The Effects of Small and Large Group Instruction on Learning of Subject Matter Attitudes, and Interests

1963 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 357-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
John F. Feldhusen
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 238212051876513 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lise McCoy ◽  
Robin K Pettit ◽  
Charlyn Kellar ◽  
Christine Morgan

Background: Medical education is moving toward active learning during large group lecture sessions. This study investigated the saturation and breadth of active learning techniques implemented in first year medical school large group sessions. Methods: Data collection involved retrospective curriculum review and semistructured interviews with 20 faculty. The authors piloted a taxonomy of active learning techniques and mapped learning techniques to attributes of learning-centered instruction. Results: Faculty implemented 25 different active learning techniques over the course of 9 first year courses. Of 646 hours of large group instruction, 476 (74%) involved at least 1 active learning component. Conclusions: The frequency and variety of active learning components integrated throughout the year 1 curriculum reflect faculty familiarity with active learning methods and their support of an active learning culture. This project has sparked reflection on teaching practices and facilitated an evolution from teacher-centered to learning-centered instruction.


1952 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 427-435
Author(s):  
Henry S. Jansen

A large group of educators is calling for a complete socialization of the high school program by the use of a core curriculum. This curriculum would take the common experiences of all fields of subject matter and combine them into an “integrated program” in which the pupil would learn by using all knowledge indiscriminately. Most forward looking mathematics teachers agree that we must stop compartmentalizing our mathematics by subjects and years, and proceed to fuse algebra, geometry, trigonometry, and analytics, into a single complete development of the science of number and space. But the core curriculum goes one better and includes not only this, but a fusing of all subjects into one single complete development of knowledge that will function in the life of every individual. Professor Fehr1 feels that mathematics teachers are afraid of this because they are afraid the good ship mathematics may be lost in the process. The educators who are proposing the core curriculum are intelligent people. Let us then be perfectly frank and seek to learn if socialization by the use of the core curriculum is a desirable program in the high school, and if it is, how it can be achieved.


1965 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 179 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. R. Anderson ◽  
J. D. Weaver ◽  
C. T. Wolf

1931 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 288-292
Author(s):  
William A. Wetzel

1946 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 247
Author(s):  
Erich Funke

1968 ◽  
Vol 61 (8) ◽  
pp. 773-775
Author(s):  
Vidya Bhushan ◽  
James Jeffryes ◽  
lrene Nakamura

We chose the words “large-group instruction” in lieu of “team teaching,” since the goals of this innovation are somewhat different from those commonly associated with team teaching. The most commonly offered goal of team teaching is that of providing students with a richer educational experience by combining the specialties of the teachers in a given school. While this idea could be incorporated into the structure of our large-group instruction in mathematics, this was not our primary concern. Flexible scheduling offers many possibilities for a variety of combinations of large-group leeture and small-group discussion labs. Our question with regard to this freedom was simply this: Can a teacher's load, in terms of classroom contact hours with students, be substantially reduced under large-group instruction while maintaining a high degree of learning within the group?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document