Do interactive learning spaces increase student achievement? A comparison of classroom context

Abstract

Research on interactive learning space classrooms has reported that instructors and students find them engaging, and engagement is expected to increase learning outcomes. Positive findings about interactive classrooms, though, are often confounded with active learning pedagogy since instructors who teach in interactive classrooms tend to also promote active learning pedagogy. More research is needed to tease apart learning gains from the instructional design, classroom context, and the related incorporation of technology. This study examined the relationship between learning gains and classroom context (traditional and interactive learning space) in a pretest/posttest design and reviewed student survey responses about learning experiences. Participants were enrolled in one of two sections of a course. Both groups were taught by the same instructor using active learning pedagogy with the same activities, materials, and assignments. The results showed that classroom context did not result in differences in students learning overall. Some findings pointing to subtle differences, however, indicate that the interactive classroom could have made the classroom instruction more effective and efficient.

What's in a question? A Comparison of Student Questions in Two Learning Spaces

“…A non-content category has been used in other SoTL research (Vercellotti, 2017) as a measure of student engagement. See appendix for further description and examples of each question type.…”

“…The influence of an intervention which encourages and scaffolds collaborative formation of application questions, such as bringing written questions to class for discussion (Harper et al, 2000;Tracy, 2017) on the type of questions posed, should be explored. This research investigated group behavior; forthcoming projects could investigate the questions of particular students, such as students with low pre-course knowledge to see how increased student activity and engagement might narrow the knowledge gap (Vercellotti, 2017). Additionally, a comparison of the amount of self-study and time spent reviewing posted lectures and material prior to class between traditional lecture style and flexible teaching course designs on learner questions and outcomes (Vercellotti & Olsen, 2016) ought to be conducted.…”

“…Some universities have begun to explore the impact of learning spaces on student affect and learning outcomes. A motivation for teaching in interactive learning spaces (ILS) is that students have reported they prefer learning in ILS classrooms (Largent, Pierce, Stallings, & Zimmermann, 2013) and some students show improved learning outcomes (Vercellotti, 2017). Yet, it is currently unclear how classroom interactions might differ in various classroom settings.…”

“…Accordingly, courses that have a mixed course design (with both content delivery and student-centered activities) may be most effective because it allows for some content delivery in person (when needed) as well as student-centered activities. This flexibility in course format, which has been labeled as "scrambled" design (Barnett, 2014) or "flexible learning" design (Gunn, McCormick, & Honey, 2002), has been adopted by instructors who want to create an active learning course (Vercellotti, 2017). It should be noted, however, that Baeten et al (2016) also found that the students who want to develop deep understanding of course concepts have a preference for constructive active learning (e.g., when students produce a tangible learning artifact) to synthesize information through cooperative learning.…”

Needs and expectations of a new learning space: Research students’ perspectives

“…Research shows that learning spaces significantly affect the way humans learn (Beckers, Van der Voordt, & Dewulf, 2016). There is, however, a limited understanding of how the learning space impacts university students' work, for instance, their learning engagement (Sawers, Wicks, Mvududu, Seeley, & Copeland 2016), gains (Vercellotti, 2017), and outcomes (Ellis & Goodyear, 2016). There is an increasing need to study what promotes and inhibits their learning practices (Bruno & Dell'Aversana, 2018).…”