Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics

To test the hypothesis that lecturing maximizes learning and course performance, we metaanalyzed 225 studies that reported data on examination scores or failure rates when comparing student performance in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses under traditiona...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS Vol. 111; no. 23; p. 8410
Main Authors: Freeman, Scott, Eddy, Sarah L, McDonough, Miles, Smith, Michelle K, Okoroafor, Nnadozie, Jordt, Hannah, Wenderoth, Mary Pat
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: United States 10.06.2014
Subjects:
Achievement
Comprehension
Engineering - education
Humans
Mathematics - education
Mental Competency
Meta-Analysis as Topic
Problem-Based Learning - methods
Science - education
Students - statistics & numerical data
Technology - education
Universities
evidence-based teaching
undergraduate education
constructivism
scientific teaching
ISSN:1091-6490, 1091-6490
Online Access:Get more information
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To test the hypothesis that lecturing maximizes learning and course performance, we metaanalyzed 225 studies that reported data on examination scores or failure rates when comparing student performance in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses under traditional lecturing versus active learning. The effect sizes indicate that on average, student performance on examinations and concept inventories increased by 0.47 SDs under active learning (n = 158 studies), and that the odds ratio for failing was 1.95 under traditional lecturing (n = 67 studies). These results indicate that average examination scores improved by about 6% in active learning sections, and that students in classes with traditional lecturing were 1.5 times more likely to fail than were students in classes with active learning. Heterogeneity analyses indicated that both results hold across the STEM disciplines, that active learning increases scores on concept inventories more than on course examinations, and that active learning appears effective across all class sizes--although the greatest effects are in small (n ≤ 50) classes. Trim and fill analyses and fail-safe n calculations suggest that the results are not due to publication bias. The results also appear robust to variation in the methodological rigor of the included studies, based on the quality of controls over student quality and instructor identity. This is the largest and most comprehensive metaanalysis of undergraduate STEM education published to date. The results raise questions about the continued use of traditional lecturing as a control in research studies, and support active learning as the preferred, empirically validated teaching practice in regular classrooms.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1091-6490
1091-6490
DOI:10.1073/pnas.1319030111