Cited by 26Innovative Teaching MethodsHigher Education Research StudiesProblem and Project Based Learning

Active Learning Outside the Classroom: Implementation and Outcomes of Peer-Led Team-Learning Workshops in Introductory Biology

Open access
Kudish, Philip, Shores, Robin, McClung, Alex, Smulyan, Lisa, Vallen, Elizabeth A., Siwicki, Kathleen K.·2016·CBE—Life Sciences Education

Abstract

Study group meetings (SGMs) are voluntary-attendance peer-led team-learning workshops that supplement introductory biology lectures at a selective liberal arts college. While supporting all students’ engagement with lecture material, specific aims are to improve the success of underrepresented minority (URM) students and those with weaker backgrounds in biology. Peer leaders with experience in biology courses and training in science pedagogy facilitate work on faculty-generated challenge problems. During the eight semesters assessed in this study, URM students and those with less preparation attended SGMs with equal or greater frequency than their counterparts. Most agreed that SGMs enhanced their comprehension of biology and ability to articulate solutions. The historical grade gap between URM and non-URM students narrowed slightly in Biology 2, but not in other biology and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics courses. Nonetheless, URM students taking introductory biology after program implementation have graduated with biology majors or minors at the same rates as non-URM students, and have enrolled in postcollege degree programs at equal or greater rates. These results suggest that improved performance as measured by science grade point average may not be necessary to improve the persistence of students from underrepresented groups as life sciences majors.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1187/cbe.16-01-0051

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • URM students in STEM are less grade-sensitive and more persistent, on average, than non-URMs.

    “URM students in STEM are less grade-sensitive and more persistent, on average, than non-URMs (11, 40).”

    From Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math (2020) · cites this paper as [40]

    The Results section on student persistence reports that URM students were less likely than non-URM students to persist before the program and that their persistence rates did not differ after implementation—not that URM students were more persistent. The Discussion suggests that improved science GPA may not be necessary to improve URM persistence, but it does not establish that URM students are less grade-sensitive than non-URM students. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The boost from active learning could be disproportionately beneficial for students from MGS even if average grades are still low, because URM students in STEM are less grade-sensitive and more persistent on average than non-URMs.

    “The boost could be disproportionately beneficial for students from MGS even if average grades are still low, because URM students in STEM are less grade-sensitive and more persistent, on average, than non-URMs (11, 40).”

    From Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math (2020) · cites this paper as [40]

    The Discussion section on persistence reports that URM students’ persistence improved after the SGM program despite their lower science GPAs, and suggests that improved GPA may not be necessary for improved persistence. But it reports equal persistence rates for URM and non-URM students after implementation, not greater persistence among URM students; it also does not establish that URM students are generally less grade-sensitive. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

7 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Sarquis JL Dixon LJ Gosser DK Kampmeier JA Roth V Strozak VS Varma-Nelson P Miller JE Groccia JE Miller M The workshop project: peer-led team learning in chemistry Student-Assisted Teaching: A Guide to Faculty-Student Teamwork 2001 Bolton MA Anker 150 155

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kudish, P., Shores, R., McClung, A., Smulyan, L., Vallen, E. A., & Siwicki, K. K.
Affiliations
  • Swarthmore College (US)
  • Drew University (US)
Corresponding author
Siwicki, Kathleen K.
Venue
CBE—Life Sciences Education
Published
2016-09
Volume
15
Issue
3
Pages
ar31
ISSN
1931-7913 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2491928666
Cited by
26
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
8.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-sa
Locations
  • CBE—Life Sciences Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Works - Scholarship, Research, & Creative Expression (Swarthmore College) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • Swarthmore College
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methods
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
Keywords
peer-led team learning, study groups, introductory biology, underrepresented minority students, challenge problems, peer leaders, science pedagogy, liberal arts colleges, student engagement
MeSH terms
Biology, Education, Educational Measurement, Humans, Peer Group, Perception, Students, Universities, Problem-Based Learning

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