Instructor strategies to aid implementation of active learning: a systematic literature review

Abstract

Background Despite the evidence supporting the effectiveness of active learning in undergraduate STEM courses, the adoption of active learning has been slow. One barrier to adoption is instructors’ concerns about students’ affective and behavioral responses to active learning, especially student resistance. Numerous education researchers have documented their use of active learning in STEM classrooms. However, there is no research yet that systematically analyzes these studies for strategies to aid implementation of active learning and address students’ affective and behavioral responses. In this paper, we conduct a systematic literature review and identify 29 journal articles and conference papers that researched active learning, affective and behavioral student responses, and recommended at least one strategy for implementing active learning. In this paper, we ask: (1) What are the characteristics of studies that examine affective and behavioral outcomes of active learning and provide instructor strategies? (2) What instructor strategies to aid implementation of active learning do the authors of these studies provide? Results In our review, we noted that most active learning activities involved in-class problem solving within a traditional lecture-based course (N = 21). We found mostly positive affective and behavioral outcomes for students’ self-reports of learning, participation in the activities, and course satisfaction (N = 23). From our analysis of the 29 studies, we identified eight strategies to aid implementation of active learning based on three categories. Explanation strategies included providing students with clarifications and reasons for using active learning. Facilitation strategies entailed working with students and ensuring that the activity functions as intended. Planning strategies involved working outside of the class to improve the active learning experience. Conclusion To increase the adoption of active learning and address students’ responses to active learning, this study provides strategies to support instructors. The eight strategies are listed with evidence from numerous studies within our review on affective and behavioral responses to active learning. Future work should examine instructor strategies and their connection with other affective outcomes, such as identity, interests, and emotions.

Mixed Analysis of the Flipped Classroom in the Concrete and Steel Structures Subject in the Context of COVID-19 Crisis Outbreak. A Pilot Study

“…Active learning is anything that "involves students in doing things and thinking about the things they are doing" [25] and can be defined as classroom based activities designed to engage students in their learning through answering questions, solving problems, discussing content or teaching others, individually or in groups [26]. Despite the effectiveness of active learning that has been established by several studies [27], and specifically in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects [28,29], traditional teaching methods are still dominant in undergraduate courses [30,31].…”

“…FL implementation is flourishing in the academic world at all educational levels with different learning designs [26,37]. Research in FL show multiple benefits such as flexibility for the students [38], an increase in motivation [39,40], increased participation [41], improvement in interaction between students [42,43] and between students and teachers [44,45], in student engagement [46], in professional skills and in academic results [47], among others.…”

An attempt to evaluate STEAM project-based instruction from a school mathematics perspective

“…This result confirms that even when instruction is well executed, regardless of the method, learning requires student effort and commitment. In this light, Chaaban et al (2021) and Nguyen et al (2021) stated that numerous teachers abandon innovative educational practices due to students' resistance to cooperation. The collaborative learning dimension of the STE(A) M-PBL was contradictorily valued by the teachers, reporting this aspect of the instruction to be beneficial for some students and not for others.…”

“…When software like GeoGebra is required to approach a project, students need support and cannot be left freely in all steps of the practice (Blanco et al, 2019). Concerns arise also about how to deal with collaborative learning during the instruction (Nguyen et al, 2021). Sometimes teachers struggle to guide students in a meaningful way, as the latter may proceed freely eluding mathematics engagement (Diego-Mantecón et al, accepted).…”

“…Sometimes teachers struggle to guide students in a meaningful way, as the latter may proceed freely eluding mathematics engagement (Diego-Mantecón et al, accepted). Chaaban et al (2021) and Nguyen et al (2021) stressed that many teachers abandon collaborative learning due to students' resistance to change, and the fact that it generates low levels of effort in some students. To avoid this issue, Diego-Mantecón et al (2021) proposed working in small groups under the KIKS (Kids Inspiring Kids for STEAM) format.…”