Students Engaged In Active Learning Think They Learn Less

[ZapperZ]

I was brought to the attention to this research article, and it blew my mind!

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/39/19251

This part of their summary/abstract really caused me to sit up and take notice:

In this report, we identify an inherent student bias against active learning that can limit its effectiveness and may hinder the wide adoption of these methods. Compared with students in traditional lectures, students in active classes perceived that they learned less, while in reality they learned more. Students rated the quality of instruction in passive lectures more highly, and they expressed a preference to have “all of their physics classes taught this way,” even though their scores on independent tests of learning were lower than those in actively taught classrooms.

My classes are a blend of both. My students had to do a pre-lecture in which they had to read up something or watch a video, followed by a short quiz based on the material that was presented. When to come to class, I give them a "traditional lecture", but heavy on (i) clicker questions and discussions, (ii) in-class problem solving where they work in groups to solve problems, and (iii) in cases where we have "labs", the experimental work is often incorporated within the lecture as they are observing the result.

So I don't know if this is considered purely "active" or "passive" learning, but more like a blend of the two. But it is certainly a surprise that students who are being taught in active learning, and clearly understood more of the material, actually think that they didn't learn as much when compared to those who took the passive learning route and didn't do as well! This is definitely a shocker and something that I didn't expect.

Zz.

 

[Andy Resnick]

I'm not surprised- most of the people in our department that teach Intro use active learning techniques, and some common complaints from students are 'I didn't learn anything', 'I had to teach myself everything', 'I had no idea what I'm supposed to be studying for exams', etc.

 

[hutchphd]

That is a fascinating result.
I am also interested in your own technique: in particular what was the "pre-lecture" logistics? Was this done immediately before the lecture at the same place...or online or in smaller groups during the week. Elaborate if you will.

 

[ZapperZ]

That is a fascinating result.
I am also interested in your own technique: in particular what was the "pre-lecture" logistics? Was this done immediately before the lecture at the same place...or online or in smaller groups during the week. Elaborate if you will.

The pre-lectures were done online. The students have access to the textbook publisher's site, and I set up what they're supposed to read and/or view, and the pre-lecture questions. They are open 1 1/2 days before the first class of the week when I introduce the new material.

Other publishers that I've dealt with have already "pre-made" pre-lecture material, and I only needed to edit and select things that I wanted or don't want.

Even if I do not completely engage in all-active learning, at the very least, the pre-lecture introduces the material to them prior to the "passive" part of the lecture, and they'll be seeing many things for the 2nd time, which in my experience, helps in understanding the material.

Zz.

 

[hutchphd]

And the third time is the homework. I absolutely found that three times was the magic number. (For me as student and teacher !)

 

[ZapperZ]

And the third time is the homework. I absolutely found that three times was the magic number. (For me as student and teacher !)

Actually, the 3rd time is the in-class problem solving. After I presented the material, I usually assign in-class problems where they work in groups to solve them. So they're seeing and using the material for the 3rd time in class, which means that the 4th time is HW.

Can never have too many times seeing the material...

Zz.

 

[kuruman]

The pre-lectures were done online. The students have access to the textbook publisher's site, and I set up what they're supposed to read and/or view, and the pre-lecture questions. They are open 1 1/2 days before the first class of the week when I introduce the new material.

I did it slightly differently. I beta-tested smartPhysics which evolved to FlipItPhysics.The prelectures were open a full week before I went over the material just so that there can be no excuse about a busy schedule on a particular day. Students were supposed to have done the prelectures by 8:00 am on the day I was to cover the material at 1:00 pm. "Doing the prelectures" meant answering the comprehension multiple choice questions plus answering the single most important questions (in my mind): "What did you find most difficult with this prelecture? What would like me to go over in class?" From morning until lecture time I had the time to shape my lecture and concentrate on what most students found difficult while barely mentioning what they felt they grasped. Homework (on-line) was available for a week starting on the day the material was covered in class and was due at 8:00 am.

How was that received? Some students accused me of being "too lazy to teach". These were very likely the students who zipped through the prelectures in under one minute when the average time is 20-30 minutes. They were the same students who clicked sequentially the four choices A - D on the comprehension questions interspersed in the prelectures until they got right so they could go on and "complete" the prelecture. How do I know? The number of attempts until they got it right was equal to the alphabetical order of the correct answer! After this experience, I realized that students can save themselves only if they want to. So in subsequent semesters I said among things during my first lecture, "I will not tell you what to think, but I will teach you how to think. This method of teaching works if you make it work. I cannot guarantee that you will learn physics, but I can guarantee that if you don't want to learn physics, you will get your wish."

A great number of students were "negative timers"; they estimated about how long they need to complete the homework and counted backwards from the 8:00 am deadline to figure out when to start. That meant 3:00-5:00 am which they found unacceptable and complained. So I asked for a show of hands, "how many of you would like to change the deadlines from 8:00 am to midnight?" About half the class raised their hands. So I picked up a pencil from its tip, waved it around Harry Potter style and said, "with this magic wand I have changed the deadline from 8:00 am to midnight." After a few seconds of quizzical stares, I added "And everybody gets an automatic extension from midnight to 8:00 am." That stopped the complaints and I hope taught them something about time-management.

