Using Breakout Groups as an Active Learning Technique in a Large Undergraduate Nutrition Classroom at the University of Guelph

Abstract

Breakout groups have been widely used under many different conditions, but the lack of published information related to their use in undergraduate settings highlights the need for research related to their use in this context. This paper describes a study investigating the use of breakout groups in undergraduate education as it specifically relates to teaching a large 4 th year undergraduate Nutrition class in a physically constrained lecture space. In total, 220 students completed a midterm survey and 229 completed a final survey designed to measure student satisfaction. Survey results were further analyzed to measure relationships between student perception of breakout group effectiveness and (1) gender and (2) cumulative GPA. Results of both surveys revealed that over 85% of students either agreed or strongly agreed that using breakout groups enhanced their learning experience, with females showing a significantly greater level of satisfaction and higher final course grade than males. Although not stratified by gender, a consistent finding between surveys was a lower perception of breakout group effectiveness by students with a cumulative GPA above 90%. The majority of respondents felt that despite the awkward room space, the breakout groups were easy to create and participate in, which suggests that breakout groups can be successfully used in a large undergraduate classroom despite physical constraints. The findings of this work are relevant given the applicability of breakout groups to a wide range of disciplines, and the relative ease of integration into a traditional lecture format.Les enseignants ont recours aux petits groupes dans de nombreuses conditions différentes, cependant, le manque d'information publiée sur leur utilisation au premier cycle confirme la nécessité d'effectuer des recherches sur ce format dans ce contexte. Le présent article rend compte d'une étude portant sur l'utilisation des petits groupes au premier cycle dans le cadre particulier d'un cours magistral de 4 e année sur la nutrition dans un espace physiquement limité. Au total, 220 étudiants ont participé à un sondage à la moitié du trimestre et 229 ont répondu à un sondage à la fin du trimestre visant à mesurer le niveau de satisfaction. Les chercheurs ont ensuite analysé les données de manière à mesurer les relations entre la perception que les étudiants avaient de l'efficacité des petits groupes et 1) le sexe, et 2) la moyenne pondérée cumulative (MPC). Les résultats des deux sondages révèlent que plus de 85 % des étudiants étaient soit d'accord, soit tout à fait d'accord avec le fait que les petits groupes amélioraient leur apprentissage, les femmes manifestant un degré de satisfaction significativement plus élevé que les hommes. Elles avaient aussi de meilleures notes finales. Sans prendre en compte la stratification selon le sexe, le résultat constant d'un sondage à l'autre démontre que les étudiants dont la MPC était supérieure à 90 % avaient une perception moins élevée de l'efficacité des petits groupes. La majorit...

Using Structured Pair Activities in a Distributed Online Breakout Room

“…The introduction of SPA alleviated this underscripting in all but two of the teams. The results support the idea that at least some of the problems previously observed in breakout rooms (e.g., lack of success and satisfaction (Blackstone and Oldmixon, 2016;) dissatisfaction in higher-GPA students (Lougheed et al, 2012)) can be attributed to lack of structure and underscripting.…”

“…Blackstone and Oldmixon (2016) found that students in a breakout from a lecture class were not more satisfied and did not succeed at higher levels compared to their peers in a lecture-only class. Lougheed et al (2012) found that higher-GPA students had a significantly less favorable response to the use of breakout groups than did their lower-GPA colleagues. In these studies, researchers speculated that possible reasons for these findings were that students may not have been clear about what they were supposed to gain from the breakout group sessions, or that some (e.g., high-GPA students) may have found that the structure of the sessions did not meet their needs.…”

“…Since there was no instruction on how to use the breakout rooms, it is not surprising that these teams experienced a momentary lack of support (underscripting) as described by Dillenbourg (2002). Because of the scarcity of research on breakout rooms (virtual or face-toface) described by Lougheed et al (2012), it is difficult to know how often students are provided with little or no structure to guide collaboration in real breakout-room environments. But personal experience suggests that such underscripting may not be uncommon.…”

“…However, there has been minimal research exploring the pedagogical aspects of breakout groups in face-to-face or online classrooms. Lougheed et al (2012) reported that research about the use of breakout groups in postsecondary education is sparse. They also reported that most of the published literature pertaining to the use of breakout groups describes the feedback generated during the breakout sessions rather than specific pedagogical elements of the breakout groups themselves.…”

Assessing scientific literacy skill perceptions and practical capabilities in fourth year undergraduate biological science students

“…These activities were conducted in a scaffolded manner that included instructor-led discussions of scientific study designs and analysis of study strengths and weaknesses that impact the interpretation of the results, to demonstrate literature critique approaches. This type of passive learning was followed by utilization of active learning activities during lecture time, in the form of break-out group discussions (Lougheed, Kirkland & Newton, 2012) of assigned scientific studies, followed by summary activities led by the instructor to consolidate break-out group discussion outcomes. Additionally, outside of lecture, students were assessed on i) their written summaries of two separate scientific literature critiques that were completed individually and ii) a written literature critique completed in groups wherein students critiqued the study design and consolidated the findings from multiple papers on a related topic of choice, requiring students to find and interpret the research findings.…”