The Availability of Scientific Evidence for the Efficacy of Active Learning in Science

by Joel A. Michael 

Active learning works! It does lead to greater retention of newly learned information. It does assist students to build robust mental models of whatever is being learned. It does help students develop the ability to solve problems. It does lead to more meaningful learning. But . . . how do we know? What’s the evidence? How do we convince our colleagues?

There are three different sorts of evidence that supports these assertions. The first is made up of the "testimonials" offered by teachers (in a wide variety of science disciplines) who have tried active learning and found that it "works." The second sort of evidence is found in a growing body of research carried out by teachers working in their own classrooms or across many classrooms on many campuses. Finally (or should it be first?), there is rapidly growing body of research in cognitive science and educational psychology conducted outside the classroom under more rigorously controlled experimental circumstances that has attempted to "measure" the learning outcomes of different teaching approaches.

Each of these kinds of evidence has different strengths and weaknesses. Teacher testimonials have the virtue of coming from our colleagues who are doing, in their classrooms, what we are thinking about doing in our classrooms. Claims for success are all the more compelling because they come directly out of the classroom. On the other hand, the usual lack of measured outcomes in such reports (even when published in peer-reviewed journals) is troubling because of the perception that is no "science" here to support the claims being made.

On the other hand, it is often difficult to determine the significance, for me in my classroom, of the reports coming out of the cognitive science laboratory. The experimenters can and did control what they regard as the relevant variables, but I can’t do this in the classroom. The unanswered question is always, "how do I do this in my classroom, in my course, with my students."

Thus, I would argue that the most compelling evidence is present in that second set of studies, research done by teachers in real classrooms. When done well, and many such studies are, the results are directly applicable to my classroom situation in ways that the results of experimental studies may not be.

The bibliography that follows is an attempt to provide you with pointers to where in the literature you can find each of the three sorts of evidence I have discussed above. Bear in mind that, unlike the situation in, say, molecular biology, advances in psychology and education occur relatively slowly. Studies from the 70's and 80's can still of great relevance.

The books listed below are generally collections of individual papers each of which may or may not report the results of research. But all of the papers will cite the relevant literature, and thus can point you towards papers that are most germane to your interests. These books are generally easier to find in local libraries than are some of the journals listed below (some are to be found in exactly two libraries in the state of Illinois).

Bransford, John D., Brown, Ann L., and Cocking, Rodney R. (editors). (1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Minstrell, Jim and van Zee, Emily. (2000). Inquiring into Inquiry Learning and Teaching in Science. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Mintzes, Joel L., Wandersee, James H., and Novak, Joseph D. (1997). Teaching Science for Understanding: A Human Constructivist View. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Mintzes, Joel L., Wandersee, James H., and Novak, Joseph D. (1999). Assessing Science Understanding: A Human Constructivist View. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

O’Donnell, Angela M. and King, Alison. (1999). Cognitive Perspectives on Peer Learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Reigeluth, Charles M. (1999). Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory, Volume 11. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Gardner, Marjorie, Greeno, James G., Reif, Frederick, Schoenfeld, Alan H., diSessa, Andrea, and Stage, Elizabeth (editors). (1990). Toward a Scientific Practice of Science Education. Hllsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

West, Leo H. T. and Pines, A. Leon (editors). (1985). Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Glynn, Shawn M., Yeany, Russell, H., and Britton, Bruce K. (editors). (1991). The Psychology of Learning Science. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

These journals have as their primary audience the teachers in a particular discipline. They publish both "testimonials" and the results of research from both the classroom and the "laboratory." These reports are most often applicable in any discipline or course that you teach.

Advances in Physiology Education (published by the American Physiological Society; articles can be downloaded and printed free from the APS website)

The American Biology Teacher (published by the National Association of Biology Teachers, Inc.)

The Journal of Biological Education (published by the Institute of Biology - UK)

Biochemical Education (published by the International Union of Biochemistry - UK)

Journal of Chemical Education (published by the Division of Chemical Education of the American Chemical Society)

American Journal of Physics (published by the American Association of Physics Teachers)

I am sure that there are journals published by professional societies in other disciplines that I simply have not yet encountered; check your library.

These journals mainly publish research from the classroom and/or the "laboratory." The results reported are likely to be relevant to your classroom needs, although some "translation" may be required.

Journal of Research in Science Teaching (published by the National Association of Research in Science Teaching)

Science Education (published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.)

International Journal of Science Education (published by Taylor & Francis - London)

The first journal listed here publishes some of the most fundamental and cutting edge research on cognition, much of it applicable to questions of pedagogy, but not always in an obvious way. The work reported in the other three journals are much more immediately applicable to teaching as their titles suggest.

Cognitive Science (published by the Cognitive Science Society)

Journal of the Learning Sciences (published by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates)

Cognition and Instruction (published by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates)

Instructional Science (published by Kluwer Academic Publishers Group)

Bagno, E. and Eylon, B.-S. (1997). From problem solving to a knowledge structure; an example from the domain of electromagnetism. Am. J. Physics 65(8): 726-736.

Miller, T. L. (1993). Demonstration-exploration-discussion: teaching chemistry with discovery and creativity. J. Chem. Education, 70(3): 187-189.

Lake, David A. (1999). Peer tutoring improves student performance in an advanced physiology course. Am. J. Physiol. 276 (Adv. Physiol. Educ. 21): S86-92.

Zeilik, Michael, Schau, Candace, and Mattern, Nancy. (1999). Conceptual astronomy. II. replicating conceptual gains, probing attitude changes across three semesters. Am. J. Physics 67(10): 923-927.

Caglayan, Sehvar. (1994). Effectiveness of an active method in teaching physiology. Am. J. Physiol. 267 (Adv. Physiol. Educ. 12): S81-86

Hake, Richard. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus tradition methods: a six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. Am. J. Physics 66(1): 64-74.

Towns, Marcy H. and Grant, Edward R. (1997). "I believe I will go out of this class actually knowing something": cooperative learning activities in physical chemistry. J. res. Science Teaching 34(8): 819-835.

Jensen, Murray S. and Finley, Fred N. (1996). Changes in students’ understanding of evolution resulting from different curricular and instructional strategies. J. res. Science Teaching 33(8): 879-900.

Chi, Michelene T. H. et al. (1989). Self-explanations: how students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science 13: 145-182.

What is PERC? | Who are we? | What do we do? | How can we help you?

 Contact PERC
Copyright © 1998