Prior findings on the effects of active learning environments were limited by both research design and data-analysis techniques, such as lack of controls over confounding factors and misuse of statistical modeling. We (1) investigated the effects of active learning environments on student achievement and motivation and (2) overcame the limitations of prior studies. Using a three-group design, the effects of physical learning environments and pedagogical approaches were successfully separated. Active learning environments were found to have little influence, whereas active learning and teaching were found to have a significantly-positive influence on student achievements. The findings contribute to understandings of active learning environments in higher education, and invite more debate about whether further investments in active learning classrooms are worthwhile.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Baepler, P., Walker, J. D., & Driessen, M. (2014). It’s not about seat time: Blending, flipping, and efficiency in active learning classrooms. Computers and Education,78, 227–236.
Baldwin, D. (1996). Discovery learning in computer science. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin,28(1), 222–226.
Barkley, E. F., Cross, K. P., & Major, C. H. (2014). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. New York: Wiley.
Beck, L. L., & Chizhik, A. W. (2008). An experimental study of cooperative learning in CS1. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin,40(1), 205–209.
Brooks, D. C. (2011). Space matters: The impact of formal learning environments on student learning. British Journal of Educational Technology,42(5), 719–726.
Carter, A. S., & Hundhausen, C. D. (2011). A review of studio-based learning in computer science. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges,27(1), 105–111.
Cotner, S., Loper, J., Walker, J. D., & Brooks, D. C. (2013). “It’s not you, it’s the room”—Are the high-tech, active learning classrooms worth it? Journal of College Science Teaching,42(6), 82–88.
Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics,69(9), 970–977.
Dori, Y. J. (2007). Educational reform at MIT: Advancing and evaluating technology-based projects on-and off-campus. Journal of Science Education and Technology,16(4), 279–281.
Dori, Y. J., & Belcher, J. (2005). How does technology-enabled active learning affect undergraduate students’ understanding of electromagnetism concepts? The Journal of the Learning Sciences,14(2), 243–279.
Elliot, A. J., & Murayama, K. (2008). On the measurement of achievement goals: Critique, illustration, and application. Journal of Educational Psychology,100(3), 613.
Gaffney, J. D., Richards, E., Kustusch, M. B., Ding, L., & Beichner, R. J. (2008). Scaling up education reform. Journal of College Science Teaching,37(5), 48–53.
Greer, T., Hao, Q., Jing, M., & Barnes, B. (2019). On the effects of active learning environments in computing education. In Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 267–272).
Hakimzadeh, H., Adaikkalavan, R., & Batzinger, R. (2011). Successful implementation of an active learning laboratory in computer science. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual ACM SIGUCCS Conference on User Services (pp. 83–86).
Hao, Q., Barnes, B., Wright, E., & Branch, R. M. (2017). The influence of achievement goals on online help seeking of computer science students. British Journal of Educational Technology,48(6), 1273–1283.
Hao, Q., Barnes, B., Wright, E., & Kim, E. (2018). Effects of active learning environments and instructional methods in computer science education. In Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 934–939).
Horwitz, S., Rodger, S. H., Biggers, M., Binkley, D., Frantz, C. K., Gundermann, D., et al. (2009). Using peer-led team learning to increase participation and success of under-represented groups in introductory computer science. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin,41(1), 163–167.
Hu, H. H., & Shepherd, T. D. (2014). Teaching CS 1 with POGIL activities and roles. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 127–132).
McConnell, J. J. (2005). Active and cooperative learning: Tips and tricks (part I). ACM SIGCSE Bulletin,37(2), 27–30.
Oliver-Hoyo, M. T., Allen, D., Hunt, W. F., Hutson, J., & Pitts, A. (2004). Effects of an active learning environment: Teaching innovations at a research I institution. Journal of Chemical Education,81(3), 441.
Park, E. L., & Choi, B. K. (2014). Transformation of classroom spaces: Traditional versus active learning classroom in colleges. Higher Education,68(5), 749–771.
Porter, L., Bailey Lee, C., & Simon, B. (2013, March). Halving fail rates using peer instruction: A study of four computer science courses. In Proceeding of the 44th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 177–182).
Porter, L., Bailey Lee, C., Simon, B., & Zingaro, D. (2011). Peer instruction: Do students really learn from peer discussion in computing? In Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Computing Education Research (pp. 45–52).
Shell, D. F., & Soh, L. K. (2013). Profiles of motivated self-regulation in college computer science courses: Differences in major versus required non-major courses. Journal of Science Education and Technology,22(6), 899–913.
Simon, B., Kohanfars, M., Lee, J., Tamayo, K., & Cutts, Q. (2010). Experience report: Peer instruction in introductory computing. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 341–345).
Timmerman, B., & Lingard, R. (2003). Assessment of active learning with upper division computer science students. In Proceedings of 2003 Frontiers in Education (FIE 2003).
Whiteside, A., Brooks, D. C., & Walker, J. D. (2010). Making the case for space: Three years of empirical research on learning environments. Educause Quarterly,33(3), 11–20.
Ziegel, E. R. (1995). Tie series analysis, forecasting, and control. Technometrics, 37(2), 238–242.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Section I Attitude towards taking computer science courses
I like programming
I like computer science
I am looking forward to taking more Computer Science courses
I am confident in my technical knowledge
I am confident in my programming skills
I am confident in my capability of learning new technical skills
Section II Achievement goal questionnaire-revised
My aim is to completely master the material presented in this class
I am striving to do well compared with other students
My goal is to learn as much as possible
My aim is to perform well relative to other students
My aim is to avoid learning less than I possibly could
My goal is to avoid performing poorly compared with others
I am striving to understand the content as thoroughly as possible
My goal is to perform better than the other students
My goal is to avoid learning less than it is possible to learn
I am striving to avoid performing worse than others
My aim is to avoid doing worse than other students
I am striving to avoid an incomplete understanding of the course material
Likert responses: SA, A, N, D, SD
About this article
Cite this article
Hao, Q., Barnes, B. & Jing, M. Quantifying the effects of active learning environments: separating physical learning classrooms from pedagogical approaches. Learning Environ Res (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-020-09320-3
- Active learning environments
- Computing education
- Higher education
- Physical environments