An integrative review of in-class activities that enable active learning in college science classroom settings

ABSTRACT Engaging students in active learning is linked to positive learning outcomes. This study aims to synthesise the peer-reviewed literature about ‘active learning’ in college science classroom settings. Using the methodology of an integrative literature review, 337 articles archived in the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) are examined. Four categories of in-class activities emerge: (i) individual non-polling activities, (ii) in-class polling activities, (iii) whole-class discussion or activities, and (iv) in-class group activities. Examining the collection of identified in-class activities through the lens of a theoretical framework informed by constructivism and social interdependence theory, we synthesise the reviewed literature to propose the active learning strategies (ALSs) model and the instructional decisions to enable active learning (IDEAL) theory. The ALS model characterises in-class activities in terms of the degrees to which they are designed to promote (i) peer interaction and (ii) social interdependence. The IDEAL theory includes the ALS model and provides a framework for conceptualising different levels of the general concept ‘active learning’ and how these levels connect to instructional decision-making about using in-class activities. The proposed ALS model and IDEAL theory can be utilised to inform instructional decision-making and future research about active learning in college science courses.

[1]  Erik Brogt.  A Theoretical Background on a Successful Implementation of Lecture-Tutorials , 2007 .

[2]  Michael P. Shaver.  Using Low-Tech Interactions in the Chemistry Classroom to Engage Students in Active Learning. , 2010 .

[3]  Kris Bosworth,et al.  Developing collaborative skills in college students , 1994 .

[4]  Michael J. Prince,et al.  Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research , 2004 .

[5]  Steve Olson,et al.  Engage to Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates with Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Report to the President. , 2012 .

[6]  N. Lewis.  A dynamic theory of personality , 1935 .

[7]  Scott Freeman,et al.  Prescribed active learning increases performance in introductory biology , 2007, CBE life sciences education.

[8]  T. Gok.  The Effects of Peer Instruction on Students' Conceptual Learning and Motivation. , 2012 .

[9]  Miguel P Caldas,et al.  Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches , 2003 .

[10]  Susan E. Shadle,et al.  IMPLEMENTING PROCESS ORIENTED GUIDED INQUIRY LEARNING (POGIL) IN UNDERGRADUATE BIOMECHANICS: LESSONS LEARNED BY A NOVICE , 2013 .

[11]  Noah D. Finkelstein,et al.  The Construction of Different Classroom Norms during Peer Instruction: Students Perceive Differences. , 2010 .

[12]  Michelle K. Smith,et al.  The Benefits of Using Clickers in Small-Enrollment Seminar-Style Biology Courses , 2011, CBE life sciences education.

[13]  Josh Gutwill-Wise,et al.  The Impact of Active and Context-Based Learning in Introductory Chemistry Courses: An Early Evaluation of the Modular Approach , 2001 .

[14]  José A. Amador,et al.  The Practice of Problem Based Learning , 2007 .

[15]  Mary Dengler,et al.  Classroom Active Learning Complemented by an Online Discussion Forum to Teach Sustainability , 2008 .

[16]  Diane Ebert-May,et al.  Scientific Teaching , 2004, Science.

[17]  Roger T. Johnson,et al.  Intellectual Legacy: Cooperation and Competition , 2011 .

[18]  The use of an active learning approach to teach metabolism to students of nutrition and dietetics , 2013, Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.

[19]  J. Hartley,et al.  Note‐taking: A critical review , 1978 .

[20]  Kathryn E. Perez,et al.  Does Displaying the Class Results Affect Student Discussion during Peer Instruction? , 2010, CBE life sciences education.

[21]  K. Charmaz,et al.  Constructing Grounded Theory , 2014 .

[22]  Jessica J. Smay,et al.  Increasing Learning in Introductory Geoscience Courses Using Lecture Tutorials , 2008 .

[23]  D R Krathwohl,et al.  A REVISION OF BLOOMS TAXONOMY: AN OVERVIEW , 2002 .

[24]  Michelle K. Smith,et al.  Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[25]  Sara M. Hein,et al.  Positive impacts using POGIL in organic chemistry , 2012 .

[26]  David E. Meltzer,et al.  Transforming the lecture-hall environment: The fully interactive physics lecture , 2002 .

