On the Effectiveness of Interteaching.

E. Arntzen, Kari Høium
{"title":"On the Effectiveness of Interteaching.","authors":"E. Arntzen, Kari Høium","doi":"10.1037/H0100698","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Teaching techniques based on behavior analysis have been available for over 50 years as for example Skinner discussed the strategies for teaching in the classroom (Skinner, 1954). Later techniques such as programmed instruction (Holland & Skinner, 1961), precision teaching (Lindsley, 1964), direct instruction (Engelmann & Carnine, 1982), and PSI or the Keller-plan (Keller, 1968) have been used. However, there has been a decline in the use of such procedures (Lamal, 1984). Some years ago a type of strategy of peer learning or interteaching was described in the behavior analytic literature (Boyce & Hineline, 2002) as \".... mutually probing, mutually informing conversation between two people\" (Boyce & Hineline, 2002p. 220). Interteaching is based on principles from the different strategies mentioned above and the main points are: (1) Students have to read the text beforehand, (2) Questions from the text are prepared by the instructor, (3) Students discuss the questions in pairs for 30-45 min, (4) An interteach record is filled out by the students whereby they write down the questions that are difficult, and (5) The instructor prepares a lecture based on the interteach records. Three studies have shown that interteaching is more effective than traditional instructions at improving students learning outcome (Saville & Zinn, 2006, 2009; Saville, Zinn, & Elliot, 2005). Saville et al. (2005) found that students did better on quizzes after interteaching than traditional lectures, reading alone or control. Saville and Zinn (2006) also found that after interteaching students did better on the exams and that students preferred interteaching. However, there have been relatively few reports on the effect of interteaching, so the purpose of the current study was to expand the knowledge by comparing the effect of interteaching with traditional lectures in a group of undergraduate students. Method Participants Sixty-nine undergraduate students from two different classes participated in the current study. Two-thirds of the participants were females and the average age for the whole group of participants was 30 years. The participants were students studying on a bachelor program in social welfare. They were recruited through ads in the class. The classes were not mandatory. Design A pre- post-test design was used. One group of the participants was exposed to interteaching as the first condition and traditional lectures as the second condition. The other group was exposed to the conditions in the reversed order. Procedure Traditional lectures. The lectures were based on previously known learning objectives. The students had the curriculum and some recommended texts. Each lecture lasted for approximately 3-4 hours with 15 minutes breaks. The second author was the instructor Interteaching. The sequence started with a short introductory lecture, maximum 45 minutes, followed by an interteaching sequence of 1-2 hours and finally a lecture of 45 minutes based on the results from the interteaching. In the introductory lecture, the learning objectives were clarified and some examples were given. The intereaching sequence started with students reading a short article from the curriculum that was related to the learning objectives. Subsequently, the students formed pairs and discussed the questions. The instructor, the second author, moved from group to group (3-4 students in each group) answering any questions that the participants had and facilitated group discussion. Furthermore, the participants filled out an interteaching record. The purpose of this record was to help the instructor to identify questions which were difficult for the students. Behavior recorded. We collected data on self-rating of how much knowledge the participants had about the different issues. The participants had to answer nine to eleven specific questions within each area. …","PeriodicalId":88717,"journal":{"name":"The behavior analyst today","volume":"11 1","pages":"155-160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The behavior analyst today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0100698","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

