Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Creating and Implementing Effective Active Learning Experiences

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Flipping the College Classroom

  • 1103 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter provides guidance on how to create and implement effective active learning experiences for the flipped classroom. The active learning experiences are organized into four categories: group work, peer tutoring, discussions, and individual work. Research on the effectiveness of group work, peer tutoring, and discussions is examined with special emphasis placed on identifying which of the six learning domains (e.g. higher-order thinking, affective learning, educational and professional skills) are supported by the active learning experiences. Evidence-based advice for effectively facilitating and monitoring group work, peer tutoring, and discussions is also provided. Finally, examples of other effective active learning experiences for each category (group work, peer tutoring, discussions, and individual work) are provided along with any research related to the activity/experience.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Meta-analytic studies employ a statistical procedure that combines data from several research studies that are investigating a similar hypothesis. The data from these separate studies is converted to a common metric, combined and then re-analyzed to assess whether, across studies, there is a significant relationship between the variables being investigated. If there is a significant relationship, the meta-analysis can determine the strength of the relationship and also test whether there are any significant moderators of the relationship. Thus, meta-analyses allow researchers to bring together the findings of several studies to test whether there is broad, consistent statistical support for the question being addressed.

  2. 2.

    Johnson et al. (2014) combined data from 168 studies of cooperative learning groups. Springer et al. (1999) combined data from 383 studies of STEM courses. Warfa (2015) combined data from 25 high school and college chemistry courses. Pai et al. (2015) combined 24 studies examining the effects of group work on transfer skills.

  3. 3.

    Group work includes groups of two or more that meet in and out of the classroom, and study groups that meet exclusively outside of the classroom.

  4. 4.

    Based on a meta-analysis of cooperative groups, collaborative groups were not included in the study.

References

  • Almajed, Abdulaziz, Vicki J. Skinner, Raymond F. Peterson, and Tracey A. Winning. 2016. Collaborative Learning: Students’ Perspectives on How Learning Happens. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning 10 (2), Article 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anaya, Guadalupe. 1996. College Experiences and Student Learning: The Influence of Active Learning, College Environments and Cocurricular Activities. Journal of College Student Development 37 (6): 611–622.

    Google Scholar 

  • Angelo, Thomas A., and Kathryn P. Cross. 1993. Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armbruster, Peter, Maya Patel, Erika Johnson, and Martha Weiss. 2009. Active Learning and Student-Centered Pedagogy Improve Student Attitudes and Performance in Biology. CBE-Life Sciences Education 8: 203–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, Scott, and Jesse Palmer. 1998. Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) in a Twelfth Grade Classroom: Effect on Student Achievement and Attitude. Journal of Social Studies Research 22 (1): 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Astin, Alexander W. 1999. Student Involvement: A Developmental Theory for Higher Education. Journal of College Student Development 40 (5): 518–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, Sarah, Larissa K. Barber, and Amanda J. Ferguson. 2015. Promoting Perceived Benefits of Group Projects: The Role of the Instructor Contributions and Intragroup Processes. Teaching of Psychology 42 (2): 179–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkley, Elizabeth F., Claire H. Major, and Kathryn P. Cross. 2014. Collaborative Learning Techniques: A Handbook for College Faculty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhullar, Naureen, Karen C. Rose, Janine M. Utell, and Kathryn Healey. 2014. The Impact of Peer Review on Writing in a Psychology Course: Lessons Learned. Journal of Excellence in College Teaching 25 (2): 91–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, Adam, Kayah-Bah Phillmann, and Lona Smart. 2001. Active Learning Within a Lecture: Assessing the Impact of Short, In-class Writing Exercises. Teaching of Psychology 28 (4): 257–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Kim S. 2015. Flipping to Teach the Conceptual Foundations of Successful Workplce Writing. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly 79 (1): 54–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casteel, Mark A., and Kenneth R. Bridges. 2007. Goodbye Lecture: A Student-Led Seminar Approach for Teaching Upper Division Courses. Teaching of Psychology 34 (2): 107–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connell, Georgianne L., Deborah A. Donovan, and Timothy G. Chambers. 2016. Increasing the Use of Student-Centered Pedagogies from Moderate to High Improves Student Learning and Attitudes About Biology. CBE-Life Sciences Education 15: 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Critz, Catherine M., and Diane Knight. 2013. Using the Flipped Classroom in Graduate Nursing Education. Nurse Educator 38: 210–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dallimore, Elise J., Julie H. Hertenstein, and Marjorie B. Platt. 2008. Using Discussion Pedagogy to Enhance Oral and Written Communication Skills. College Teaching 56 (3): 163–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, Frances, and Jason L.G. Braasch. 2013. Application Exercises Improve Transfer of Statistical Knowledge in Real-World Situations. Teaching of Psychology 40 (3): 200–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dochy, Filip, Mien Segers, Piet Van den Bossche, and David Gijbels. 2003. Effects of Problem-Based Learning: A Meta-Analysis. Learning and Instruction 13: 533–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fantuzzo, John W., Ronald E. Riggio, Sharon Connelly, and Linda Dimeff. 1989. Effects of Reciprocal Peer Tutoring on Academic Achievement and Psychological Adjustment: A Component Analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology 81 (2): 173–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiechtner, Susan B., and Elaine A. Davis. 2016. Republication of ‘Why Some Groups Fail: A Survey of Students’ Experiences with Learning Groups’. Journal of Management Education 40 (1): 12–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, Elizabeth A. 2011. Re-viewing Peer Review. The Writing Instructor. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ959705.pdf.

