Articles of Interest

Brent, R., & Felder, R. M. (1998). The new faculty member. Chemical Engineering Education, 32(3), 46-47. | View article online. . . 
 
Cohen, G. L., Garcia, J., Apfel, N., & Master, N. (2006). Reducing the racial achievement gap: a social-psychological Intervention. Science, 313 (5791), 1307. | Read article online. . . 
 
Crouch, C.H., & Mazur, E. (2001) Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970-977. 
A paper looking a results of studies of the efficacy of Mazur's Peer Instruction. | Download PDF version. . .
 
Felder, R. M. (1994). Things I wish they had told me. Chemical Engineering Education, 28(2), 108-109.| Read online. . .
 
Hake, R. R. (1988). Interactive-engagement vs traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 64- 74.
A comparison of physics taught using traditional lecture and interactive engagement methods. The comparison involves more than 5,500 students. | Download PDF version. . .
 
Haunsperger, D., Galotti, K. M., Cass, M., & Paas, M. W. (2002). Where does the time go? Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, 23, 91-94. | Download PDF version. . .
 
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K.A. (1998). Cooperative Learning Returns to College: What Evidence Is There That It Works? Change, July/August 1998.
A meta-analysis of numerous studies examining the efficacy of cooperative learning in comparison to traditional lecture. | Download PDF version. . . 
 
NEW! Labov, J. B., Singer, S. R., George, M. D., Schweingruber, H. A., & Hilton, M. L. (2009). Effective Practices in Undergraduate STEM Education, Part 1: Examining the Evidence. Cell Biology Education—Life Sciences Education 8,157–161. | Download PDF version. . . 

Prince, M. (2004). Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231.
A survey of the literature on active learning, cooperative learning, and problem-based learning. It provides both working definitions and an analysis of the studies that the authors found. | Download PDF version. . .
 
Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effcts of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: a meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 21-51.
Study involving student-reported learning gains in a comparison of collaborative learning and traditional lecture in the Ecsel Coalition. |  Download PDF version. . .
 
Terenzini, P. T., Cabrera, A. F., Colbeck, C. L., Parente, J. M., & Bjorklund, S. A. (2001). Collaborative learning vs. lecture/discussion: students’ reported learning gain. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(1), 123-130. | Download PDF version. . .
 
Wright, J. C., Millar, S. B., Kosciuk, S.A., Penberthy, D. L., Williams, P. H., & Wampold, B. E. (1998). A Novel Strategy for Assessing the Effects of Curriculum Reform on Student Competence. Journal of Chemical Education, 85(8), 986-992.
A comparison of chemistry courses taught using active/cooperative learning and lecture at the University of Wisconsin. | Download PDF version. . .