Student Buy-In to Active Learning in a College Science Course

Cavanagh, Andrew; Aragón, Oriana R.; Chen, Xinnian; Couch, Brian A.; Durham, Mary F.; Bobrownicki, Aiyana; Hanauer, David I.; Graham, Mark

doi:10.1187/cbe.16-07-0212

Cited by 117 publications

(148 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

146

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, one study investigating what types of expectations students had about pedagogy in college STEM classes found that first-year students expected more active-learning techniques to be used than non-first-year students (Brown et al, 2017). Furthermore, using surveys has been an effective way of measuring student buy-in and engagement with STEM classes (Brazeal et al, 2016;Cavanagh et al, 2016). These studies revealed that students think that active-learning teaching strategies support their learning in class and lead them to engage in more self-regulated learning habits out of class, such as meeting with other students to complete assignments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Types of Instructional Shifts Do Students Experience? Investigating Active Learning in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Classes across Key Transition Points from Middle School to the University Level

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the need for a strong Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) workforce, there is a high attrition rate for students who intend to complete undergraduate majors in these disciplines. Students who leave STEM degree programs often cite uninspiring instruction in introductory courses, including traditional lecturing, as a reason. While undergraduate courses play a critical role in STEM retention, little is understood about the instructional transitions students encounter upon moving from secondary to post-secondary STEM courses. This study compares classroom observation data collected using the Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM from over 450 middle school, high school, introductory-level university, and advanced-level university classes across STEM disciplines. We find similarities between middle school and high school classroom instruction, which are characterized by a large proportion of time spent on active-learning instructional strategies, such as small-group activities and peer discussion. By contrast, introductory and advanced university instructors devote more time to instructor-centered teaching strategies, such as lecturing. These instructorcentered teaching strategies are present in classes regardless of class enrollment size, class period length, or whether or not the class includes a separate laboratory section. Middle school, high school, and university instructors were also surveyed about their views of what STEM instructional practices are most common at each educational level and asked to provide an explanation of those perceptions. Instructors from all levels struggled to predict the level of lecturing practices and often expressed uncertainty about what instruction looks like at levels other than their own. These findings suggest that more opportunities need to be created for instructors across multiple levels of the education system to share their active-learning teaching practices and discuss the transitions students are making between different educational levels.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Types of Instructional Shifts Do Students Experience? Investigating Active Learning in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Classes across Key Transition Points from Middle School to the University Level

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Student perceptions of AL are also important and can influence whether faculty implement such practices in their courses; concern that students will avoid their courses due to more “difficult” or involved coursework or students simply not liking the technique have prevented some faculty from implementing pre-prepared AL modules (14). Students themselves may perceive that they learn and retain information better through AL, however this doesn’t necessarily mean that they like or fully engage in classes that implement AL (15,17,19,20). Much of this resistance seems to stem from the desire to passively acquire information from an expert – the instructor – which is perceived to require less effort than actively constructing their own knowledge and dealing with the uncertainty of having the “right” answer, in spite of the fact that these are features not only of AL, but also of the scientific process in general (17,19).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Roles matter: Graduate student perceptions of active learning in the STEM courses they take and those they teach

Wischusen

Patrick

Howell

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

17 Despite many calls to reform undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) 18 education to incorporate active learning into classes, there has been little attention paid to 19 graduate level classrooms or courses taught by graduate students. Here, we set out to understand 20 if and how STEM graduate students' perceptions of active learning change in the classes they 21 take versus those they teach by administering surveys to STEM graduate students at our 22 institution. We found that graduate students had taken relatively few graduate level classes using 23 active learning and they felt that more time should devoted to active learning in the courses they 24 were taking. Teaching assistants felt that they were devoting the right amount of class time to 25 active learning in the classes they taught. Graduate students also felt that they were using 26 teaching methods in the classes they taught that were different from those they thought should be 27 used when teaching undergraduates and were different from how they preferred to learn when 28 taking classes. These findings suggest that graduate students' perceptions of teaching and 29 learning changed based on their role in the classroom, which have implications for graduate level 30 course work and professional development programs. 31 3 32 Introduction 33 "Active learning is an instructional method in which students 34 become engaged participants in the classroom. Students are 35 responsible for their own learning through the use of in-class: 36 written exercises, games, problem sets, clickers, debates, class 37 discussions, etc."-Miller and Metz (2014) 38 39 Active learning (AL) techniques encompass a variety of teaching practices in which students 40 actively engage with the course content and each other to construct their own knowledge. AL 41 increases student engagement, learning, and course grades, and reduces failure rates (e.g., 1-5); 42 these findings are so ubiquitous (but see 6), that researchers have shifted their focus from 43 proving the benefits of active learning to determining which techniques are most useful for 44 which students in which contexts (7). Despite the preponderance of evidence, AL is not yet used 45 in all classrooms, particularly at the college level (8,9) and much work has sought to identify and 46 lower barriers to implementing AL and other evidence-based teaching practices for faculty 47 teaching undergraduate courses (10-14). Commonly identified barriers for faculty include class 48 size, insufficient class time, and insufficient time to prepare materials (11,13,15). 49Faculty and student perceptions of and attitudes toward AL have also been identified as 50 potential barriers to AL adoption (14-20). Unsurprisingly, if faculty don't perceive that AL is 51 useful or beneficial, they report not using AL in their classrooms; a survey of faculty across 52 disciplines found that attitudes toward AL was the most important predictor AL adoption (18).53 Student perceptions of AL are also important and can influen...

show abstract

“…This prior work focusing on summative assessments suggests that student perceptions regarding the purpose and benefits of FAs could impact student interactions with FAs and the learning that results. If students understand and value how particular FA methods can facilitate their learning (i.e., if they “buy into” their use), then they may be more likely to put more effort into completing and using them in productive ways (Cavanagh et al , 2016). Conversely, if students view these methods as unhelpful or irrelevant to their learning, they may choose to engage with FAs in superficial ways that undermine learning (e.g., rushing through them or copying answers from the Internet).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterizing Student Perceptions of and Buy-In toward Common Formative Assessment Techniques

Brazeal

Brown

Couch

2016

LSE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Student Buy-In to Active Learning in a College Science Course

Cited by 117 publications

References 60 publications

What Types of Instructional Shifts Do Students Experience? Investigating Active Learning in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Classes across Key Transition Points from Middle School to the University Level

What Types of Instructional Shifts Do Students Experience? Investigating Active Learning in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Classes across Key Transition Points from Middle School to the University Level

Roles matter: Graduate student perceptions of active learning in the STEM courses they take and those they teach

Characterizing Student Perceptions of and Buy-In toward Common Formative Assessment Techniques

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About