ArticleCBE life sciences education2018
Student Learning Outcomes and Attitudes Using Three Methods of Group Formation in a Nonmajors Biology Class.
Article in CBE life sciences education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Equitable Group Work in Undergraduate Biology Courses: Leveraging a Complex Instruction Framework to Identify Pedagogical Strategies.CBE life sciences education · 2026Article
- Educational disparities in STEM during COVID-induced distance learning and a potential strategy to address them.Nature communications · 2026Article
- So You Want to Teach a Field-Based Course: A Practical Toolkit for Teaching Teams.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Unlocking learning: exploring take-home examinations andJournal of microbiology & biology education · 2025Article
- Strategically creating maximally heterogeneous lab groups did not improve group performance in an introductory biology lab class.PloS one · 2025Article
- Mind the Gap: Investigating Disaggregated Student Performance in an Upper-Division Biochemistry Course Following Team-Based Learning.CBE life sciences education · 2024Article
- Try Before You Buy: Are There Benefits to a Random Trial Period before Students Choose Their Collaborative Teams?CBE life sciences education · 2024Article
- Demographic isolation and attitudes toward group work in student-selected lab groups.PloS one · 2024Article
- Forming Groups in a Large-Enrollment Biology Class: Group Permanence Matters More than Group Size.CBE life sciences education · 2023Article
- Identifying Group Work Experiences That Increase Students' Self-Efficacy for Quantitative Biology Tasks.CBE life sciences education · 2023Article
- Collaborative Two-Stage Exams Benefit Students in a Biology Laboratory Course.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2023Article
- How do introductory field biology students feel? Journal reflections provide insight into student affect.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Why Students Struggle in Undergraduate Biology: Sources and Solutions.CBE life sciences education · 2022Article
- Undergraduates' Experiences with Online and in-Person Courses Provide Opportunities for Improving Student-Centered Biology Laboratory Instruction.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2022Article
- Implementing team-based learning in the life sciences: A case study in an online introductory level evolution and biodiversity course.Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Three Steps to Adapt Case Studies for Synchronous and Asynchronous Online Learning.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Group work is often a key component of student-centered pedagogies, but there is conflicting evidence about what types of groups provide the most benefit for undergraduate students. We investigated student learning outcomes and attitudes toward working in groups when students were assigned to groups using different methods in a large-enrollment, student-centered class. We were particularly interested in how students entering the class with different levels of competence in biology performed in homogeneous or heterogeneous groups, and what types of group compositions were formed using different methods of group formation. We found that low-competence students had higher learning outcomes when they were in heterogeneous groups, while mid- and high-competence students performed equally well in both group types. Students of all competence types had better attitudes toward group work in heterogeneous groups. The use of student demographic variables to preemptively form groups and allowing students to self-select their group mates both yielded heterogeneous competence groups. Students in the instructor-formed, demographic groups had higher learning outcomes compared with students allowed to self-select. Thus, heterogeneous groupings provided the most benefit for students in our nonmajors, large-enrollment class.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.