What is active learning?

Active learning refers to the robust research finding that learning is more durable and lasting when
students are cognitively engaged in the learning process. Long-term retention, understanding, and
transfer is result of mental work on the part of learners who are engaged in active sense-making and
knowledge construction. Accordingly, learning environments are most effective when they elicit effortful
cognitive processing from learners and guide them in constructing meaningful relationships between
ideas rather than encouraging passive recording of information.

Mayer notes that there are three primary cognitive processes involved in active learning: selecting
relevant material to attend to, mentally organizing attended material into meaningful representations,
and integrating these representations with prior knowledge. Effective active learning techniques engage
learners in one or more of these cognitive activities. The emphasis on appropriate mental processing is
critical as physical activity is neither necessary nor sufficient to promote successful learning. In fact, well-
designed lectures can promote active learning if they stimulate appropriate cognitive activity
(deWinstanley et al.; Clark & Mayer).

Why is active learning important?

Few educational interventions can match the power of active learning when it comes to improving
student academic outcomes. Researchers have consistently found that higher student achievement and
engagement are associated with instructional methods involving active learning techniques (e.g.,
Freeman et al.; McDermott et al.). Also, students employing active learning strategies in the planning,
monitoring, and evaluation of their learning progress have been found to outperform peers lacking
these skills.

And although educators have been encouraged to incorporate active learning strategies into their
teaching for decades, little has changed in how we teach students in higher education. Both traditional
face-to-face and online instruction continue to be characterized by information transmission models
relying almost exclusively on passive lecturing and textbook reading. This instructional approach affords
little opportunity for students to engage in the types of active processing required to create enduring
and transferable knowledge. In addition, surveys of college student behaviors reveal an overwhelming
reliance on passive learning strategies during study (Karpicke et al. 475). Common techniques such as
rereading, summarizing, and highlighting, for instance, involve minimal mental effort on the part of
students and are significantly less effective than more active alternatives (Dunlosky et al.).

Incorporating active learning into instruction

As Halpern and Hakel observe, the primary take away from research on active learning is that student
learning success depends much less on what instructors do than what they ask their students to do. So
what can we as instructors ask our students to do in order to promote more active learning?

Several active learning techniques are empirically well established and their positive learning effects
consistently demonstrated. We describe three of the most powerful here.  

 Students should be asked to generate connections, questions, and solutions. One of the

strongest findings in the learning sciences is that recall and comprehension is greater if learners
 are frequently required to produce ideas rather than exclusively receiving information from an
instructor or textbook (Bertsch et al.).

 Instruction should dedicate time toward helping learners integrate  new information into their
preexisting knowledge networks. Students come to an instructional situation with a robust
collection of prior beliefs, ideas, and experiences that must be linked to instructional content in
order to build the meaningful connections required for enduring knowledge (Ambrose and
Lovett).

 Finally, perhaps the most well-established active learning strategy is repeated and
spaced retrieval of learned information. Instruction should include frequent opportunities for
learners to engage in effortful recollection of information in order to promote long-term
retention and transfer (Karpicke and Blunt).

Where can I learn more about active learning?

For a brief introduction to the idea of active learning and some simple suggestions for incorporating
active learning into one’s teaching, see Hammer and Giordano. For an accessible discussion of much of
the research mentioned in this paper, in addition to many examples of instructor and student strategies
to make learning more active, see Brown, Roedigger, and McDaniel. Finally, for a comprehensive list of
50 active learning techniques that can be employed in many teaching situations, see Angelo and Cross.

Promoting Active Learning

ABOUT ACTIVE LEARNING

"Active learning" means students engage with the material, participate in the class, and collaborate with
each other.  Don't expect your students simply to listen and memorize; instead, have them help
demonstrate a process, analyze an argument, or apply a concept to a real-world situation.

THE IMPORTANCE OF ACTIVE LEARNING

Whether you’re facing a lecture hall filled with 300 students or a seminar table with 15 students, one of
your primary goals for the class should be to actively engage students with the material. Students learn
more when they participate in the process of learning, whether it’s through discussion, practice, review,
or application (Grunert, 1997). This is in stark contrast to traditional styles of teaching, where students
are expected to sit for hours, listening and, theoretically, absorbing information presented by the
instructor.

