Association for Behavior Analysis International

In 2013, Saville and colleagues examined whether group size affected course performance in an interteaching based classroom, and found there was no significant difference in course performance between the different sizes of groups. In this replication and extension, we increased the larger interteaching group size from four to six, maintained the small group size at two, and included additional measures of social validity. The students rated their groups each class as a group and individually. Additionally, teaching assistants rated their perception of group effectiveness based on responses to end-of-class questions by individual students. The current study used an alternating treatments design to compared weekly test performance and discussion quality between the small and large interteaching groups. The weekly quiz scores do not show a difference between the two group sizes; however, clear preferences for group size emerged. This paper will discuss the findings and implications of the social validity data.

In this study, the researchers contrasted the impact of interteaching with a traditional lecture on quiz grades and social validity metrics. The participants were two sections of students in a hybrid graduate experimental analysis of behavior course. Using an alternating design between each type of instructional technology and a split approach in which the two instructors were yoked in content and instructional technology for the first half of the semester and then had opposing technologies for the second half. The data demonstrate that the two sections performed near-identically when yoked on technology, and the divergence in the second half suggest that at the least, Interteaching is equivalent to the traditional lecture and that students tend to prefer it. This study demonstrates that Interteaching can be done in a fully remote or hybrid setup (students in class and remotely joined).