate student tutors in small tutorial groups. In this study, academic achievement of staff tutor-guided groups are compared with student tutor-guided groups. After an eightweek course students' level of academic achievement was tested by essay questions. Two methods of assessing students' performance are used: expert judgements and propositional analysis. Results of both methods used indicate that no differences in academic achievement occur. Students guided by student tutors perform as well as students guided by staff tutors. Several explanations are proposed to account for these results.

show abstract

“…PAL approaches may be considered to address gaps in student learning identified during curriculum review or evaluation (Perkins et al 2002) or as additional support on courses with relatively high failure rates (Hoad-Reddick & Theaker 2003;Hurley et al 2003). Complex learning and concept manipulation seem to lend themselves more to PAL approaches in this regard than does rote-learning of factual information (Clement 1971). Alternatively there may be new learning outcomes or drivers from external and political sources that must be addressed, as with the GMC requirement for UK medical graduates to have some teaching experience (GMC 2003) and the apparent lack of dental graduates interested in academic careers (Bibb & Lefever 2002).…”

Section: Questions Relating To Peer Assisted Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whilst much of the research on PAL in healthcare has focused on students of medicine, it has also been developed in nursing (Byrne et al 1989;Owens & Walden 2001;Morris and Turnbull 2004), dentistry (Rhodes & Swedlow 1983;Bibb & Lefever 2002;Brueckner & MacPherson 2004), physiotherapy (Lake 1999;Solomon & Crowe 2001), occupational therapy (Folts et al 1986), osteopathy , psychology (Clement 1971;Fantuzzo et al 1989), health sciences (De Volder et al 1985) and veterinary medicine (Monahan & Yew 2002). Multi-disciplinary PAL projects have been developed with medical & dental students (Shanks et al 2000); medical & nursing students (Gill et al 2006); medical, nursing, dental & physiotherapy students (Perkins et al 2002); and medical & veterinary students ('Coping with Stress' project at the University of Edinburgh).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer assisted learning: a planning and implementation framework: AMEE Guide no. 30

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much has been written about the benefits and applications of Peer Assisted Learning (PAL) in the literature. Curriculum developers increasingly consider PAL as a vehicle to help undergraduate healthcare students learn to teach; an outcome which has received more attention in the UK since the General Medical Council stated in Tomorrow's Doctors that medical graduates must 'Be able to demonstrate appropriate teaching skills'. This guide is primarily designed to assist curriculum developers, course organisers and educational researchers develop and implement their own PAL initiatives. It is structured around a PAL planning framework consisting of 24 questions. The questions are grouped in threes, around eight themes. Each question is discussed with reference to the PAL literature and other related subjects, and is exemplified by responses from a recent PAL project developed at The University of Edinburgh. Working through the 24 questions, particularly with discussion in a small planning group, will enable readers to efficiently develop their ideas for PAL into comprehensive and practical project plans cognisant of current educational theory, existing PAL literature and the local context. The framework is particularly suitable for those who want to develop healthcare undergraduate PAL initiatives yet have little or no experience of PAL, as it provides an introduction to the relevant literature field and a step-by-step process for the design and implementation of such projects. It will also be of interest to those with experience of PAL and those seeking a structured framework for planning non-PAL curriculum developments in undergraduate healthcare curricula.

show abstract

Learning and Retention in Student-Led Discussion Groups

Cited by 16 publications

References 15 publications

Peer teaching: Academic achievement of teacher-led versus student-led discussion groups

Peer teaching: Academic achievement of teacher-led versus student-led discussion groups

Effects of staff and student tutors on student achievement

Peer assisted learning: a planning and implementation framework: AMEE Guide no. 30

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About