Advertisement

Incorporating Active Learning into Your Educational Repertoire

  • Laura L. BieremaEmail author
Chapter
First Online:
  • 322 Downloads
Part of the Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning book series (IAKM, volume 8)

Abstract

This chapter examines the problems with instructor-centered education and offers pedagogical alternatives to make learning more engaging, participative, and enduring. The chapter begins with a critique of the traditional lecture method and offers interactive lecture as an alternative strategy. Next, active learning is defined with recommended activities to involve learners. Strategies for improving participation and learning are presented that are grounded in adult learning principles. Finally, strategies for designing active learning are provided to help instructors begin shifting their educational programs to more participative, effective learning sessions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Supplementary material

Video 1

Mazur Interactive Lecture. https://youtu.be/wont2v_LZ1E (MP4 25220 kb)

Video 2

Dr. Richard Felder. https://youtu.be/1J1URbdisYE (MP4 32313 kb)

Video 3

Ferris Bueller’s Day Off. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhiCFdWeQfA&feature=youtu.be (MP4 3440 kb)

References

  1. Abeysekera, I. (2008). Preferred learning methods: A comparison between international and domestic accounting students. Accounting Education: An International Journal, 17(2), 187–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Afrasiabifar, A., & Asadolah, M. (2019). Effectiveness of shifting traditional lecture to interactive lecture to teach nursing students. Investigacion and Educacion En Enfermeria, 37(1), e07. https://doi-org.proxy-remote.galib.uga.edu/10.17533/udea.iee.v37n1a07.Google Scholar
  3. Almeida, P. A., & Teixeira-Dias, J. J. (2012). Aligning teaching, learning and assessment in a first-year chemistry course. International Journal of Learning, 18(4), 143–158.Google Scholar
  4. Aronson, E. (1975). The jigsaw route to learning and liking. Psychology Today, 8, 43–59.Google Scholar
  5. Aronson, E. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013, June). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In ASEE national conference proceedings, Atlanta, GA (Vol. 30, No. 9, pp. 1–18).Google Scholar
  7. Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC higher education report no. 1. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Börekçi, N. A. (2017). Visual thinking styles and idea generation strategies employed in visual brainstorming sessions. Design and Technology Education, 22(1), n1.Google Scholar
  9. Brookfield, S. D., & Preskill, S. (2012). Discussion as a way of teaching: Tools and techniques for democratic classrooms. San Francisco, CA: Wiley.Google Scholar
  10. Burns, R. A. (1985, May 22–25). Information impact and factors affecting recall. Paper presented at the 7th annual national conference on teaching excellence and conference of administrators, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
  11. Campitelli, G., & Gobet, F. (2011). Deliberate practice: Necessary but not sufficient. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(5), 280–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2008). Student’s questions: A potential resource for teaching and learning science. Studies in Science Education, 44(1), 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Churchill, W. (1952, November 9). The Observer, n.p. Google Scholar
  14. Cluskey, B., Elbeck, M., Hill, K. L., & Strupeck, D. (2011). How students learn: Improving teaching techniques for business discipline courses. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 6. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy-remote.galib.uga.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1097028&site=eds-live.
  15. Cross, K. P., & Angelo, T. A. (1988). Classroom assessment techniques. A handbook for faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  16. Daley, B. J., & Torre, D. M. (2010). Concept maps in medical education: An analytical literature review. Medical Education, 44(5), 440–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Darby, M. (2007). Debate: A teaching-learning strategy for developing competence in communication and critical thinking. American Dental Hygienists’ Association, 81(4), 78–78.Google Scholar
  18. Downs, C. T., & Wilson, A. L. (2015). Shifting to active learning: Assessment of a first-year biology course in South Africa. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 27(2), 261–274.Google Scholar
  19. Eison, J. (2010). Using active learning instructional strategies to create excitement and enhance learning. Jurnal Pendidikantentang Strategi Pembelajaran Aktif (Active Learning) Books, 2(1), 1–10.Google Scholar
  20. Everly, M. C. (2013). Are students’ impressions of improved learning through active learning methods reflected by improved test scores? Nurse Education Today, 33(2), 148–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fisher, S. (2019, May 8). 12 free Jeopardy templates. Lifewire. Retrieved from https://www.lifewire.com/free-jeopardy-powerpoint-templates-1358186.
  22. Freeman, M., Blayney, P., & Ginns, P. (2006). Anonymity and in class learning: The case for electronic response systems. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22(4), 568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gulick, L. H. (1908). Mind and work. Page: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  24. Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement vs. traditional methods: A six-thousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hemraj-Benny, T., & Beckford, I. (2014). Cooperative and inquiry-based learning utilizing art-related topics: Teaching chemistry to community college nonscience majors. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(10), 1618–1622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Irving, A., & Garling, B. (n.d.). Wait time. Classroom. Retrieved from https://questioninganddiscussionforteaching.wordpress.com/wait-time/.
