Group Problem-Solving versus Lecture in College-Level Quantitative Analysis: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Abstract

The purpose of this semester-long study was to investigate the effect of replacing traditional lecture with cooperative group problem-solving sessions in a junior-level quantitative analysis course. The control and treatment groups had the same instructor, met on the same day, had the same reading assignments, and had common exams. The instructor worked sample problems for the control group. In the treatment group, students were assigned to heterogeneous cooperative groups of 4. The groups solved problems presented on an overhead that were the same or equivalent in content and number to those used in the control group. Students were responsible for making sure that all members of the group could work each problem. The students' reasoning abilities were measured by the Test of Logical Thinking (TOLT). Groups were compared on quiz, exam, final, and course grades. Other data included attitudinal surveys, observations, field notes, interviews, and open-response evaluations. No significant differences were found in content measures. Differences were found in the number of students dropping the course and in the attitudes and perceptions of the two groups. Qualitative measures support a number of assertions concerning more positive attitudes and lower withdrawal rates in the treatment group, and a case for mixed delivery modes.