Interteaching: Its effects on exam scores in a compressed-schedule format

Abstract

Although previous research has found interteaching to be an effective form of instruction, all of the currently published data have been collected in courses that have allowed for a minimum of 48 hours between class sessions. In the current study, we examined the effectiveness of interteaching compared to traditional lecture during a six week summer session of a behavior modification course. Two non-concurrent sections of the behavior modification course were taught during which the instructor alternated between interteaching and traditional lecture. These courses were counterbalanced, such that when material from one section was covered using an interteaching approach, the same material in the other section was presented using a traditional lecture. Unlike previous studies, students did not score higher on exams following interteaching sessions. Nevertheless, students did indicate that they found interteaching to be beneficial. Interpretations of these results, the social validity responses, practical implications, and recommendations for additional research are discussed.

A comparison of interteaching, lecture-based teaching, and lecture-based teaching with optional preparation guides in an asynchronous online classroom.

“…The present study was a systematic replication of Zayac and Paulk (2014) and aimed to compare IT to a lecture condition that allowed students access to prep guide questions to use as an optional study guide. This study evaluated the effects of IT, ST (i.e., lecture only), and STϩ in an online asynchronous learning environment.…”

“…The primary aim of this study was to further investigate the efficacy of IT in comparison to lecture conditions that include additional components (i.e., optional study guides) that may also improve student learning outcomes. To do this, we systematically replicated Zayac and Paulk (2014) by comparing IT to a lecture condition that allowed students access to an optional study guide in a compressed schedule, but set the class up so that IT assignments occurred only once per week instead of on 4 days per week. In Zayac and Paulk's lecture condition, students had access to study guides that were brief and less detailed than the prep guides in their IT condition.…”

An Assessment of Group Size in Interteaching

“…For example, Saville and colleagues (2006) asked students to complete a two-item questionnaire at the end of the semester that asked which of the two teaching methods they preferred, and to rate their extent of learning from each method. Zayak and Paulk (2014) had a similar approach to evaluate social validity, but included additional open-ended questions in the form completed by participants. The reported preference for interteaching when compared to lecture has been mixed, with at least some studies reporting student preference for interteaching while others reported preference for lecture even when interteaching was more effective (see Querol, Rosales, & Soldner, 2015 for a review of empirical research on Interteaching including the use of social validity measures).…”

A Systematic Review and Quantitative Analysis of Interteaching

“…Lastly, contingency on discussion or prep guide completion was associated with the effectiveness of interteaching ( p < .05). Studies in which no contingencies were implemented (e.g., Edwards, 2005 ; Saville et al, 2014 ; Saville et al, 2005 ; Scoboria & Pascual-Leone, 2009 ; Slezak & Faas, 2017 ) had larger effect sizes than those that had contingencies in place (Anbro, 2015 ; Cezeaux & Keyser, 2018 ; Felderman, 2016 ; Rieken et al, 2018 ; Soldner et al, 2015 ; Zayac & Paulk, 2014 ). However, these findings should be interpreted carefully because a closer inspection of the records related to this regression showed that one of them reported a somewhat disproportionate effect size (Saville et al, 2014 ).…”