 

[ZapperZ]

I used FlipItPhysics for one semester, and I actually liked the features there more than what I am using currently. It gives me an easier snapshot of how long the student spent time with one particular section of the pre-lecture. Their pre-lecture videos are also more concise and "nicer".

I open mine rather close to the actual class time because of a study I read somewhere (I can't find it right now) that students have rather short short-term memory, and that the best time period for them to "read ahead" and retain the information is within 24 hours or so. That is why my pre-lectures open the day before class starting at midnight. So the students roughly have 1 1/2 days to complete the pre-lecture. I made exceptions a few times for students who work during the week and had more free time on Sundays, so I opened the pre-lectures on Sunday instead of Monday (class was evening on Tuesdays).

But reading this latest report reinforces my prevailing idea that a student isn't usually the best judge of a material should be taught, or what is best methodology for them to understanding something. Even when they understood something, they often do not realize that they have!

Zz.

 

[kuruman]

But reading this latest report reinforces my prevailing idea that a student isn't usually the best judge of a material should be taught, or what is best methodology for them to understanding something. Even when they understood something, they often do not realize that they have!

That is very true, especially with physics. I have found that there is a time lag from when students are exposed to the material until they own it. That becomes obvious when a student comes for help before the second hourly exam and exclaims, "I can't believe I messed up the first exam. That stuff was so easy!" Cramming before the exam is detrimental to one's understanding. The prelecture, lecture, homework, exam schedule spaces the exposure apart and allows more time for the material to percolate through students' brains.

 

[Vanadium 50]

But reading this latest report reinforces my prevailing idea that a student isn't usually the best judge of a material should be taught, or what is best methodology for them to understanding something. Even when they understood something, they often do not realize that they have!

This exposes a problem with student evaluations.

 

[ZapperZ]

This exposes a problem with student evaluations.

Yup it does.

Besides the institution, I also do my own student evaluation because I do care what the students think and how the feel about the course. But I use the info only so much because at some point, I don't think they have all the info on how things should be done.

And besides, there's this:

https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/PT.3.4386

Zz.

 

[WWGD]

As, someone suggested, quality evaluations should be made "downstreams" , a few semesters after the class since ideas and material is still kind of blurry shortly after the class. Most will dislike being challenged at the moment the class takes place but at least a few will eventually appreciate it --if they put the effort for the class.

 

[Stephen Tashi]

It's understandable that many students prefer passive learning to active learning. By the time students reach college they have had teachers with many different standards and expectations. They've had a few teachers whose expectations were downright eccentric in one way or the other! Successfully negotiating the path of education involves finding out what someone wants you to do, how they want you to do it, and doing it their way while you are in their class.

When the student is given the task to figure something out, prove something, or , in general, understand something this may leave them to set their own standards for proof and understanding. The way they learn the instructors standards is to have their work criticized. Someone headed for a career of research must get accustomed to active thinking and having their proofs and explanations criticized. Other people can resent the self-service approach to education.

If you want to know something about a technical topic, which do you prefer: a good exposition of the topic? or a set of questions that lead you to figure out the topic? With me, it varies. If I'm not in a hurry and certainly if I'm involved in a group that is discussing the questions then I'd prefer the Socratic experience. If I'm in a hurry and thinking about it alone, I'd prefer a good exposition.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

Having students evaluate their teachers after only a few months is like having football players evaluate their coaches after summer two-a-days and before the first game. Students don't really know what they've learned at that point any more than most football players know how many games they'll win. I'm a teacher and coach, not a cheerleader.

By the time they get to college, students should have a good sense that they'll learn what is needed if they follow the teacher's program. One of the great failures of high school education is not only that students arrive at college without the fundamental knowledge that they need in various subject areas, but that they arrive thinking they are smarter than their teachers regarding the best way to learn subjects that are new to them. High school did not teach them to trust their teachers' program, since so many high school teachers are not trustworthy.

The bottom line is not that one way of teaching or learning is better than others. The bottom line is that the student's efforts contribute more to learning than the teacher's. Teachers can't work hard enough for students to learn without working. Student accomplishment is the integral of student effort over time. Most of the challenge in teaching is to get students expending a high level of effort in a course for the entire duration. Active learning is a good way to do that, but students are not accustomed to that much effort in prep before class, during class, or after class. It is the effort they are resisting, not the package of active learning.

 

[DrClaude]

The thread is now reopen. Please keep all discussion on the topic of active learning.

 

[ZapperZ]

This is a rather timely article. It came out a couple of days ago.

https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/03/03/1916903117

It is another study that supports active learning. This time, the authors show that active learning actually helps under-represented students in undergraduate STEM education.

Zz.

 

[sophiecentaur]

Can never have too many times seeing the material...

I totally agree with this in practice but the pressures of timetable can make 'many times' very difficult to achieve. What other stuff can be left out if you are going to allow repeats?

 

[martinbn]

What is the definition of "active learning"?

 

[ZapperZ]

What is the definition of "active learning"?

https://cei.umn.edu/active-learning
https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/59/Active-Learning.pdf

Zz.

 

[haushofer]

Many students like to consume knowledge instead of construct it. Interesting topic and research.