Prateek Shekhar

Strategies to mitigate student resistance to active learning

BackgroundResearch has shown that active learning promotes student learning and increases retention rates of STEM undergraduates. Yet, instructors are reluctant to change their teaching approaches for several reasons, including a fear of student resistance to active learning. This paper addresses this issue by building on our prior work which demonstrates that certain instructor strategies can positively influence student responses to active learning. We present an analysis of interview data from 17 engineering professors across the USA about the ways they use strategies to reduce student resistance to active learning in their undergraduate engineering courses.ResultsOur data reveal that instructor strategies for reducing student resistance generally fall within two broad types: explanation and facilitation strategies. Explanation strategies consist of the following: (a) explain the purpose, (b) explain course expectations, and (c) explain activity expectations. Facilitation strategies include the following: (a) approach non-participants, (b) assume an encouraging demeanor, (c) grade on participation, (d) walk around the room, (e) invite questions, (f) develop a routine, (g) design activities for participation, and (h) use incremental steps. Four of the strategies emerged from our analysis and were previously unstudied in the context of student resistance.ConclusionsThe findings of this study have practical implications for instructors wishing to implement active learning. There is a variety of strategies to reduce student resistance to active learning, and there are multiple successful ways to implement the strategies. Importantly, effective use of strategies requires some degree of intentional course planning. These strategies should be considered as a starting point for instructors seeking to better incorporate the use of active learning strategies into their undergraduate engineering classrooms.

Integrating quantitative and qualitative research methods to examine student resistance to active learning

ABSTRACT Engineering education researchers are increasingly integrating qualitative and quantitative research methods to study learning and retention in engineering. While quantitative methods can provide generalisable results, qualitative methods generate rich, descriptive understanding of the investigated phenomenon. On the other hand, a mixed methods approach provides benefits of the two approaches by incorporating them in a single study. However, engineering faculty often faces difficulty in integrating qualitative and quantitative methods and designs in their education research. This article discusses mixed methods in the context of an actual ongoing engineering education research project investigating student resistance to active learning. We describe the research design in phases that show the integration of quantitative and qualitative results, and how these data sources can help influence the direction of the research and triangulate findings. Our mixed method research experience highlights the importance of thinking iteratively between qualitative and quantitative data sources during the instrument development process.

‘Not hard to sway’: a case study of student engagement in two large engineering classes

ABSTRACT Although engineering education research has empirically validated the effectiveness of active learning in improving student learning over traditional lecture-based methods, the adoption of active learning in classrooms has been slow. One of the greatest reported barriers is student resistance towards engagement in active learning exercises. This paper argues that the level of student engagement in active learning classrooms is an interplay of social and physical classroom characteristics. Using classroom observations and instructor interviews, this study describes the influence of the interaction of student response systems and classroom layout on student engagement in two large active-learning-based engineering classrooms. The findings suggest that the use of different student response systems in combination with cluster-style seating arrangements can increase student engagement in large classrooms.