The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Combining Peer Discussion with Instructor Explanation Increases Student Learning from In-Class Concept Questions
Open accessAbstract
Use of in-class concept questions with clickers can transform an instructor-centered “transmissionist” environment to a more learner-centered constructivist classroom. To compare the effectiveness of three different approaches using clickers, pairs of similar questions were used to monitor student understanding in majors’ and nonmajors’ genetics courses. After answering the first question individually, students participated in peer discussion only, listened to an instructor explanation only, or engaged in peer discussion followed by instructor explanation, before answering a second question individually. Our results show that the combination of peer discussion followed by instructor explanation improved average student performance substantially when compared with either alone. When gains in learning were analyzed for three ability groups of students (weak, medium, and strong, based on overall clicker performance), all groups benefited most from the combination approach, suggesting that peer discussion and instructor explanation are synergistic in helping students. However, this analysis also revealed that, for the nonmajors, the gains of weak performers using the combination approach were only slightly better than their gains using instructor explanation alone. In contrast, the strong performers in both courses were not helped by the instructor-only approach, emphasizing the importance of peer discussion, even among top-performing students.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hake, R. R. (1998) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.18809 · Cited by 6,072
Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results
Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.1374249 · Cited by 2,682
Biology in Bloom: Implementing Bloom's Taxonomy to Enhance Student Learning in Biology
Crowe, A., Dirks, C., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2008) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.08-05-0024 · Cited by 629
Prescribed Active Learning Increases Performance in Introductory Biology
Freeman, S., O'Connor, E., Parks, J. W., Cunningham, M., Hurley, D., Haak, D., Dirks, C., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2007) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.06-09-0194 · Cited by 455
Cited by
Singer, S., & Smith, K. A. (2013) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/jee.20030 · Cited by 835
Teaching and physics education research: bridging the gap
Fraser, J. M., Timan, A. L., Miller, K., Dowd, J. E., Tucker, L., & Mazur, E. (2014) · Reports on Progress in Physics · doi:10.1088/0034-4885/77/3/032401 · Cited by 422
Cooper, K. M., Downing, V. R., & Brownell, S. E. (2018) · International Journal of STEM Education · doi:10.1186/s40594-018-0123-6 · Cited by 312
Eddy, S. L., Converse, M., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2015) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.14-06-0095 · Cited by 182
“This group work increases performance on isomorphic clicker questions and posttests compared with performance of students who only listened to an instructor explanation (Schworm and Renkl, 2006; Smith et al., 2011).”
BackgroundWhy does peer instruction benefit student learning?
Tullis, J. G., & Goldstone, R. L. (2020) · Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications · doi:10.1186/s41235-020-00218-5 · Cited by 153
Metadata
- Authors
- Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Krauter, K., & Knight, J. K.
- Venue
- CBE—Life Sciences Education
- Published
- 2011-03
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 55-63
- ISSN
- 1931-7913 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2170710283
- Cited by
- 258
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 83.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Combining Peer Discussion with Instructor Explanation Increases Student Learning from In-Class Concept Questions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1187/cbe.10-08-0101
- The paper
- Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Krauter, K., & Knight, J. K. (2011). Combining Peer Discussion with Instructor Explanation Increases Student Learning from In-Class Concept Questions. CBE—Life Sciences Education. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-08-0101
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.