Incorporate active learning strategies into every component of your course design. For example,
encouraging short partner discussions during lectures (i.e., think-pair-share), adding problem- or case-
based research projects to the curriculum, and incorporating time for small-group critical analysis
exercises during seminars are all great ways to actively engage students in learning.

Because it can take time and creativity to develop active learning exercises, we provide many examples
on the Teaching Commons website, particularly in Teaching Strategies. Keep reading for some sample
strategies to help get you started.

Facilitate independent, critical, and creative thinking

Ask students to analyze, synthesize, or apply material, both during lectures and in assignments. Some
examples include:

 Case-based problem solving exercises  – these types of exercises help students develop analytical
skills and learn how to apply academic theories to real-world problems. Use case studies in a
lecture and have students work out their solutions independently or in small groups, or use case
studies as the basis for major projects or exams.

 Debate  – this is another active learning technique that helps develop critical thinking and logical
reasoning skills. Present competing viewpoints in lecture and assign students to defend one, or
both, of the viewpoints in a short (five-minute) written exercise or classroom debate. 

Encourage effective collaboration

Collaborative group work can be an extremely useful addition to a large class. Some examples include:

 Small-group discussions– there are many benefits to taking short think-pair-share breaks during
a lecture. These small-group discussions help students understand and retain material, while
also serving the broader goals of developing their communication skills and increasing their
awareness of their classmates as learning resources.

 Peer instruction exercises– one minute paper reflections or speed problem solving questions,
paired with peer to peer discussion, can be a very effective teaching strategy. Upon completion
of the question and at least one iteration, tally the answers.  Once the results are in, explain the
correct answer and demonstrate why the other options are misleading (Mazur, 1997). 

Research from cognitive psychology has shown that one of the best ways to improve understanding is to
teach material to a peer (Topping and Stewart, 1998). Build this exercise into your classes through
presentations, study groups, and quick, breakout “teaching” sessions, such as the one described above.

Increase student investment, motivation, and performance

When you invite students to actively participate in the learning environment, they take more
responsibility for their performance in the course. Similarly, when they have an opportunity to make
decisions about what they learn and how they use that knowledge, students see a course as more
valuable and more directly related to their goals. For example:

 Brainstorm learning objectives  – if you involve students in the development of classroom

activities, e.g., allow them to choose the topic of a short discussion or generate ideas about how
a concept could be applied to a problem that interests them, it automatically increases
engagement levels. Involving students in classroom activities also requires them to assess their
understanding and skill and rather than allowing them to rest comfortably with a surface
knowledge, it forces them to develop a deeper understanding of the material.

VPTL has a wide array of resources available for you to use in your classes here in Teaching
Commons and an extensive collection of books, articles, and handouts on active learning strategies
available for checkout from the VPTL Office. In addition, VPTL offers workshops and events throughout
the year on using active learning effectively in different class settings.

Incorporate active learning into your curriculum and transform your classroom into an exciting, dynamic
learning environment.

REFERENCES

Grunert, Judith. The course syllabus: A learning-centered approach. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Co,
Inc, 1997.

Mazur, Eric. Peer instruction: A user’s manual. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 1997.

Topping, Keith and Ehly Stewart, Peer-Assisted Learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Inc., 1998.

SEE ALSO

Introduction to Active Learning

ACTIVE LEARNING LEADS TO HIGHER GRADES AND FEWER FAILING STUDENTS IN SCIENCE, MATH, AND
ENGINEERING
Image Credit: velkr0/Flickr

IMAGE CREDIT: VELKR0 / FLICKR

THINK BACK TO when you learned how to ride a bike. You probably didn't master this skill by listening to
a series of riveting lectures on bike riding. Instead, you tried it out for yourself, made mistakes, fell down
a few times, picked yourself back up, and tried again. When mastering an activity, there's no substitute
for the interaction and feedback that comes from practice.

What if classroom learning was a little more active? Would university instruction be more effective if
students spent some of their class time on active forms of learning like activities, discussions, or group
work, instead of spending all of their class time listening?

