The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 85 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
PORTAAL: A Classroom Observation Tool Assessing Evidence-Based Teaching Practices for Active Learning in Large Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Classes
Open accessAbstract
There is extensive evidence that active learning works better than a completely passive lecture. Despite this evidence, adoption of these evidence-based teaching practices remains low. In this paper, we offer one tool to help faculty members implement active learning. This tool identifies 21 readily implemented elements that have been shown to increase student outcomes related to achievement, logic development, or other relevant learning goals with college-age students. Thus, this tool both clarifies the research-supported elements of best practices for instructor implementation of active learning in the classroom setting and measures instructors’ alignment with these practices. We describe how we reviewed the discipline-based education research literature to identify best practices in active learning for adult learners in the classroom and used these results to develop an observation tool (Practical Observation Rubric To Assess Active Learning, or PORTAAL) that documents the extent to which instructors incorporate these practices into their classrooms. We then use PORTAAL to explore the classroom practices of 25 introductory biology instructors who employ some form of active learning. Overall, PORTAAL documents how well aligned classrooms are with research-supported best practices for active learning and provides specific feedback and guidance to instructors to allow them to identify what they do well and what could be improved.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Figures





Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Our data on type of active learning are also poorly resolved, because publications still routinely fail to report quantitative data on the nature of course interventions, such as records from classroom observation tools (e.g., ref. 61 and SI Appendix, Table S12).”
From Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math (2020) · cites this paper as [61]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1319030111 · Cited by 9,787 · cited 3×
“For example, when asked to define active learning, faculty members in one study offered a range of answers, including simply “using clickers” or “group work” to “emphasizing higher-order skills” (Freeman et al., 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationThe role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.100.3.363 · Cited by 9,564 · cited 4×
“In addition to the amount of practice, the quality and distribution of the practice is also important (Ericsson et al., 1993).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialCicchetti, D. V. (1994) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284 · Cited by 9,349 · cited 2×
“The resulting ICCs were all > 0.8, and thus all were in the “excellent” range (Supplemental Table 2; Cicchetti 1994).”
BackgroundInfluentialForming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients.
McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P. (1996) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.1.1.30 · Cited by 6,903 · cited 3×
“The resulting ICCs were all > 0.8, and thus all were in the “excellent” range (Supplemental Table 2; Cicchetti 1994).”
MethodInfluentialHake, R. R. (1998) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.18809 · Cited by 6,072 · cited 1×
“One of the most popular definitions of active learning comes from Hake (1998): “those [practices] designed at least in part to promote conceptual understanding through interactive engagement of students in heads-on (always) and hands-on (usually) activities which yield immediate feedback through…”
BackgroundDunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100612453266 · Cited by 3,138
Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement.
Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.54.1.5 · Cited by 3,098
Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing
Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1977) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(77)80016-9 · Cited by 2,296 · cited 2×
“To provide students with opportunities to practice their logic development, it is necessary for instructors to formulate questions that require a higher level of thinking (PORTAAL element logic development 1, L1; Morris et al., 1977; Ericsson et al.,1993; Jensen et al., 2014).”
BackgroundMethodAronson, J., Fried, C. B., & Good, C. (2002) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1491 · Cited by 1,889 · cited 1×
“At the college level, an intervention that had students reflect on a situation in their own life in which hard work helped them improve also increased their achievement in their classes (Aronson et al., 2002).”
BackgroundPraise for intelligence can undermine children's motivation and performance.
Mueller, C. M., & Dweck, C. S. (1998) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.33 · Cited by 1,709 · cited 1×
“Praise that focuses on effort encourages a mastery goal and can increase student willingness to participate in challenging tasks (R6; Mueller and Dweck, 1998).”
BackgroundWhy do women opt out? Sense of belonging and women's representation in mathematics.
Good, C., Rattan, A., & Dweck, C. S. (2012) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0026659 · Cited by 1,113 · cited 1×
“Furthermore, for some college students, the perception that their instructor holds mastery goals for the class leads to improved performance relative to students who believe the instructor has a performance orientation (Good et al., 2012).”
