Faculty at many colleges and universities are redesigning courses to address differences in student learning preferences. In this study, the researchers surveyed students in two similar American Politics classes. In one, the instructor used a traditional large-class lecture format. In the other, lectures were supplemented with weekly small-group discussions to facilitate more in-depth engagement with course material. We subsequently surveyed students in both classes about their political knowledge gains, perceptions of politics, and views on critical thinking. Due to nonrandom group assignment, we estimate the effects using propensity score matching. Our results indicate that there were different types of students enrolled in each class. Students who experienced the small-group discussions were more likely to score better on critical thinking questions, but they were not as likely to demonstrate more general knowledge about political science in their responses. There are almost no estimation differences based on whether we use propensity score matching or linear regression.