A new study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences addressed this question by
conducting the largest and most comprehensive review of the effect of active learning on STEM
(Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) education. Their answer is a resounding yes.
According to Scott Freeman, one of the authors of the new study, "The impact of these data should be
like the Surgeon General's report on "Smoking and Health" in 1964–they should put to rest any debate
about whether active learning is more effective than lecturing."

Before you study something quantitatively, you have to define it. The authors combined 338 different
written responses to arrive at the following definition of active learning:

Active learning engages students in the process of learning through activities and/or discussion in class,
as opposed to passively listening to an expert. It emphasizes higher-order thinking and often involves
group work.
They then searched for classroom experiments where students in a STEM class were divided into two
groups - one group engaged in some form of active learning, while the other group participated in a
traditional lecture. At the end of the class, both groups took essentially identical exams.

The authors looked at studies where both groups were taught by the same instructor and the students
were assigned at random to each group, as well as less ideal experimental conditions, where the
instructors differed, or the students weren't assigned to groups at random. They evaluated the
performance of these studies using two metrics - their scores on identical exams, and the percentage of
students that failed (receiving a D, F or withdrawing from the class). In all, they identified 228 studies
matching their criteria, to analyze further.

Here's what they found.

1. Students in a traditional lecture course are 1.5 times more likely to fail, compared to students in
courses with active learning

The authors found that 34% of students failed their course under traditional lecturing, compared to 22%
of students under active learning. This suggests that, just in the studies that they analyzed, 3,500 more
students would have passed their courses if taught with active learning. By conservative estimates, this
would have saved the students about 3.5 million dollars in tuition. The authors point out that, were this
a medical study, an effect size this large and statistically significant would warrant stopping the study
and administering the treatment to everyone in the study.
A comparison of how students performed in active learning and lecture courses. The horizontal axis is
the failure rate, and the vertical axis is the relative number of courses with that failure rate. Under active
learning, the average failure rate drops from 33.8% to 21.8%. Image Credit: Freeman et al, PNAS.

A COMPARISON OF HOW STUDENTS PERFORMED IN ACTIVE LEARNING AND LECTURE COURSES. THE
HORIZONTAL AXIS IS THE FAILURE RATE, AND THE VERTICAL AXIS IS THE RELATIVE NUMBER OF COURSES
WITH THAT FAILURE RATE. UNDER ACTIVE LEARNING, THE AVERAGE FAILURE RATE DROPS FROM 33.8%
TO 21.8%. IMAGE CREDIT: FREEMAN ET AL, PNAS.

A large drop in the number of failing students meets a demonstrated need to increase the retention of
STEM students, and should be taken very seriously. Nearly a third of all students entering US colleges
and universities intend to major in STEM fields, and more than half of these students eventually either
switch their majors to a non-STEM field or drop out of college without a degree. This attrition problem is
particularly acute for minorities, as only 20% of under-represented minority students who are interested
in the STEM fields finish university with a STEM degree.
2. Students in active learning classes outperform those in traditional lectures on identical exams

On average, students taught with active learning outperformed those taught by lectures by 6
percentage points on their exam. That's the difference between bumping a B- to a B or a B to a B+.
Here's another way that the authors describe this result. Picture a student in a traditional lecture class
who scored higher than 50% of the students on the exam. If the same student were taught with active
learning instead, they would score higher than 68% of the students in this lecture class.

Image Credit: Freeman et al, PNAS.

THE INCREASE IN STUDENT GRADES (LEFT, MEASURED IN STANDARD DEVIATIONS), AND THE
PERCENTAGE DECREASE IN THE FAILURE RATE (RIGHT), BROKEN DOWN BY SUBJECT. IMAGE CREDIT:
FREEMAN ET AL, PNAS.

