The use of small groups in a large lecture microbiology course

In the fall of 1997, we started using small groups in our large (100–200 students) junior level introductory microbiology course. Students form five-person groups early in the semester, and work on projects within these groups throughout the semester. These projects involve exploration of concepts such as metabolism, protein synthesis, and viral reproduction strategies and the submission of a poster describing a disease of their choice at the end of the semester. We have refined the use of the small groups during the last three semesters, and student acceptance and performance have improved steadily. In the fall semester of 1998, a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of these group projects was performed. Students were chosen at random to participate in student consultation groups to discuss group projects. Furthermore, we utilized a master teacher-in-residence from the Rocky Mountain Teachers Education Collaborative (RMTEC). This teacher-in-residence attended our classes, spoke with students, helped with student consultation groups, and provided observations of student responses to group work activities. RMTEC also provided funds to hire a research assistant to conduct student consultation groups, analyze student evaluations of our course, and compare evaluations from before and after the implementation of group examinations. Additionally, the Center for Teaching and Learning at Colorado State University assisted with mid-semester evaluations in each subsequent semester. The results of our analysis show that small groups in large lectures can be an effective learning tool provided students are given well-designed activities with clearly defined, obtainable goals and clearly articulated guidelines. Our experience also shows that the manner in which the instructor presents the process to students affects students' willingness to participate in the process. It must be clearly articulated to students why he has incorporated active learning strategies into the course, what he hopes students will gain from the experience, and how he expects students to participate in these activities. We recognize the increase in workload on ourselves as instructors, but the benefits seem worth the additional time and effort. This paper describes the group process that we use and provides an evaluation of the effort. Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology (2000) 25, 121–126. Received 24 March 1999/ Accepted in revised form 23 November 1999