[27]  J D Walker,et al.  A delicate balance: integrating active learning into a large lecture course. , 2008, CBE life sciences education.

[28]  K. Tanner,et al.  Feature Approaches to Biology Teaching and Learning Considering the Role of Affect in Learning : Monitoring Students ’ Self-Efficacy , Sense of Belonging , and Science Identity , 2014 .

[29]  Luiza A. Nogaj.  Using Active Learning in a Studio Classroom to Teach Molecular Biology. , 2013 .

[30]  Gili Marbach-Ad,et al.  Student Attitudes and Recommendations on Active Learning: A Student-Led Survey Gauging Course Effectiveness. , 2001 .

[31]  D. Nicol,et al.  Peer Instruction versus Class-wide Discussion in Large Classes: A comparison of two interaction methods in the wired classroom , 2003 .

[32]  Douglas K. Duncan,et al.  Clickers: A New Teaching Aid with Exceptional Promise , 2006 .

[33]  Ingunn Myrtveit,et al.  Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering , 2014 .

[34]  Barbara J. Tewksbury,et al.  Specific Strategies for Using the “Jigsaw” Technique for Working in Groups in Non-Lecture-Based Courses , 1995 .

[35]  Thomas A. Angelo,et al.  Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers. Second Edition. , 1993 .

[36]  George Keller,et al.  Using Problem-Based and Active Learning in an Interdisciplinary Science Course for Non-Science Majors , 2003 .

[37]  Peter Gustafsson,et al.  From Everyday Life Experiences to Physics Understanding Occurring in Small Group Work with Context Rich Problems During Introductory Physics Work at University , 2007 .

[38]  M. Niewiadomska-Bugaj,et al.  Use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: Where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process? , 2012 .

[39]  Mike A Christiansen,et al.  Inverted Teaching: Applying a New Pedagogy to a University Organic Chemistry Class , 2014 .

[40]  D. Laplane.  Thought and language. , 1992, Behavioural neurology.

[41]  Aditi Bandyopadhyay.  Measuring the Disparities between Biology Undergraduates' Perceptions and Their Actual Knowledge of Scientific Literature with Clickers. , 2013 .

[42]  Debra L. Linton,et al.  Identifying Key Features of Effective Active Learning: The Effects of Writing and Peer Discussion , 2014, CBE life sciences education.

[43]  E. Schultz.  A guided discovery approach for learning glycolysis , 1997 .

[44]  Timothy F. Slater,et al.  Research on a Lecture-Tutorial Approach to Teaching Introductory Astronomy for Non-Science Majors , 2004 .

[45]  Robert Endorf.  Effectiveness of different tutorial recitation teaching methods and its implications for TA training , 2007 .

[46]  D. Halpern.  Teaching for Critical Thinking: Helping College Students Develop the Skills and Dispositions of a Critical Thinker , 1999 .

[47]  Aime A. Levesque,et al.  Using Clickers to Facilitate Development of Problem-Solving Skills , 2011, CBE life sciences education.

[48]  Andrew A. Zekeri,et al.  College curriculum competencies and skills former students found essential to their careers , 2004 .

[49]  Peter Armbruster,et al.  Active learning and student-centered pedagogy improve student attitudes and performance in introductory biology. , 2009, CBE life sciences education.

[50]  Kim L. Siegenthaler,et al.  Phillip C. Wankat. The Effective, Efficient Professor — Teaching, Scholarship and Service , 2003 .

[51]  P. Klein.  Active Learning Strategies and Assessment in World Geography Classes , 2003 .

[52]  Helen H. Hu,et al.  Using POGIL to help students learn to program , 2013, TOCE.

[53]  Angel Hoekstra.  Vibrant student voices: exploring effects of the use of clickers in large college courses , 2008 .

[54]  D. Krathwohl.  A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview , 2002 .

[55]  Shane Donohue,et al.  Supporting active learning in an undergraduate geotechnical engineering course using group-based audience response systems quizzes , 2014 .

[56]  D. F. Slish.  Assessment of the Use of the Jigsaw Method and Active Learning in Non-Majors, Introductory Biology. , 2005 .

[57]  E. Mazur,et al.  Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results , 2001 .

[58]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. , 1999 .

[59]  M. James,et al.  Assessment and Learning: differences and relationships between formative and summative assessment , 1997 .

[60]  Jon Anderson.  Active learning through student film: a case study of cultural geography , 2013 .

[61]  Kirsten Crossgrove,et al.  Using clickers in nonmajors- and majors-level biology courses: student opinion, learning, and long-term retention of course material. , 2008, CBE life sciences education.

[62]  R. Torraco.  Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples , 2005 .

[63]  C. S. Wallace,et al.  Lecture-Tutorials in Introductory Astronomy , 2018, Astronomy Education, Volume 1.

[64]  Susan Sanner,et al.  Group Peer Review as an Active Learning Strategy in a Research Course , 2009 .

[65]  David N. Steer,et al.  Personal Response Systems and Learning: It Is the Pedagogy that Matters, Not the Technology. , 2012 .

[66]  Adrienne Wright,et al.  Using clickers to improve student engagement and performance in an introductory biochemistry class , 2009, Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.

[67]  Eric Mazur,et al.  Peer Instruction: A User's Manual , 1996 .

[68]  Josip Slisko,et al.  Software Socrative and Smartphones as Tools For Implementation of Basic Processes of Active Physics Learning in Classroom: An Initial Feasibility Study With Prospective Teachers , 2013 .

[69]  Marye Anne Fox,et al.  Evaluating and improving undergraduate teaching : in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics , 2003 .

[70]  Pratibha Varma-Nelson,et al.  Pedagogies of Engagement in Science , 2008 .

[71]  E. F. D. C. E. Silva,et al.  Understanding fatty acid metabolism through an active learning approach , 2010, Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.

[72]  M. Herzog,et al.  Active Learning in Anatomy & Physiology: Student Reactions & Outcomes in a Nontraditional A&P Course , 1997 .

[73]  J. Hageman.  Use of Molecular Models for Active Learning in Biochemistry Lecture Courses , 2010 .

[74]  Michael C. LoPresto,et al.  Using the Star Properties Concept Inventory to compare instruction with lecture tutorials to traditional lectures , 2009 .

[75]  David N. Steer,et al.  Assessment and Active Learning Strategies for Introductory Geology Courses , 2003 .

[76]  L. S. Vygotskiĭ,et al.  Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .

[77]  Alison B. Flynn,et al.  Developing Problem-Solving Skills through Retrosynthetic Analysis and Clickers in Organic Chemistry , 2011 .

[78]  Yi-Chun Lin,et al.  Implementing clickers to assist learning in science lectures: The Clicker-Assisted Conceptual Change model , 2011 .

[79]  M. Deutsch.  A Theory of Co-operation and Competition , 1949 .

[80]  A hybrid approach to active learning , 2001 .

[81]  Kelly Miller,et al.  Conceptual Question Response Times in Peer Instruction Classrooms. , 2014 .

[82]  Brian R. Belland,et al.  A Conceptual Framework for Organizing Active Learning Experiences in Biology Instruction , 2012 .

[83]  Jeffrey Kovac,et al.  Student Active Learning Methods in General Chemistry , 1999 .

[84]  Pratibha Varma-Nelson,et al.  Pedagogies of engagement in science: A comparison of PBL, POGIL, and PLTL , 2008, Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.

[85]  Maria K. DiBenedetto,et al.  Within the pipeline: Self-regulated learning, self-efficacy, and socialization among college students in science courses , 2013 .

[86]  Lei Bao,et al.  Testing a new voting machine question methodology , 2008 .

[87]  Marion O'Leary,et al.  Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics , 2003 .

[88]  Lei Bao,et al.  Toward the effective use of voting machines in physics lectures , 2005 .

[89]  Cheryl Bailey,et al.  Learning transferable skills in large lecture halls: Implementing a POGIL approach in biochemistry , 2012 .

[90]  D. R. Paulson.  Active Learning and Cooperative Learning in the Organic Chemistry Lecture Class. , 1999 .

[91]  David Pundak,et al.  Empowering Engineering College Staff to Adopt Active Learning Methods , 2008 .