Both these results were incredibly robust. They held up for all of the STEM subjects for which there was
sufficient data. They held in large and small classes (although the impact of active learning was larger in
small classes), and they held in introductory as well as upper-level courses. The exam performance
results also held up irrespective of how the students were split into the two groups - whether the groups
had the same or different instructors, or whether the student were randomly assigned to courses or not.
The authors were also careful to account for whether their study was affected by publication biases (the
bias to publish positive results over negative ones) and they found that this did not significantly impact
their findings.
I asked Scott Freeman whether star lectures with strong teaching evaluations should be interested in
these findings as well. He responded,

"Most of the studies we analyzed were based on data from identical instructors teaching active learning
v lecturing sections; some studies (e.g. Van Heuvelen in Am. J. Physics; Deslauriers et al. in Science) have
purposely matched award-winning lecturers with inexperienced teachers who do active learning and
found that the students did worse when given "brilliant lectures." We've yet to see any evidence that
celebrated lecturers can help students more than even 1st-generation active learning does."

I'll leave the last word with Scott, who makes a strong case for active learning.

"[Under active learning,] students learn more, which means we're doing our job better. They get higher
grades and fail less, meaning that they are more likely to stay in STEM majors, which should help solve a
major national problem. Finally, there is a strong ethical component. There is a growing body of
evidence showing that active learning differentially benefits students of color and/or students from
disadvantaged backgrounds and/or women in male-dominated fields. It's not a stretch to claim that
lecturing actively discriminates against underrepresented students."

__ References__

Freeman et al. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics.
PNAS.

Data on STEM attrition rates from the Department of Education's STEM attrition report and
the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology report.

More Evidence That Active Learning Trumps Lecturing

By: Maryellen Weimer, PhD

 9


The June-July issue of The Teaching Professor newsletter highlights a study you don’t want to miss. It’s a
meta-analysis of 225 studies that compare STEM classes taught using various active learning approaches
with classes taught via lecture. “The results indicate that average examination scores improved by about
6% in active learning sessions, and that students in classes with traditional lecturing were 1.5 times
more likely to fail than were students in classes with active learning.” (p. 8410) Carl Wieman, a Nobel-
winning physicist who now does research on teaching and learning, describes the work as a “massive
effort” that provides “a much more extensive quantitative analysis of the research on active learning in
college and university STEM courses than previously existed.” (p. 8319) And what does he make of these
results? “The implications of these meta-analysis results for instruction are profound, assuming they are
indicative of what could be obtained if active learning methods replaced the lecture instruction that
dominates U.S. postsecondary STEM instruction.” (pp. 8319-8320) That’s a long way from the guarded

language usually found in commentaries on scientific results.

The findings of the meta-analysis aren’t are all that unexpected. Study after study, not just in the STEM
fields, but pretty much across the board, have reported findings that favor active learning approaches
over lecture. Most of us, especially readers of a blog like this one, don’t need to be convinced. We know
that learning is harder from the sidelines. If deep understanding is the objective, then the learner had
best get out there and play the game. Watching others problem-solve, think critically, paint watercolors,
or start an IV may provide a sense of how it’s done, but that’s not how you learn to perform on the field.

There is less defense of lecture than there used to be and more apologizing by those who do. “I have to
lecture. What else can you do in these large classes?” “I can’t get the content covered if I don’t lecture.”
“Students want me to lecture.” Valid excuses? Not really. Examples of active learning strategies being
used in large classes abound. Teachers may cover the content, but if that doesn’t promote learning,
does it really matter that it’s been covered? And since when did education become governed by what
learners may think they need or want?

But despite what we know, those apologies, and the resultant feelings of guilt, there’s still an awful lot
of lecture happening in most fields and on most campuses. It remains our default instructional mode.
We go there first and we stay there the longest. Lecturing allows us to pledge allegiance to the content.

I know, I’m sounding adamant, but the evidence is in. The case is closed. Active learning wins. If we
aspire to make our practice evidence-based, then we need to do a very honest analysis of how often
we’re finding ourselves front and center, covering the content. We need to more aggressively raise the
issue with our colleagues, in our departments, at our institutions, and within our professional
associations.

No, lecturing doesn’t need to be against the law with harsh sentences levied against those who continue
to do it. I still believe there are times when teachers need to share their expertise, when efficiency
makes telling students the only reasonable option. Teachers can explain things clearly, cogently, and
with passion. There’s a place for that in the classroom as well, but it’s a much smaller place than it
currently occupies in many classrooms.

