Active Learning: Subtypes, Intra-Exam Comparison, and Student Survey in an Undergraduate Biology Course

Abstract

Active learning improves undergraduate STEM course comprehension; however, student comprehension using different active learning methods and student perception of active learning have not been fully explored. We analyze ten semesters (six years) of an undergraduate biology course (honors and non-honors sections) to understand student comprehension and student satisfaction using a variety of active learning methods. First, we describe and introduce active learning subtypes. Second, we explore the efficacy of active learning subtypes. Third, we compare student comprehension between course material taught with active learning or lecturing within a course. Finally, we determine student satisfaction with active learning using a survey. We divide active learning into five subtypes based on established learning taxonomies and student engagement. We explore subtype comprehension efficacy (median % correct) compared to lecture learning (median 92% correct): Recognition (100%), Reflective (100%), Exchanging (94.1%), Constructive (93.8%), and Analytical (93.3%). A bivariate random intercept model adjusted by honors shows improved exam performance in subsequent exams and better course material comprehension when taught using active learning compared to lecture learning (2.2% versus 1.2%). The student survey reveals a positive trend over six years of teaching in the Perceived Individual Utility component of active learning (tau = 0.21, p = 0.014), but not for the other components (General Theoretical Utility, and Team Situation). We apply our findings to the COVID-19 pandemic and suggest active learning adaptations for newly modified online courses. Overall, our results suggest active learning subtypes may be useful for differentiating student comprehension, provide additional evidence that active learning is more beneficial to student comprehension, and show that student perceptions of active learning are positively changing.

Active learning tools improve the learning outcomes, scientific attitude and critical thinking in higher education: Experiences in an online course during the COVID-19 pandemic

“…For this, we proposed problem-based learning strategies in questionnaires, elaboration of a scientific project and online quiz in order to complete the lectures. In the last few months, there has been a huge increase in the number of studies dedicated to developing and validating active learning strategies in remote or hybrid education, driven by the pandemic (Ghazi-Saidi et al, 2020; Hasnine and Ahmed, 2020; McGreevy and Church, 2020; Murugesan and Chidambaram, 2020; Qiang et al, 2020).…”

Active Learning: Basic Science Workshops, Clinical Science Cases, and Medical Role-Playing in an Undergraduate Biology Course

“…Like the hierarchical components in Bloom's Revised Taxonomy on Learning [21][22][23][24][25][26], we divided active learning into five subtypes: Recognition, Exchanging, Reflective, Constructive, and Analytical [20], situated from the least to the most advanced level of interaction, respectively. In our previous work, focused on an upper-level undergraduate biology course [20], we reasoned that three types of knowledge form the foundation of learning: technical understanding, which is the knowledge of terminology, facts, and recalls; theoretical understanding, which is the knowledge of reasoning and feelings; and systematic understanding, which is the knowledge of applying principles to synthesize answers and to diagnose problems. In Figure 2, the five active learning subtypes are given, aligned with the three types of learning knowledge, followed by a description of the aspects of active learning utilized within each of the subtypes.…”

“…Using this framework of active learning subtypes allows the teacher to select which component(s) offer(s) the best fit for combining active learning into an existing lecture-based course, or as the starting point for developing a new active-learning-based program. [20] for further information).…”

“…Most of the students enrolled in this course are majoring in biology, psychology, nutrition, exercise and sport science, epidemiology, or anthropology. McGreevy and Church [20] provide additional details regarding active learning subtypes, traditional lecture topics, examinations, grading, course surveys, and adapting the course in the presence of COVID-19.…”

“…Therefore, while we remain committed to the concept of lecturing, blending elements of active learning components with lectures may allow student learners to be better informed and educated in STEM courses. In addition, using different [20] for further information).…”