Jigsaw & Anatomy
-
Upload
andy-saltarelli -
Category
Education
-
view
879 -
download
3
description
Transcript of Jigsaw & Anatomy
The Effects of Virtual Labs and Cooperative Learning on Student Achievement and Motivation in
Anatomy Instruction.
Andy Saltarelli, Ph.D.Faculty Center for Innovative Teaching
Central Michigan Universityfacit.cmich.edu
William Saltarelli, Ph.D.College of Health ProfessionsCentral Michigan Univeristy
300 students per semester
4 credit course
15 lab sections taught by 7 GAs
1 large lecture and 2 labs per week
DEW ~30%
HSC 214 – Human Anatomy
HSC 214 – Anatomy StudyVirtual Labs via Simulation
SoftwareAnatomy & Physiology Revealed 3.0
(APR)
Cooperative Learning via Jigsaw
(Johnson & Johnson, 1998)
Two Interventions
Study #1 – Spring 2010
APR Only Lab
Cadaver Only Lab
Simulated LabCadaver
Lab
Conclusions:
Results: Cadaver-only students performed better than APR-only
Explanation: We did not teach students how to use the APR software well and perceptions of software were poor
Solution: Infuse active learning (e.g., cooperative learning) to ameliorate observed negative effects of simulation software
VS
Study #2 – Fall 2011 Experimental-control Study:
2 Instructional Technology (APR, Cadaver) X 2 Cooperative Learning (Jigsaw, No Jigsaw)
APR +
Jigsaw
APR +
Individual
Cadaver +
Jigsaw
Cadaver +
Individual
APRSoftware
CadaverOnly
Jigsaw Individual
Study #2 – Fall 2011 Jigsaw + APR Software
Study #2 – Results
Quantitative:
Outcome Variables
Achievement (Quiz Grade, 1-Week Retention, Overall Course Grade)
Intrinsic Motivation (Relatedness, Interest, Value)
Cooperative Perceptions (Cooperative, Competitive, Individualistic)
Conflict Regulation (Epistemic, Relational)
Attitude Toward Technology
Achievement Results
Result: Students who participated in the jigsaw activity performed better* than those that didn’t on the 1-week retention quiz. *Wilks's λ=.97, F(1,218) p = .04
Results: Achievement
Result: Students who studied with APR in lab performed worse on the intial quiz, but the same as cadaver-only on the 1-week retention quiz.
Results: Motivation
Result: Students who participated in the jigsaw activity had higher motivation* than those who didn’t participate. *F=5.96, P=.01
Results: Motivation
Result: Students who studied with APR in lab had lower motivation* than cadaver-only students. *F=28.83, P<.001
Results: Motivation
Result: Results suggest* that the jigsaw activity ameliorated decreases in motivation observed in the APR group. *Jig x APR Interaction, F = 6.57, p = .01
Results: Epistemic Regulation
Result: Students who participated in the jigsaw activity had higher epistemic regulation (more focused on learning content)* those who didn’t participate. *Wilks's λ=.95, F(1,213) p < .01
Study #2 – Results Qualitative (Regarding Jigsaw Activity):
•I liked how I was able to teach and be taught at the same time.
•I liked teaching my objectives to others. It helped me learn more in depth.
•I liked this activity because it allows us to work together more and receive feedback from each other.
•I enjoyed teaching the material to others. It makes it so I have to master it in order to teach it.
•The group activity helped me get more involved and learn different ways to study the material.
Next Steps Analyze Remaining Data & Submit Manuscript for
Publication
Jigsaw and APR are being introduced large-scale in HSC 214 (honors section)
Present simulations and cooperative learning as evidence-based, proof-of-concept “interventions” to improve student learning and retention in large STEM courses (e.g., MTH 105, CHM 132-133)