Implementing Small-Group Activities in Large Lecture Classes

College Teaching

Volumn 55, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 164-169

  Yazedjian, Ani ^a   Kolkhorst, Brittany Boyle ^a  

^a TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

active learning; large lecture classes; small group activities; teaching strategies

Indexed keywords

EID: 80051738629     PISSN: 87567555     EISSN: 19308299     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3200/CTCH.55.4.164-169     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Burrowes, P. A. 2003. A student-centered approach to teaching general biology that really works: Lord's constructivist model put to a test. The American Biology Teacher 65:491-502.
2. Christianson, R. G., and K. M. Fisher. 1999. Comparison of student learning about diffusion and osmosis in constructivist and traditional classrooms. International Journal of Science Education 21:687-98.
3. Christopher, D. A. 2003. Interactive large lecture classes and the dynamics of teacher/student interaction. Journal of Instruction Delivery Systems 17:13-18.
4. Cooper, J. L., J. MacGregor, K. Smith, and P. Robinson. 2000. Implementing small-group instruction: Insights from successful practitioners. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 81:63-76.
5. Cooper, J. L., and P. Robinson. 2000. The argument for making large classes seem small. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 81:5-16.
6. Davis, B. G. 1993. Tools for teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7. Ebert-May, D., and C. Brewer. 1997. Innovation in large lectures: Teaching for active learning. Bioscience 47:601-7.
8. Hu, S., and G. Kuh. 2002. Being disengaged in educationally purposeful activities: The influence of student and institutional characteristics. Research in Higher Education 43:555-74.
9. MacGregor, J., J. Cooper, K. Smith, and P. Robinson. 2000. Editors' notes. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 81:1-4.
10. Mbuva, J. 2003. Implementation of the multiple intelligences theory in the 21st century teaching and learning environments: A new tool for effective teaching and learning in all levels (ED-476-162). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
11. McKeachie, W. J. 1999. Teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers. 10th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
12. McClanahan, E. B., and L. L. McClanahan. 2002. Active learning in a non-majors biology class. College Teaching 50:92-96.
13. Michaelsen, L. K. 2002. Team learning in large classes. In Engaging large classes: Strategies and techniques for college faculty, Ed. C. A. Stanley and M. E. Porter, 67-83. Bolton: Anker.
14. Peters, J., and J. Armstrong. 1998. Collaborative learning: People laboring together to construct knowledge. New Directions for Continuing and Adult Education 79:75-84.
15. Railsback, J. 2002. Project-based instruction: Creating excitement for learning (ED-01-CO-0013). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
16. Springer, L. 1997. Relating concepts and applications through structured active learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
17. Springer, L., M. Stanne, and S. Donovan. 1997. Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Albuquerque, NM.
18. Umbach, P. D., and M. R. Wawrzynski. 2005. Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher Education 46:153-84.
19. Wright, J. C. 1996. Authentic learning environment in analytical chemistry using cooperative methods and open-ended laboratories in large lecture courses. Journal of Chemical Education 73:827-32.