It is true that we still don’t know as much about active learning as we need to know. For example, we
don’t how much is needed to make a difference in a class session or across the course. We don’t know
which of the many active learning approaches (group work, clickers, online discussion, hands-on
experience, etc.) work best with what kinds of content and for what kinds of learners. We’ve got lots to
learn, but we definitely know enough to challenge ourselves and our colleagues to step back from
lecture and move forward with approaches that feature students taking action.

References: Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okorafor, N., Jordt, H., and
Wenderoth, M.P., (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and
mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 111 (23), 8410-8415.

Weiman, C.E., (2014. Large-scale comparison of science teaching methods sends clear
message. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 111 (23), 8319-8320.

Research: Active Learning More Important than Flipping the Classroom

 By Leila Meyer

 03/03/15

Active learning produces the same student learning outcomes in both flipped and nonflipped
classrooms, according to new research from Brigham Young University (BYU).

In the flipped classroom model, students watch video lectures outside of class time and participate in
active learning activities during class time. The approach has been growing in popularity, so researchers
at BYU decided to test its effectiveness.

They created two freshman biology classes, one that used the flipped model and one that didn't.
Otherwise, the classes were nearly identical. They had the same instructor, lectures, assignments and
activities. There were 55 students in one class and 53 in the other. They were taught one after another
at the same time of day. And they used the same level of active learning in and out of the classroom,
according to information from BYU. At the end of the semester, the exam results of both groups of
students were equivalent.

The researchers concluded that the flipped classroom doesn't produce higher student learning
outcomes than a nonflipped classroom when both use an active learning approach. Whether instructors
flip their classrooms or not, the key to improving learning outcomes is to involve students actively in the
learning process, constructing their own knowledge rather than just passively listening to lectures.

"If you're not using a model with active learning already, then the flipped classroom is certainly a viable
alternative," said Tyler Kummer, one of the authors of the study, in a prepared statement. "But if you
are, you're already going to be seeing the learning advantages in your course."

The study was conducted by Jamie Jensen, a professor of biology and discipline-based educational
researcher at BYU; Tyler Kummer, a biology PhD student at BYU; and Patricia Godoy from Universidade
Potiguar in Brazil.

The full study, "Improvements from a Flipped Classroom May Simply Be the Fruits of Active Learning,"
was published in the March issue of CBE-Life Sciences Education.

About the Author

Leila Meyer is a technology writer based in British Columbia. She can be reached
at [email protected]. 

Active Learning

Active learning is a term that refers to several models of instruction that focus the responsibility for
learning onto the learners themselves. In the early 1990’s educational researchers Bonwell and Eison
suggested that in order to learn, students must do more than just listen--they must read, write, discuss
and/or be engaged in solving problems. In particular, students must engage in higher-order thinking
tasks such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.

Some studies have shown that introducing the active learning activity before lectures or readings results
in deeper learning, understanding, and transfer of knowledge. Others have indicated that in order to
create participation and draw on the wisdom of all the learners the classroom, arrangements need to be
made for flexible seating to allow for the creation of small groups. The degree of instructor guidance
students need while being "active" is up for debate and may vary according to the task and its place in a
teaching unit.

Bottom line--active learning engages students in two aspects – doing things and thinking about the
things they are doing. Some examples of active learning activities include:

 Class discussions - Held in class or in an online environment, these can be conducted with any
class size, although it is typically more effective in smaller group settings. Class discussions allow
for instructor guidance of the learning experience and importantly, require the learners to think
 critically on the subject matter and use logic to evaluate their and others' positions. Class
discussions also help students explore a diversity of perspectives and show respect for students’
voices and experiences.

 Think-Pair-Share Activity – This is when you ask students to take a minute to think about the
content from the previous class session, discuss it with one or more of their classmates and
finally to share it with the class as part of a formal discussion. When properly implemented,
think-pair-share saves instructor time, helps students to get more involved in class discussions
and also provides a cumulative assessment of student progress. TPS is not a good strategy to use
in very large classes because of time and logistical constraints.  