  27. Johnstone, A. H., & Percival, F. (1976). Attention breaks in lectures. Education in Chemistry, 13(2), 49–50.Google Scholar
  28. Kumar, R., & Lightner, R. (2007). Games as an interactive classroom technique: Perceptions of corporate trainers, college instructors and students. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19(1), 53–63. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy-remote.galib.uga.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ901287&site=eds-live.Google Scholar
  29. Lang, J. M. (2016). Small teaching: Everyday lessons from the science of learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  30. Medina, J. (2009). Brain rules: 12 principles for surviving and thriving at work, home and school. Seattle, WA: Pear Press.Google Scholar
  31. Mendelson, E. (2013). Who wrote Auden’s definition of a professor? The W. H. Auden Society. Retrieved from http://audensociety.org/definition.html.
  32. Merriam, S. B., & Bierema, L. L. (2013). Adult learning: Linking theory and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  33. Michael, J. (2006). Where’s the evidence that active learning works? Advances in Physiology Education, 30(4), 159–167. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy-remote.galib.uga.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cmedm&AN=17108243&site=eds-live.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Morell, T. (2004). Interactive lecture discourse for university EFL students. English for Specific Purposes, 23(3), 325–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moses, E. (2000). The $100 billion allowance: Accessing the global teen market. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  36. Nouri, H., & Shahid, A. (2005). The effect of PowerPoint presentation on student’s learning and attitudes. Global Perspectives on Accounting Education, 2, 53–73.Google Scholar
  37. Nowlen, P. (1988). Cited in Cervero, R. (1992). Professional Practice, learning, and continuing education: An integrated perspective. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 11(2), 91–101.Google Scholar
  38. Penner, J. G. (1984). Why many college teachers cannot lecture. Springfield, IL: Thomas.Google Scholar
  39. Reilly, R. F. (1992, September 1). The Erosion of Trust, a speech delivered to the Juniata College Annual Spring Awards Convocation, Huntington, Pennsylvania, April 20, 1992. In Vital speeches of the day (Vol. LVIII, No. 22).Google Scholar
  40. Rimer, S. (2009, January 12). At M.I.T., large lectures are going the way of the blackboard. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/us/13physics.html.
  41. Rowe, M. B. (1972). Wait-time and rewards as instructional variables, their influence in language, logic, and fate control. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Chicago, IL. ED 061 103. ERIC Resource Center www.eric.ed.gov http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED061103.
  42. Rowe, M. B. (1987). Wait time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up. American Educator 11(2), 38–43, 47. EJ 351 827.Google Scholar
  43. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith.Google Scholar
  44. Silberman, M. (1995). 101 ways to make training active. San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer.Google Scholar
  45. Silberman, M. (2006). Active training: A handbook of techniques, designs, case examples and tips. San Francisco, CA: Wiley.Google Scholar
  46. Stahl, R. J. (1990). Using “think-time” behaviors to promote students’ information processing, learning, and on-task participation. an instructional module. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University.Google Scholar
  47. Stahl, R. J. (1994). Using “think-time” and “wait-time” skillfully in the classroom. ERIC Clearinghouse. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED370885.pdf.
  48. Stead, D. R. (2005). A review of the one-minute paper. Active Learning in Higher Education, 6(2), 118–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Strayer, J. F. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation, and task orientation. Learn Environments Research, 15, 171–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Swinehart, D. F. (1980). Swinehart’s definition. In P. Dickson (Ed.), The official explanations. New York: Dell Publishing.Google Scholar
  51. UNESCO. (2005). Towards knowledge societies: UNESCO world report. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  52. University of Leicester. (n.d.). Active learning. Leicester Learning Institute. Retrieved from https://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/lli/developing-learning-and-teaching/enhance/strategies/active-learning
  53. Verner, C., & Dickenson, G. (1967). The lecture: An analysis and review of research. Adult Education, 17(2), 85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ward, A. F., Duke, K., Gneezy, A., & Bos, M. W. (2017). Brain drain: The mere presence of one’s own smartphone reduces available cognitive capacity. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 2(2), 140–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wilmer, H. H., Sherman, L. E., & Chein, J. M. (2017). Smartphones and cognition: A review of research exploring the links between mobile technology habits and cognitive functioning. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options