Active Learning Typology – UC Tech

My colleague, Joseph Kearns, and I are excited to present our active learning typology at the 2023 UC Tech Conference in July! This venue is for those interested in and working with technology within the University of California system. Student workers are also invited to attend. This year has its first teaching and learning program track for which we applied. The theme is Resilient, Rising, and Reinspired. Below is the description and outline of our presentation. Here’s the link to the recording from UC Tech (skip the first 5 minutes of technical difficulties). This will be my first time visiting the Berkeley campus and meeting my colleagues!

Active Learning: Get Reinspired with Our Typology!

The rapid shift to remote instruction during the pandemic highlighted both the need for active learning and the challenges of implementing it. Including active learning in an already established course can feel overwhelming. Our typology is designed to make it easier to introduce active learning in your courses, with a menu of techniques ranging from the simple to the complex. Whether you’re an active learning aficionado looking for fresh ideas or a novice seeking practical suggestions, our typology will provide a framework for making pedagogically powerful innovations.

We’ll describe what active learning is, why it works, and the critical roles instructional designers play in co-designing such strategies. We provide examples of seven different types, sample lessons, a student learning organizer, and other academic resources that you can implement right now. We’ll feature active learning instructional strategies incorporated at Berkeley and elsewhere, with a particular focus on online instruction. We’ll also sprinkle in some active learning techniques as part of our session to keep things lively (i.e., a structured guide for participants’ notetaking, polls, think-pair-share, exit ticket).

Active learning gains students’ attention and provides students agency by using what’s learned. Researchers have shown that active learning can trigger cognitive functioning and build learning skills (Freeman et al., 2014; Harris & Bacon, 2019) to improve overall academic performance (Freeman et al., 2014; Prince, 2004; Ruiz-Primo et al., 2011). When effectively designed and implemented, it can reduce failure rates (Freeman et al., 2011; Styers et al., 2018; Theobald et al., 2020), advance the inclusion of the minoritized and therefore narrow the achievement gap for underrepresented students (Eddy & Hogan, 2014; Haak et al., 2011; Theobald et al., 2020). We’ll also address explicitly informing students of the benefits of active learning techniques so they take advantage of them.

Objectives

1. Define active learning.
2. Describe how it improves academic performance for all.
3. Recognize how it fits with the course subject matter.
4. Incorporate active learning into course design by referencing the typology.

Alignment with UC Goals

1. Improve learning.
2. Facilitate discovery experiences (O’Reilly, 2022).
3. Improve graduation rates (UCOP, 2020).
4. Eliminate equity gaps (UCOP, 2020).

Teaching Best Practices (Chickering & Gamson, 1987)

Four of Chickering & Gamson’s seven guiding principles of teaching relate to active learning. It’s based on their meta-analysis of 50 years of research on traditional undergraduate education: (Of note, recent researchers have found that these principles also apply to distance education.)

1. Develop reciprocity and cooperation among students (e.g., group work, team-based learning, debates).
2. Encourage active learning.
3. Give prompt feedback (e.g., peer reviews, formative assessments, practice tests).
4. Respect diverse talents and ways of learning (e.g., alternative assessments, student projects, options).

Role of Instructional Designers (Kumar & Rhitzhaught, 2017)

• Mediate between instructor & content.
• Guide implementation, especially challenges.
• Train faculty.
• Manage projects.
• Evaluate projects.

Typology of Active Learning (Kearns & Rogers, 2023)

• Practical – practice testing, project checkpoints, applied problem-solving
• Dialogical – Socratic method, elaborative interrogation, debates, arbitrations
• Experiential – framing the learning experience, VR, scenarios
• Experimental – lab tests, coding, environmental tests, social surveys, prototyping
• Investigative – research paper, lit review, current events, fact sheet, WebQuest
• Creative – webpage, laser engravings, podcasts, videos, graphics
• (Meta)cognitive – concept map, Cornell note-taking, visualization, mediation

Resources

See our extensive curated list of excellent Active Learning Resources.

References

*Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). The seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED282491

Eddy, S. L., & Hogan, K. A. (2017). Getting under the hood: How and for whom does increasing course structure work? CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(3), 361–571. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-03-0050

Freeman, S., Haak, D., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2011). Increased course structure improves performance in introductory biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 10(2), 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-08-0105

Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. PNAS, 111(23), 8410-8415. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1319030111

Haak, D. C., HilleRisLambers, J., Pitre, E., & Freeman, S. (2011). Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology. Science, 332(6034), 1213–1216. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204820

Harris, N., & Bacon, C. E. W. (2019). Developing cognitive skills through active learning: A systematic review of health care professions. Athletic Training Educational Journal, 14(2), 135–148. http://doi.org/10.4085/1402135

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., & Smith, K. (2006). Active learning: Cooperation in the university classroom (3rd ed.). Interaction Book Company.

Kearns, J. J., & Rogers, S. A. (2023). Active learning: Get reinspired with our typology! UC Tech Conference, Berkeley, CA

Kumar, S., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2017). What do instructional designers in higher education really do? International Journal on E-Learning, 16(4), 371-393. https://edtechbooks.org/-owHI

O’Reilly, O. (2022). Vision and Priorities 2022-2023 https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/17FI0yTbx_I772pzjgMbLzUKA72OPLB2ZWAxGtikr-Rs

Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-331. https://www.engr.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/drive/1smSpn4AiHSh8z7a0MHDBwhb_JhcoLQmI/2004-Prince_AL.pdf

Ruiz-Primo, M.A., Briggs, D., Iverson, H., Talbot, R., Shepard, L.A. (2011). Impact of undergraduate science course innovations on learning. Science, 331(6022):1269-70. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1198976

Styers, M. L., Van Zandt, P. A., & Hayden, K. L. (2018). Active learning in flipped Life Science courses promotes development of critical thinking skills. CBE Life Sciences Education, 17(3), ar39. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-11-0332

Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., Chambwe, N., Cintrón, D. L., Cooper, J. D., Dunster, G., Grummer, J. A., Hennessey, K., Hsiao, J., Iranon, N., Jones, L., 2nd, Jordt, H., Keller, M., Lacey, M. E., Littlefield, C. E., Lowe, A., … Freeman, S. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117(12), 6476–6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117

UCOP 2030 Capacity Plan. https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/university-leaders-present-ambitious-plan-help-thousands-more-californians-earn-degree

Presenters

Dr. Sandra Annette Rogers is an instructional designer with Digital Learning Services at UC Berkeley. She’s an author, content developer, education researcher, instructional designer, and teacher trainer. Additionally, Dr. Rogers has taught in a variety of educational settings from a rural hut in Honduras with the Peace Corps to the UCLA Lab School to higher education. Sandra’s professional interests include futures thinking, universal design for learning, and distance education.

Joseph Kearns (he/him) is an instructional designer at UC Berkeley with over fifteen years of experience in digital education, including academic coaching, instructional design, and digital learning support. Joseph’s areas of professional interest encompass futures thinking, active learning, and human-centered design. Joseph mentored Dr. Rogers in her transition to UCB as an instructional designer!