Teaching techniques based on behavior analysis have been available for over 50 years as for example Skinner discussed the strategies for teaching in the classroom (Skinner, 1954). Later techniques such as programmed instruction (Holland & Skinner, 1961), precision teaching (Lindsley, 1964), direct instruction (Engelmann & Carnine, 1982), and PSI or the Keller-plan (Keller, 1968) have been used. However, there has been a decline in the use of such procedures (Lamal, 1984). Some years ago a type of strategy of peer learning or interteaching was described in the behavior analytic literature (Boyce & Hineline, 2002) as ".... mutually probing, mutually informing conversation between two people" (Boyce & Hineline, 2002p. 220). Interteaching is based on principles from the different strategies mentioned above and the main points are: (1) Students have to read the text beforehand, (2) Questions from the text are prepared by the instructor, (3) Students discuss the questions in pairs for 30-45 min, (4) An interteach record is filled out by the students whereby they write down the questions that are difficult, and (5) The instructor prepares a lecture based on the interteach records. Three studies have shown that interteaching is more effective than traditional instructions at improving students learning outcome (Saville & Zinn, 2006, 2009; Saville, Zinn, & Elliot, 2005). Saville et al. (2005) found that students did better on quizzes after interteaching than traditional lectures, reading alone or control. Saville and Zinn (2006) also found that after interteaching students did better on the exams and that students preferred interteaching. However, there have been relatively few reports on the effect of interteaching, so the purpose of the current study was to expand the knowledge by comparing the effect of interteaching with traditional lectures in a group of undergraduate students. Method Participants Sixty-nine undergraduate students from two different classes participated in the current study. Two-thirds of the participants were females and the average age for the whole group of participants was 30 years. The participants were students studying on a bachelor program in social welfare. They were recruited through ads in the class. The classes were not mandatory. Design A pre- post-test design was used. One group of the participants was exposed to interteaching as the first condition and traditional lectures as the second condition. The other group was exposed to the conditions in the reversed order. Procedure Traditional lectures. The lectures were based on previously known learning objectives. The students had the curriculum and some recommended texts. Each lecture lasted for approximately 3-4 hours with 15 minutes breaks. The second author was the instructor Interteaching. The sequence started with a short introductory lecture, maximum 45 minutes, followed by an interteaching sequence of 1-2 hours and finally a lecture of 45 minutes based on the results from the interteaching. In the introductory lecture, the learning objectives were clarified and some examples were given. The intereaching sequence started with students reading a short article from the curriculum that was related to the learning objectives. Subsequently, the students formed pairs and discussed the questions. The instructor, the second author, moved from group to group (3-4 students in each group) answering any questions that the participants had and facilitated group discussion. Furthermore, the participants filled out an interteaching record. The purpose of this record was to help the instructor to identify questions which were difficult for the students. Behavior recorded. We collected data on self-rating of how much knowledge the participants had about the different issues. The participants had to answer nine to eleven specific questions within each area. …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
论交互式教学的有效性。
基于行为分析的教学技巧已经有50多年的历史了,例如斯金纳讨论了课堂教学的策略(斯金纳,1954)。后来的技术,如程序教学(Holland & Skinner, 1961),精确教学(Lindsley, 1964),直接教学(Engelmann & Carnine, 1982),以及PSI或凯勒计划(Keller, 1968)已被使用。但是,使用这种程序的情况有所减少(Lamal, 1984年)。几年前,行为分析文献(Boyce & Hineline, 2002)将同伴学习或互动教学的一种策略描述为“....”两个人之间相互探索、相互告知的对话”(Boyce & Hineline, 2002)。220)。互动教学是基于上述不同策略的原则,其要点是:(1)学生必须事先阅读课文,(2)课文中的问题由教师准备,(3)学生两人一组讨论30-45分钟,(4)学生填写互动记录,写下困难的问题,(5)教师根据互动记录准备讲座。三项研究表明,在提高学生学习成果方面,互动教学比传统教学更有效(Saville & Zinn, 2006, 2009;Saville, Zinn, & Elliot, 2005)。Saville等人(2005)发现,与传统授课、单独阅读或对照相比,学生在互动教学后的测验成绩更好。Saville和Zinn(2006)也发现,经过交叉教学的学生在考试中表现更好,并且学生更喜欢交叉教学。然而,关于互动教学效果的报道相对较少,因此本研究的目的是通过对本科生群体进行互动教学与传统讲座效果的比较来扩展知识。研究对象:69名来自两个不同班级的大学生。三分之二的参与者是女性,整个参与者群体的平均年龄为30岁。参与者都是攻读社会福利专业学士学位的学生。他们是通过在班上登广告招募的。这些课程不是强制性的。设计采用前后试验设计。一组参与者在第一条件下接受互动式教学,在第二条件下接受传统讲座。另一组以相反的顺序暴露在条件下。传统讲座。这些讲座是基于先前已知的学习目标。学生们有课程表和一些推荐的课文。每次讲座大约持续3-4小时,中间休息15分钟。第二作者是讲师Interteaching。该序列以一个简短的介绍讲座开始,最多45分钟,然后是1-2小时的交叉教学序列,最后根据交叉教学的结果进行45分钟的讲座。在导论课中,明确了学习目标,并给出了一些例子。教学顺序从学生阅读课程中与学习目标相关的一篇短文开始。随后,学生们结对讨论问题。导师,即第二作者,从一个小组移动到另一个小组(每组3-4名学生),回答参与者提出的任何问题,并促进小组讨论。此外,参与者还填写了一份教学记录。这个记录的目的是帮助老师找出对学生来说比较困难的问题。行为记录。我们收集了参与者对不同问题了解程度的自我评价数据。参与者必须在每个区域内回答9到11个具体问题。...
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Functional and morphological maturation of the full-sized and mini-pig corpus luteum by programmed cell death mechanism. Procedural aspects that control discounting rates when using the fill-in-the-blank and multiple-choice methods On the sequential and concurrent presentation of trials establishing prerequisites for emergent relations. Using SAFMEDS and direct instruction to teach the model of hierarchical complexity The zeitgeist of behavior analytic research in the 21st century: A keyword analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1