Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math

Abstract

We tested the hypothesis that underrepresented students in active-learning classrooms experience narrower achievement gaps than underrepresented students in traditional lecturing classrooms, averaged across all science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields and courses. We conducted a comprehensive search for both published and unpublished studies that compared the performance of underrepresented students to their overrepresented classmates in active-learning and traditional-lecturing treatments. This search resulted in data on student examination scores from 15 studies (9,238 total students) and data on student failure rates from 26 studies (44,606 total students). Bayesian regression analyses showed that on average, active learning reduced achievement gaps in examination scores by 33% and narrowed gaps in passing rates by 45%. The reported proportion of time that students spend on in-class activities was important, as only classes that implemented high-intensity active learning narrowed achievement gaps. Sensitivity analyses showed that the conclusions are robust to sampling bias and other issues. To explain the extensive variation in efficacy observed among studies, we propose the heads-and-hearts hypothesis, which holds that meaningful reductions in achievement gaps only occur when course designs combine deliberate practice with inclusive teaching. Our results support calls to replace traditional lecturing with evidence-based, active-learning course designs across the STEM disciplines and suggest that innovations in instructional strategies can increase equity in higher education.

Innovative teaching knowledge stays with users

“…Evidence-based instructional practices (EBIPs) are codified strategies that align with this goal. Given their demonstrated potential for improving student outcomes, particularly for students from underserved groups, the adoption of EBIPs has critical implications for creating equitable college environments and cultivating a diverse science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce (1). Despite numerous local and national initiatives to promote instructional change, EBIPs remain underutilized in college STEM courses (2).…”

CUREs During and Beyond COVID-19

“…Furthermore, this ownership over project components is enriched when students collaborate with others and are responsible for communicating their work (Auchincloss et al, 2014). Indeed, many CURE components are akin to scientific teaching principles like active learning, formative assessment, and inclusive teaching practices, thus offering the benefits of increased learning outcomes, improved equity, and increased retention in the sciences (Bransford et al, 2000;Freeman et al, 2014;Miller et al, 2008;Theobald et al, 2020).…”

“…o Such approaches would be most beneficial when done with active learning exercises dispersed within a lecture, for example, having students reflect on relevance and their own interest through think-pair-share, small group discussions, or 'clicker' type polls (Freeman et al, 2014;Theobald et al, 2020). o This option would be most useful when students are unlikely to have the expertise required to generate utility relevant to future science careers and applications.…”

Characterizing college science instruction: The Three-Dimensional Learning Observation Protocol

“…To date, much research involving pedagogical approaches has coalesced around what is now known as "active learning"-the idea that students must be actively engaged with their learning [5,7,8]. Until recently, however, what students should learn and what they should do with that knowledge has not received as much attention.…”