 Brief Writing Exercises – Sometimes called the "one minute paper", this is a good way to review
material and provide feedback to students. Typically an instructor will allow students to have at
least 10 minutes to work on this exercise and then ask students to present the information in
close to a minute.  

 Debates – These are an active way to learn because they allow students the chance to take a
position and gather information to support their view and explain it to others. These debates
not only give the student a chance to participate in a fun activity but it also lets them gain some
experience with giving a verbal presentation.

 Games – These are considered an energetic way to learn because they not only help students to
review course material before a big exam, they also help students to enjoy the learning process.
One example is to review your course content by morphing it into something like the television
game “Jeopardy”.

Links:

 Basic Active Learning Strategies

 Using Active Learning Instructional Strategies to Create Excitement and Enhance Learning

 Active Learning for the College Classroom

 Does Active Learning Work?  A Review of the Research

 Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom

For information about this or any other instructional pedagogies, contact the IT Office by either stopping
in to Whitman 114, calling 315-443-2342 or by emailing [email protected].
What is Active Learning?

The term “active learning” is certainly not a new one. It has become increasingly common amongst
college classrooms in recent years. The result has been a tremendous amount of research on the topic.
Numerous studies have supported the benefits of active learning in regard to its impact on teaching and
student learning. Researchers and faculty have interpreted it in various ways. Michael Prince explains,
“Active learning is generally defined as any instructional method that engages students in the learning
process. In short, active learning requires students to do meaningful learning activities and think about
what they are doing” (Prince, 2004). Prince’s definition is drawn from foundational work done by
Bonwell and Eison (Bonwell, 2000 and Eison, 2010) and has been widely accepted.

Active Learning vs. Engaged Learning

Instructors sometimes ask how active learning is related to “engaged learning.” At the University of
Michigan, engaged learning is defined as the education experiences in which “students have
opportunities to practice in unscripted, authentic settings, where stakeholders (including the students
themselves) are invested in the outcome.” For more information about engaged learning at U-M,
visit Engaged Learning at Michigan.

What Does Active Learning Look Like in the Classroom?

In a course focused on active learning, students are truly engaged in the learning process. They might be
grappling with the course material by working collaboratively on problems. They are constantly
processing what they are learning. Students may look at PowerPoint slides, but they are also discussing
or debating questions posed by the instructor and are asked to critically analyze the information
presented. They may search the Internet, but they are looking for data and resources to support their
arguments. In some cases, they are exposed to an extensive amount of material outside of class so that
most of the in-class time can be devoted to hands-on learning (see examples of First Exposure to Course
Content). In fact, some courses are so active that an outside observer might not be able to immediately
identify who the instructor is, as the instructor might be circulating and interacting with groups of
working students.
Benefits of Active Learning
The benefits of active learning have been supported time and again in the literature. By comparing
student learning gains in introductory physics courses, Richard Hake was able to show that interactive
courses were over two times as effective in promoting conceptual understanding as compared to
traditional ones (Hake, 1998). A more recent meta-analysis by Freeman et al. reported results from 225
studies across STEM disciplines, comparing traditional lecture to active learning (Freeman, 2014). In
general, students’ average exam scores were shown to improve by around 6% in active learning classes.
Additionally, students involved in traditional lecture were found to be 1.5 times more likely to fail as
compared to those in classes with significant active learning.

It takes time and creativity to effectively incorporate active learning strategies into teaching and achieve
the full benefits across instructional settings and disciplines. But as many of the faculty members we
profile demonstrate, active learning can easily and effectively be incorporated into existing courses and
materials without the need for a dramatic overhauling of the course.

This website focuses on the following:

 reflecting on your own practice to identify areas in which active learning could be used, and
identifying strategies already being used that can be built upon

 making active learning work -- tips and techniques for integrating active learning strategies while
avoiding common pitfalls

 U-M faculty examples of how active learning strategies are integrated in teaching

 resources for further exploration, including discipline-specific resources and the research that
supports our conclusions about the efficacy of active learning.  

Reflect on your own teaching, explore our faculty examples, and plan to engage students in the learning
process. As always, CRLT has a variety of resources, from our blog to one-on-one consultations, to
support you.