HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (9) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Pelaez, N. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Pelaez, N. J.

HOW WE TEACH

PROBLEM-BASED WRITING WITH PEER REVIEW IMPROVES ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN PHYSIOLOGY

Department of Biological Science, College of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, California State University, Fullerton, Fullerton, California 92834

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine whether problem-based writing with peer review (PW-PR) improves undergraduate student performance on physiology exams. Didactic lectures were replaced with assignments to give students practice explaining their reasoning while solving qualitative problems, thus transferring the responsibility for abstraction and generalization to the students. Performance on exam items about concepts taught using PW-PR was compared with performance on concepts taught using didactic lectures followed by group work. Calibrated Peer Review^TM, a Web-delivered program, was used to collect student essays and to manage anonymous peer review after students "passed" three calibration peer reviews. Results show that the students had difficulty relating concepts. Relationship errors were categorized as 1) problems recognizing levels of organization, 2) problems with cause/effect, and 3) overgeneralizations. For example, some described cells as molecules; others thought that vesicles transport materials through the extracellular fluid. With PW-PR, class discussion was used to confront and resolve such difficulties. Both multiple-choice and essay exam results were better with PW-PR instead of lecture.

Key words: active learning; elementary physiology; writing to learn

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. A. Danielson, A. J. Fales-Williams, S. D. Sorden, R. K. Myers, H. S. Bender, and E. M. Mills Peer Assessment of a Final-Year Capstone Experience for Formative Evaluation of a Pathology Curriculum J Vet Med Educ, September 1, 2008; 35(3): 466 - 474. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. E. Timmerman, D. C. Strickland, and S. M. Carstensen Curricular reform and inquiry teaching in biology: where are our efforts most fruitfully invested? Integr. Comp. Biol., August 1, 2008; 48(2): 226 - 240. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. L. Tauck Using a classic paper by Gottschalk and Mylle to teach the countercurrent model of urinary concentration Advan Physiol Educ, June 1, 2006; 30(2): 63 - 66. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Poronnik and R. W. Moni The Opinion Editorial: teaching physiology outside the box Advan Physiol Educ, June 1, 2006; 30(2): 73 - 82. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. J. Pelaez, D. D. Boyd, J. B. Rojas, and M. A. Hoover Prevalence of blood circulation misconceptions among prospective elementary teachers Advan Physiol Educ, September 1, 2005; 29(3): 172 - 181. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]