Does Size Really Matter? A Comparison of Class Size and Student Outcomes in Introductory Physiology Courses
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Traditionally, it's been thought that small class size resulted in better student outcomes. As teaching styles change and inquiry‐based learning becomes more common, this may not necessarily be the case. This study examined student outcomes for introductory physiology courses of different sizes at two different institutions over a three year period. One course averaged 30 students per year while the other course averaged 200 students per year. Both courses were taught by the same instructor, using the same teaching materials, lecture style, and inquiry‐based techniques. The same hands‐on lab exercises were taught and the same lab report questions were assigned. Tutorials involved teaching the same case studies (by the instructor at the small institution and by teaching assistants under the direction of the instructor at the larger institution). Each course used the same exam questions and consisted of multiple choice and short answer formats. With class size being the only significant variable, it was possible to test if class size was a key factor in student success. Students in both courses (and in all years) were given a pre‐test to assess the student knowledge base at the beginning of the course. In all cases, the pre‐test showed similar levels of starting knowledge between the different‐sized courses (31.1±1.8% for the smaller course vs. 30.6±0.9% for the larger course). Student outcomes were compared between the classes by assessing exam grades (overall scores as well as individual question scores), comparing lab report grades, and by comparing final course grades. Assessment of all these parameters showed no significant difference between the two courses and this result was seen in each year of the study. Lab report grades, averaged over 5 lab reports, differed by less than 2% between the large and small courses (not a significant difference). Mean exam scores and final grade scores were also not significantly different for any of the years of the study. Course grades between the courses differed by less than 3±0.8%. These results would indicate that class size alone was not a significant factor in determining student outcomes. Students showed similar success in both large and small classes when all other factors were similar. Interactive lectures, as well as the use of case studies and other inquiry‐based learning methods may have a much greater influence on student learning and success than class size.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,022 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».