BackgroundO’Donnell, C. (2008) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654307313793 · Cited by 1,037
Brownell, S. E., & Tanner, K. D. (2012) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.12-09-0163 · Cited by 797 · cited 2×
“…teaching as they do their research, may not recognize that the teaching strategies they use are not as effective as other strategies, or may not recognize that comfort and familiarity often dictate their choices of teaching method (Cole, 1982; Bouwma-Gearhart, 2012; Brownell and Tanner, 2012).”
BackgroundBell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2008) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.296 · Cited by 710 · cited 2×
“In the Bell and Kozlowski (2008) study, students in the treatment group were simply told: “errors are a positive part of the training process” and “you can learn from your mistakes and develop a better understanding of the [topic/activity].””
BackgroundBiology in Bloom: Implementing Bloom's Taxonomy to Enhance Student Learning in Biology
Crowe, A., Dirks, C., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2008) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.08-05-0024 · Cited by 629 · cited 2×
“Furthermore, the education research literature frequently does not provide sufficient detail for the proper implementation of the educational innovations presented (Borrego et al., 2013).”
BackgroundSelf-citationFeedback in Written Instruction
Kulhavy, R. W. (1977) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543047002211 · Cited by 571 · cited 2×
“14, Summer 2015 14:ar23, 5 into determining the correct answer and therefore reduces learning outcomes (Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundGetting Under the Hood: How and for Whom Does Increasing Course Structure Work?
Eddy, S. L., & Hogan, K. A. (2014) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.14-03-0050 · Cited by 553 · cited 1×
“The blue instructor decreased failure rates (instances of a “C−” or lower) on exams by 41% (Eddy and Hogan, 2014) when the instructor changed from traditional lecturing to a more active-learning environment that incorporated greater use of group work in class and weekly reading quizzes.”
BackgroundSelf-citationPrescribed active learning increases performance in introductory biology
Freeman, S., O’Connor, E., Parks, J. W., Cunningham, M., Hurley, D., Haak, D. C., Dirks, C., & Wenderoth, M. (2007) · CBE - Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1096/fasebj.21.5.a220 · Cited by 485 · cited 2×
“, 2010) and increase overall class attendance and performance (Freeman et al., 2007).”
BackgroundSelf-citationEffects of Dyadic Interaction on Argumentive Reasoning
Kuhn, D., Shaw, V., & Felton, M. K. (1997) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1503_1 · Cited by 480
Worked-out examples: Instructional explanations support learning by self-explanations
Renkl, A. (2002) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/s0959-4752(01)00030-5 · Cited by 452 · cited 2×
“Second, a deeper understanding of the material is often gained when students share and explain their answers to other students (i.e., work in small groups; L4; Wood et al., 1995, 1999; Renkl, 2002; Sampson and Clark, 2009; Menekse et al., 2013).”
BackgroundEMPLOYEE PROPENSITY TO WITHHOLD EFFORT: A CONCEPTUAL MODEL TO INTERSECT THREE AVENUES OF RESEARCH
Kidwell, R. E., & Bennett, N. (1993) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1993.9309035146 · Cited by 424 · cited 2×
“…and reward in a large class (students are fairly anonymous and will not get personally called out for not participating, and, even if they do participate, the chance they will be rewarded by being called on is low), which decreases motivation to participate (Kidwell and Bennett, 1993).”
BackgroundTeaching and physics education research: bridging the gap
Fraser, J. M., Timan, A. L., Miller, K., Dowd, J. E., Tucker, L., & Mazur, E. (2014) · Reports on Progress in Physics · doi:10.1088/0034-4885/77/3/032401 · Cited by 422 · cited 4×
“guarantee improvement in student learning, but it does increase the odds of success over less scientifically based approaches (Fraser et al., 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialNicol, D., & Boyle, J. T. (2003) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/0307507032000122297 · Cited by 359 · cited 2×
“Students also self-report that having time to think independently before discussions allows time to think through the question and come up with their own ideas (Nicol and Boyle, 2003).”
BackgroundCollaborative Discovery in a Scientific Domain
Okada, T., & Simon, H. (1997) · Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2102_1 · Cited by 350 · cited 2×
“Some students consider this explanations for their answers (Okada and Simon, 1997).”
BackgroundJensen, J. L., McDaniel, M. A., Woodard, S. M., & Kummer, T. A. (2014) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-013-9248-9 · Cited by 324 · cited 1×
“To provide students with opportunities to practice their logic development, it is necessary for instructors to formulate questions that require a higher level of thinking (PORTAAL element logic development 1, L1; Morris et al., 1977; Ericsson et al.,1993; Jensen et al., 2014).”
BackgroundIs Out of Sight, Out of Mind? An Empirical Study of Social Loafing in Technology-Supported Groups
Chidambaram, L., & Tung, L. L. (2005) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1050.0051 · Cited by 323 · cited 2×
“…psychology studies in classrooms have demonstrated that the smaller the group a student is in (e.g., pairs vs. the entire class) the more likely he or she is to participate in group work and the higher the quality of individual answers (Chidambaram and Tung, 2005; Aggarwal and O’Brien, 2008).”
BackgroundImmediate Feedback Assessment Technique Promotes Learning and Corrects Inaccurate first Responses
Epstein, M. L., Lazarus, A., Calvano, T. B., Matthews, K., Hendel, R. A., Epstein, B. B., & Brosvic, G. (2002) · The Psychological Record · doi:10.1007/bf03395423 · Cited by 310 · cited 1×
“Immediate feedback and correction also improves student performance (Trowbridge and Carson, 1932; Ericsson et al., 1993; Epstein et al., 2002; Renkl, 2002).”
BackgroundAssessment drives learning: An unavoidable truth?
Wormald, B. W., Schoeman, S., Somasunderam, A., & Penn, M. (2009) · Anatomical Sciences Education · doi:10.1002/ase.102 · Cited by 308
Increased Course Structure Improves Performance in Introductory Biology
Freeman, S., Haak, D., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2011) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.10-08-0105 · Cited by 306 · cited 1×
“With these changes, the failure rate decreased dramatically (a 65% reduction; Freeman et al., 2011).”
BackgroundSelf-citationJust the Facts? Introductory Undergraduate Biology Courses Focus on Low-Level Cognitive Skills
Momsen, J. L., Long, T. M., Wyse, S. A., & Ebert‐May, D. (2010) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.10-01-0001 · Cited by 290 · cited 2×
“PART 1: PORTAAL DEVELOPMENT”
BackgroundGender Gaps in Achievement and Participation in Multiple Introductory Biology Classrooms
Eddy, S. L., Brownell, S. E., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.13-10-0204 · Cited by 281
Self-citationScherr, R. E., & Hammer, D. M. (2007) · International Conference of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1080/07370000902797379 · Cited by 279 · cited 1×
“PART 1: PORTAAL DEVELOPMENT”
The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation
Sampson, V. D., & Clark, D. B. (2008) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20306 · Cited by 278 · cited 2×
“Second, a deeper understanding of the material is often gained when students share and explain their answers to other students (i.e., work in small groups; L4; Wood et al., 1995, 1999; Renkl, 2002; Sampson and Clark, 2009; Menekse et al., 2013).”
BackgroundDifferentiated Overt Learning Activities for Effective Instruction in Engineering Classrooms
Menekşe, M., Stump, G. S., Krause, S., & Chi, M. T. H. (2013) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/jee.20021 · Cited by 274 · cited 2×
“Second, a deeper understanding of the material is often gained when students share and explain their answers to other students (i.e., work in small groups; L4; Wood et al., 1995, 1999; Renkl, 2002; Sampson and Clark, 2009; Menekse et al., 2013).”
BackgroundSmith, M. K., Wood, W., Krauter, K., & Knight, J. K. (2011) · CBE - Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.10-08-0101 · Cited by 269 · cited 2×
“This group work increases performance on isomorphic clicker questions and posttests compared with performance of students who only listened to an instructor explanation (Schworm and Renkl, 2006; Smith et al., 2011).”
BackgroundAn Experimental Study of Thorndike's Theory of Learning
Trowbridge, M. H., & Cason, H. (1932) · The Journal of General Psychology · doi:10.1080/00221309.1932.9918465 · Cited by 240 · cited 2×
“Immediate feedback and correction also improves student performance (Trowbridge and Carson, 1932; Ericsson et al., 1993; Epstein et al., 2002; Renkl, 2002).”
BackgroundPreszler, R. W., Dawe, A. L., Shuster, C. B., & Shuster, M. I. (2007) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.06-09-0190 · Cited by 235 · cited 1×
“There are many articles validating the importance of opportunities to practice: student learning is positively correlated with the number of in-class clicker questions asked (Preszler et al., 2007); students who created their own explanations performed better on related exam questions than students who read expert exp…”
BackgroundWebb, N. M., Nemer, K. M., & Ing, M. (2006) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1501_8 · Cited by 232
The Effect of Teacher Confirmation on Student Communication and Learning Outcomes
Goodboy, A., & Myers, S. A. (2008) · Communication Education · doi:10.1080/03634520701787777 · Cited by 216 · cited 3×
“These behaviors can also influence students’ willingness to participate in class (Fritschner, 2000; Goodboy and Myers, 2008).”
BackgroundResultHenderson, C., & Dancy, M. H. (2009) · Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research · doi:10.1103/physrevstper.5.020107 · Cited by 211 · cited 1×
“This result is not exclusive to biology, as it has also been seen in engineering (Borrego et al., 2013), physics (Henderson and Dancy, 2009), and extensively at the K–12 level (O’Donnell, 2008).”
BackgroundEllis, K. (2000) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2000.tb00758.x · Cited by 200 · cited 3×
“For a more nuanced picture of instructor confirmation, instructors could use the survey developed by Ellis (2000).”
BackgroundMethodResultExplanation feedback is better than correct answer feedback for promoting transfer of learning.
Butler, A. C., Godbole, N. R., & Marsh, E. J. (2012) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0031026 · Cited by 192
Computer-supported example-based learning: When instructional explanations reduce self-explanations
Schworm, S., & Renkl, A. (2004) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2004.08.011 · Cited by 188 · cited 3×
“PART 1: PORTAAL DEVELOPMENT”
BackgroundMethodThe impact of perceived teacher confirmation on receiver apprehension, motivation, and learning
Ellis, K. (2004) · Communication Education · doi:10.1080/0363452032000135742 · Cited by 180 · cited 1×
“These results, paired with the other studies, demonstrate that both conditions lead to equal Vol. 14, Summer 2015 14:ar23, 7 (how much students like a subject or domain) and the more typical cognitive learning (Ellis, 2000, 2004; Goodboy and Myers, 2008).”
ResultTurpen, C., & Finkelstein, N. D. (2009) · Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research · doi:10.1103/physrevstper.5.020101 · Cited by 177 · cited 2×
“First, there is a lack of clarity as to what active learning is, and this lack of clarity can lead to lack of fidelity of implementation of the teaching technique (O’Donnell, 2008; Turpen and Finkelstein, 2009; Borrego et al., 2013).”
BackgroundBorrego, M. J., Cutler, S. L., Prince, M. J., Henderson, C., & Froyd, J. E. (2013) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/jee.20020 · Cited by 161 · cited 2×
“This result is not exclusive to biology, as it has also been seen in engineering (Borrego et al., 2013), physics (Henderson and Dancy, 2009), and extensively at the K–12 level (O’Donnell, 2008).”
BackgroundThe role of teacher instructional practices in student collaboration
Webb, N., Franke, M., Ing, M., Chan, A. G., De, T., Freund, D., & Battey, D. (2008) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.05.003 · Cited by 144 · cited 1×
“PART 1: PORTAAL DEVELOPMENT”
The construction of different classroom norms during Peer Instruction: Students perceive differences
Turpen, C., & Finkelstein, N. D. (2010) · Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research · doi:10.1103/physrevstper.6.020123 · Cited by 125 · cited 5×
“…students with immediate feedback on their logic from peers or the instructor, which helps them correct or develop their ideas (deWinstanley and Bjork, 2002) and sets the tone that the instructor values student logic and critical thinking, not just the right answer (Turpen and Finkelstein, 2010).”
BackgroundInfluentialUnderstanding Clicker Discussions: Student Reasoning and the Impact of Instructional Cues
Knight, J., Wise, S. B., & Southard, K. M. (2013) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.13-05-0090 · Cited by 112 · cited 1×
“14:ar23, 4 CBE—Life Sciences Education One of the simplest ways to improve student conversations and increase student focus on sense-making and logic when introducing activities is for instructors to remind students to provide the rationale for their answers (L2; Turpen and Finkelstein, 2010; Knight et al., 2013).”