  • Fosmire, Michael. 2010. Calibrated Peer Review: A New Tool for Integrating Information Literacy Skills in Writing-Intensive Large Classroom Settings. Libraries and the Academy 10 (2): 147–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, Scott, Sarah Eddy, Miles McDonough, Michelle Smith, Nnadozie Okorafor, Hannah Jordt, and Mary Pat Wenderoth. 2014. Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111: 8410–8415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fulton, Cheryl, and Laura Gonzalez. 2014. Making Career Counseling Relevant: Enhancing Experiential Learning Using a ‘Flipped’ Course Design. The Journal of Counselor Preparation and Supervision 7 (2), Article 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilboy, Mary Beth, Scott Heinerichs, and Gina Pazzaglia. 2015. Enhancing Student Engagement Using the Flipped Classroom. Journal of Nutritional Education and Behavior 47: 109–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graner, Michael H. 1987. Revision Workshops: An Alternative to Peer Editing Groups. The English Journal 76 (3): 40–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haak, David C., Janneke HilleRisLambers, Emile Pitre, and Scott Freeman. 2011. Increased Structure and Active Learning Reduce the Achievement Gap in Introductory Biology. Science 332: 1213–1216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartling, Lisa, Carol Spooner, Lisa Tjosvold, and Anna Oswald. 2010. Problem-Based Learning in Pre-clinical Medical Education: 22 Years of Outcome Research. Medical Teacher 32: 28–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, Cindy E. 2004. Problem-Based Learning: What and How Do Students Learn? Educational Psychology Review 16 (3): 235–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, Yvonne, Robyn Benson, and Charlotte Brack. 2015. Student Conceptions of Peer-Assisted Learning. Journal of Further and Higher Education 39 (4): 579–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, Jamie L., Tyler A. Kummer, and Patricia D.d.M. Godoy. 2015. Improvements from a Flipped Classroom May Simply Be the Fruits of Active Learning. CBE-Life Science Education 14: 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, David W., and Roger T. Johnson. 1993. Creative and Critical Thinking Through Academic Controversy. The American Behavioral Scientist 37 (1): 40–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, David W., Roger T. Johnson, and Karl A. Smith. 1996. Academic Controversy: Intellectual Challenge in the Classroom. Edina: Interaction Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, David W., Roger T. Johnson, and Karl A. Smith. 2014. Cooperative Learning: Improving University Instruction by Basing Practice on Validated Theory. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 25 (3 & 4): 85–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaddoura, Mahmoud. 2013. Think Pair Share: A Teaching Learning Strategy to Enhance Students’ Critical Thinking. Educational Research Quarterly 36 (4): 3–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagan, Spencer. 1992. Co-operative Learning. San Juan Capistrano: Resources for Teachers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karau, Steven, and Kipling D. Williams. 1993. Social Loafing: A Meta-analytic Review and Theoretical Integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65 (4): 681–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karegianes, Myra L., Ernest T. Pascarella, and Susanna W. Pflaum. 1980. The Effects of Peer Editing on the Writing Proficiency of Low-Achieving Tenth Grade Students. Journal of Educational Research 73 (4): 203–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kember, David, and Lyn Gow. 1994. Orientations to Teaching and Their Effect on the Quality of Student Learning. Journal of Higher Education 65 (1): 58–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krain, Matthew. 2016. Putting the Learning in Case Learning? The Effects of Case-Based Approaches on Student Knowledge, Atitudes and Engagement. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 27 (2): 131–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulak, Verena, and Genevieve Newton. 2015. An Investigation of the Pedagogical Impact of Using Case-Based Learning in a Undergraduate Biochemistry Course. International Journal of Higher Education 4 (4): 13–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Grace Hui Chin, and Paul Shih Chieh Chien. 2009. An Investigation into Effectiveness of Peer Feedback. Journal of Applied Foreign Languages Fortune Institute of Technology 3: 79–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu, Ruiling, and Linda Bol. 2007. A Comparison of Anonymous Versus Identifiable e-Peer Review on College Student Writing Performance and the Extent of Critical Feedback. Journal of Interactive Online Learning 6 (2): 100–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundstrom, Kristi, and Wendy Baker. 2009. To Give Is Better than to Receive: The Benefits of Peer Review to the Reviewer’s Own Writing. Journal of Second Language Learning 18L: 30–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maier, Mark H., KimMarie McGoldrick, and Scott Simkins. 2012. Implementing Cooperative Learning in Introductory Economics Courses. In Cooperative Learning in Higher Education: Across the Discipline, Across the Academy, ed. Barbara Mills. Sterling: Stylus Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mennella, Thomas A. 2016. Comparing the Efficacy of Flipped vs. Alternative Active Learning in a College Genetics Course. The American Biology Teacher 78 (6): 471–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michael, Joel. 2006. Where’s the Evidence that Active Learning Works? Advances in Physiological Education 30: 159–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaelsen, Larry K., Warren E. Watson, Jon Cragin, and L. Dee Fink. 1982. Team Learning: A Potential Solution to the Problems of Large Classes. The Organizational Behavior Teaching Journal 7 (1): 13–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Min, Hui-Tzu. 2005. Training Students to Become Successful Peer Reviewers. System 33 (2): 293–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Min, Hui-Tzu. 2006. The Effects of Trained Peer Review on EFL Students’ Revision Types and Writing Quality. Journal of Second Language Writing 15: 118–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilson, Linda B. 2016. Teaching at Its Best. A Reseach-Based Resource for College Instructors. 