SCIRP Mobile Website
Paper Submission

Why Us? >>

  • - Open Access
  • - Peer-reviewed
  • - Rapid publication
  • - Lifetime hosting
  • - Free indexing service
  • - Free promotion service
  • - More citations
  • - Search engine friendly

Free SCIRP Newsletters>>

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from SCIRP.

 

Contact Us >>

WhatsApp  +86 18163351462(WhatsApp)
   
Paper Publishing WeChat
Book Publishing WeChat
(or Email:book@scirp.org)

Article citations

More>>

Dandavino, M., Snell, L., & Wiseman, J. (2007). Why Medical Students Should Learn How to Teach. Medical Teacher, 29, 558-565. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01421590701477449

has been cited by the following article:

  • TITLE: The Effect of In-Class Formality during a Peer-Teaching Activity on Student’s Satisfaction, Perceived Participation and Learning Gain

    AUTHORS: Jan G. M. Kooloos, Tim Klaassen, Sascha van Kuppeveld, Sanneke Bolhuis, Marc Vorstenbosch

    KEYWORDS: Peer-Teaching, Formality Level, Participation and Satisfaction, Learning Outcome

    JOURNAL NAME: Creative Education, Vol.7 No.13, August 18, 2016

    ABSTRACT: Background: It was hypothesized that cooperation would be stimulated in small groups preparing for peer-teaching when the required formality level of the subsequent actual peer-teaching event would be higher. This higher formality level was supposed to increase the appeal on the individual accountability of the students to the shared result, being the preparation of the execution of peer- teaching. Aim: This study explores whether in-class formality during peer-teaching in a small group stimulates perceived participation, satisfaction and learning gain. Methods: Four in-class formality levels of peer-teaching (A-D) were defined and practiced in thirty group assignments of about 15 students, using a randomized cluster design with four arms: A) absence of peer-teaching, B) informal peer-teaching, C) and D) peer-teaching with the use of a frontal class presentation. Peer-teacher selection was either executed by the peers (B and C) or by throwing a dice just prior to the presentation (D). All students took a pretest, a post-test and a follow-up test and completed a questionnaire. The Friedman test, Wilcoxon’s signed ranks test and ANOVA were used to analyze the questionnaires. Learning gain was analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA. Results: The overall scores on the satisfaction and perceived participation increased significantly from A to D (p = 0.000) and the students in D scored higher than those in C (p = 0.007). For 10 out of 19 individual questions a significant difference was found. Mostly A scored lower than D or than C and D, but also differences between B, C and D were found in which D scored highest. The learning gain did not differ significantly between the arms. Conclusion: This study shows that, although student’s perceived participation and satisfaction rise with in-class formality level, the learning gains do not increase simultaneously.