Managing active learning processes in large first year physics classes: The advantages of an integrated approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.2.2.75Keywords:
active learning, science education, learning outcomes, first year experienceAbstract
Turning lectures into interactive, student-led question and answer sessions is known to increase learning, but enabling interaction in a large class seems aninsurmountable task. This can discourage adoption of this new approach – who has time to individualize responses, address questions from over 200 students and encourage active participation in class? An approach adopted by a teaching team in large first-year classes at a research-intensive university appears to provide a means to do so. We describe the implementation of active learning strategies in a large first-year undergraduate physics unit of study, replacing traditional, content-heavy lectures with an integrated approach to question-driven learning. A key feature of our approach is that it facilitates intensive in-class discussions by requiring students to engage in preparatory reading and answer short written quizzes before every class. The lecturer uses software to rapidly analyze the student responses and identify the main issues faced by the students before the start of each class. We report the success of the integration of student preparation with this analysis and feedback framework, and the impact on the in-class discussions. We also address some of the difficulties commonly experienced by staff preparing for active learning classes.
Metrics
References
Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning—a new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 27(6), 12-25.
Beatty, I. D., Gerace, W. J., Leonard, W. J., & Dufresne, R. J. (2006a). Designing effective questions for classroom response system teaching. American Journal of Physics 74(1), 31-39.
Beatty, I. D., Leonard, W. J., Gerace, W. J., & Dufresne, R. J. (2006b). Question Driven Instruction: Teaching Science (Well) With an Audience Response System. In D. A. Banks (Ed.), Audience Response Systems in Higher Education: Applications and Cases. Hershey PA. : Idea Group Inc.
Beichner, R. J. (2007). The Student-Centered Activities for Large Enrollment Undergraduate Programs (SCALE-UP) Project. In E. F. Redish & P. J. Cooney (Eds.), Research-Based Reform of University Physics. College Park, MD: American Association of Physics Teachers.
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. Washington, DC: George Washington University.
Bruffee, K. A. (1999). Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence, and the authority of knowledge (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the Large Classroom: Current Research and Best-Practice Tips. CBE— Life Sciences Education, 6, 9 -20.
Chabay, R. & Sherwood, B. (1997). Qualitative understanding and retention, AAPT Announcer 27, 96. Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven Principles for Good Practice. AAHE Bulletin, 39, 3-7.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE Publications.
Crouch, C., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970-977.
Deslauriers, L., Schelew, E., & Wieman, C. (2011). Improved Learning in a Large-Enrollment Physics Class. Science, 332, 862
Donaldson, N., E. , Rutledge, D., N., & Ashley, J. (2004). Outcomes of Adoption: Measuring Evidence Uptake by Individuals and Organizations. Worldviews on Evidence-based Nursing, 1(s1), S41-S52.
Gappa, J., Austin, A. E., & Trice, A. G. (2007). Rethinking faculty work: Higher education’s strategic imperative. San Fransisco: Jossey Bass.
Gibbs, G., Lucas, L. & Simonite, V. (1996). Class size and student performance: 1984-94, Studies in Higher Education, 21, 261-273.
Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hake, R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 64-74.
Harris, M., & Cullen, R. M. (2010). Leading the learner-centered campus: An administrator’s framework for improving student learning outcomes. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force Concept Inventory. Physics Teaching, 30, 141-158.
Kay, R. H., & Le Sage, A. (2009). Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 53, 819-827.
Kohlmyer, M.A., Caballero, M.D., Catrambone, R., Chabay, R.W., Ding, L., Haugan, M.P., . . . Schatz, M.F. (2009) Tale of two curricula: The performance of 2000 students in introductory electromagnetism. Physics Review Special Topics — Physics Educucation Research, 5, 020105.
Kuh, G. D. (2008). High Impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter: Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U).
Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Cruce, T., Shoup, R., & Gonyea, R. M. (2006). Connecting the dots: Multi-faceted analyses of the relationships between student engagement results from the NSSE, and the institutional practices and conditions that foster student success: Final report prepared for the Lumina Foundation for Education.: Centre for Postsecondary Research, Indiana University.
Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., & Whitt, E. J. (2010). Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lee, D. D., & Seung, H. S. (1999). Learning the parts of objects by non-negative matrix factorization. Nature, 401, 788-791.
Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: a user’s manual, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
McKenzie, J., Alexander, S., Harper, C., & Anderson, S. (2005). Dissemination, Adoption and Adaptation of Project Innovations in Higher Education. In ALTC (Ed.). Sydney: University of Technology, Sydney.
Meltzer, D. E., & Manivannan, K. (2002). Transforming the lecture-hall environment: The fully interactive physics lecture. American Journal of Physics, 70, 639-654.
Meltzer, D. E., & Thornton, R. K. (2012). Resource Letter: Active-Learning Instruction in Physics. American Journal of Physics, 80, 478-498.
Meyer, J. H. F., & Land, R. (2003). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: Linkages to ways of thinking and practising within the disciplines. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving Student Learning: Improving Student Learning Theory and Practice - Ten Years On. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.
Pollock, S. (2009). Longitudinal study of student conceptual understanding in electricity and magnetism. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 5, 020110
Prince, M. (2004). Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research. Journal of Engineering Education 93(3), 223-231.
Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C., Knight, J. K., Guild, N., Su, T.T. (2009). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science, 323(5910), 122-124.
Sokoloff, D. R., & Thornton, R. K. (1997). Using interactive lecture demonstrations to create an active learning environment. AIP Conf. Proc., 399, 1061-1074
Southwell, D., Gannaway, D., Orrell, J., Chalmers, D., & Abraham, C. (2010). Strategies for effective dissemination of the outcomes of teaching and learning projects. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 32(1), 55-67.
Trowbridge, D. E., & McDermott, L. C. (1981). Investigation of student understanding of the concept of acceleration in one dimension. American Journal of Physics, 49, 242-253.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Understanding by Design. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.