4th ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oates, Greg, Judy Paterson, Ivan Reilly, and Grant Woods. 2016. Seeing Things from Others’ Points of View: Collaboration in Undergraduate Mathematics. PRIMUS 26 (3): 206–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, Angela M. 2006. The Role of Peers and Group Learning. 2004. In Handbook of Educational Psychology, ed. Patricia A. Alexander and Philip H. Winne, 781–802. Mahwah: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pai, Hui-Hua, David A. Sears, and Yukiko Maeda. 2015. Effects of Small-Group Learning on Transfer: A Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review 27: 79–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pascarella, Ernest T., and Patrick T. Terenzini. 2005. How College Affects Students: A Third Decade of Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, Philip H., Kerstin Hamann, and Bruce M. Wilson. 2011. Learning Through Discussions: Comparing the Benefits of Small-Group and Large-Class Settings. Journal of Political Science Education 7: 48–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prince, Michael. 2004. Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research. Journal of Engineering Education 93 (3): 223–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rieber, Lloyd J. 2006. Using Peer Review to Improve Student Writing in Business Courses. Journal of Education for Business 81 (6): 322–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roehling, P.V., Thomas Vander Kooi, Stephanie Dykema, Brooke Quisenberry, and Chelsey Vandlen. 2011. Engaging the Millennial Generation in Class Discussions. College Teaching 59: 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosser, Sue V. 1998. Group Work in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics: Consequences of Ignoring Gender and Race. College Teaching 46 (3): 82–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, Robert. 1991. Student Team Learning: A Practical Guide to Cooperative Learning. National Education Association: Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robert Slavin. 1991. Student Team Learning: A Practical Guide to Cooperative Learning. Washington D.C.: National Education Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Michelle K., William B. Wood, Wendy K. Adams, Carl Wieman, Jennifer K. Knight, Nancy Guild, and Tin Tin Su. 2009. Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance on In-class Concept Questions. Science 323 (5910): 122–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Michelle K., William B. Wood, Ken Krauter, and Jennifer K. Knight. 2011. Combining Peer Discussion with Instructor Explanation Increases Student Learning from In-Class Concept Questions. Cell Biology Education 10 (1): 55–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprague, Elaine W., and Darren W. Dahl. 2010. Learning to Click: An Evaluation of the Personal Response System Clicker Technology in Introductory Marketing Courses. Journal of Marketing Education 32 (1): 93–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Springer, Leonard, Mary Elizabeth Stanne, and Samuel E. Donovan. 1999. Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research 69 (1): 21–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stead, David R. 2005. A Review of the One-Minute Paper. Active Learning in Higher Education 6 (2): 118–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svinicki, Marilla D., and Wilbert McKeachie. 2014. McKeachie’s Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research and Theory for College and University Teachers. 14th ed. Belmont: Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talley, Cheryl P., and Stephen Scherer. 2013. The Enhanced Flipped Classroom: Increasing Academic Performance with Student-Recorded Lectures and Practice Testing in a “Flipped” STEM Course. The Journal of Negro Education 82: 339–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topping, Keith J. 1996. The Effectiveness of Peer Tutoring in Further and Higher Education: A Typology and Review of the Literature. Higher Education 32 (2): 321–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ueltschy, Linda C. 2001. An Exploratory Study of Integrating Interactive Technology into the Marketing Curriculum. Journal of Marketing Education 23 (1): 63–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wankat, Phillip C. 2002. The Effective, Efficient Professor: Teaching, Scholarship and Service. New York: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warfa, Abdi-Rizak. 2015. Using Cooperative Learning to Teach Chemistry: A Meta-Analytic Review. Journal of Chemical Education 93: 248–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, Stephanie G. 2013. The Flipped Class: A Method to Address the Challenges of an Undergraduate Statistics Course. Teaching of Psychology 40 (3): 193–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psychology, Hope College, Holland, Michigan, USA

    Patricia V. Roehling

Authors
  1. Patricia V. Roehling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Roehling, P.V. (2018). Creating and Implementing Effective Active Learning Experiences. In: Flipping the College Classroom. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69392-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69392-7_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-69391-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-69392-7

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation