Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics

Abstract

To test the hypothesis that lecturing maximizes learning and course performance, we metaanalyzed 225 studies that reported data on examination scores or failure rates when comparing student performance in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses under traditional lecturing versus active learning. The effect sizes indicate that on average, student performance on examinations and concept inventories increased by 0.47 SDs under active learning (n = 158 studies), and that the odds ratio for failing was 1.95 under traditional lecturing (n = 67 studies). These results indicate that average examination scores improved by about 6% in active learning sections, and that students in classes with traditional lecturing were 1.5 times more likely to fail than were students in classes with active learning. Heterogeneity analyses indicated that both results hold across the STEM disciplines, that active learning increases scores on concept inventories more than on course examinations, and that active learning appears effective across all class sizes-although the greatest effects are in small (n ≤ 50) classes. Trim and fill analyses and fail-safe n calculations suggest that the results are not due to publication bias. The results also appear robust to variation in the methodological rigor of the included studies, based on the quality of controls over student quality and instructor identity. This is the largest and most comprehensive metaanalysis of undergraduate STEM education published to date. The results raise questions about the continued use of traditional lecturing as a control in research studies, and support active learning as the preferred, empirically validated teaching practice in regular classrooms.constructivism | undergraduate education | evidence-based teaching | scientific teaching L ecturing has been the predominant mode of instruction since universities were founded in Western Europe over 900 y ago (1). Although theories of learning that emphasize the need for students to construct their own understanding have challenged the theoretical underpinnings of the traditional, instructorfocused, "teaching by telling" approach (2, 3), to date there has been no quantitative analysis of how constructivist versus exposition-centered methods impact student performance in undergraduate courses across the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. In the STEM classroom, should we ask or should we tell?Addressing this question is essential if scientists are committed to teaching based on evidence rather than tradition (4). The answer could also be part of a solution to the "pipeline problem" that some countries are experiencing in STEM education: For example, the observation that less than 40% of US students who enter university with an interest in STEM, and just 20% of STEM-interested underrepresented minority students, finish with a STEM degree (5).To test the efficacy of constructivist versus exposition-centered course designs, we focused on the design of clas...

Implementation and evaluation of flipped learning for delivery of analytical chemistry topics

“…From the electronic components available, students found the online video lectures to be more useful than the blog (p < 0.001, n = 61-64). These findings are as expected, as the problem-solving workshops engage students in activities which are regularly seen to be more stimulating than conventional lectures [25]. There is often less time to conduct problem-solving learning activities in analytical chemistry classes as classroom time is dominated by the need to ensure the students understand the underlying theory.…”

Comparison between flipped classroom and lecture-based classroom in ophthalmology clerkship

“…The most effective approach to improve teaching efficiency is to promote active learning, which requires students to actively engage with learning materials, participate in the class, and collaborate with other classmates [11–13]. Our group and others have studied the implementation of several teaching approaches in ophthalmology clerkships that promote student-centered learning.…”

A meta‐analysis of anatomy laboratory pedagogies

“…on knowledge gains in anatomy. While a study by Freeman et al (2014) suggests that pedagogies with active learning components enhance student performance across disciplines and student populations in higher education, there is still a need to study the effects of these approaches on the acquisition of anatomical knowledge specifically. Secondly, the anatomy education literature could benefit from systematically investigating the hidden benefits of dissection.…”