BackgroundImpact of Cold-Calling on Student Voluntary Participation
Dallimore, E. J., Hertenstein, J. H., & Platt, M. B. (2013) · Organizational Behavior Teaching Review · doi:10.1177/1052562912446067 · Cited by 93 · cited 2×
“PART 1: PORTAAL DEVELOPMENT”
BackgroundThe effect of grading incentive on student discourse in Peer Instruction
James, M. (2006) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.2198887 · Cited by 92 · cited 2×
“, 2007), but it has also been shown to reduce the quality of the small-group discussions, as 1) these interactions were dominated by the student in the group with the greatest knowledge, 2) there were fewer exchanges between students, and 3) fewer students participated in the discussions overall (James, 2006; James an…”
BackgroundSuccessful Lecturing: Presenting Information in Ways That Engage Effective Processing
deWinstanley, P. A., & Bjork, R. A. (2002) · New Directions for Teaching and Learning · doi:10.1002/tl.44 · Cited by 85 · cited 6×
“Instead, we focused on teacher-provided incentives that create attention around the activity (Table 3; deWinstanley and Bjork, 2002).”
BackgroundInfluentialThe Influence of Group Discussion on Students’ Responses and Confidence during Peer Instruction
Brooks, B., & Koretsky, M. D. (2011) · Journal of Chemical Education · doi:10.1021/ed101066x · Cited by 75 · cited 1×
“PART 1: PORTAAL DEVELOPMENT”
James, M., & Willoughby, S. (2011) · doi:10.1119/1.3488097 · Cited by 71 · cited 2×
“, 2007), but it has also been shown to reduce the quality of the small-group discussions, as 1) these interactions were dominated by the student in the group with the greatest knowledge, 2) there were fewer exchanges between students, and 3) fewer students participated in the discussions overall (James, 2006; James an…”
BackgroundRemembering the levels of information in words
McDaniel, M. A., Alinda Friedman, A., & Bourne, L. E. (1978) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03197441 · Cited by 69
Does Displaying the Class Results Affect Student Discussion during Peer Instruction?
Perez, K. E., Strauss, E. A., Downey, N., Galbraith, A. M., Jeanne, R. L., & Cooper, S. (2010) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.09-11-0080 · Cited by 68 · cited 2×
“Awarding course points has been shown to increase student participation (especially the participation of low-performing students; Perez et al., 2010) and increase overall class attendance and performance (Freeman et al.”
BackgroundClass Participation inAccounting Courses: FactorsThatAffect Student Comfort and Learning
Dallimore, E. J., Hertenstein, J. H., & Platt, M. B. (2010) · Issues in Accounting Education · doi:10.2308/iace.2010.25.4.613 · Cited by 59
Thomas, A. K., & McDaniel, M. A. (2007) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03194054 · Cited by 46 · cited 4×
“, 2013) and student metacognition (Thomas and McDaniel, 2007).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialHoekstra, A., & Mollborn, S. (2012) · Learning Media and Technology · doi:10.1080/17439884.2011.568493 · Cited by 45 · cited 4×
“…particularly the attitudes of low-performing students, toward the discussion topic (Len, 2006–2007); 2) improve social cohesion and, through that, feelings of accountability (Hoekstra and Mollborn, 2011); and 3) develop students’ argumentation skills (Kuhn et al., 1997; Eichinger et al., 1991).”
BackgroundInfluentialWilloughby, T., Wood, E., McDermott, C., & McLaren, J. (2000) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-0720(200001)14:1 · Cited by 42
Technology talks: Clickers and grading incentive in the large lecture hall
Willoughby, S., & Gustafson, E. (2009) · doi:10.1119/1.3013542 · Cited by 39 · cited 1×
“In an experiment explicitly designed to test how grading scheme impacts learning, Willoughby and Gustafson (2009) found that although students answered more clicker questions correctly when points were earned based on correctness, this grading scheme did not lead to an increase in achievement on a…”
BackgroundNielsen, K. L., Hansen-Nygård, G., & Stav, J. (2012) · ISRN Education · doi:10.5402/2012/290157 · Cited by 32
Overcoming Collaborative Inhibition through Error Correction: A Classroom Experiment
Gadgil, S., & Nokes-Malach, T. J. (2012) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.1843 · Cited by 23 · cited 1×
“Group work is particularly important for tasks that require students to transfer knowledge from one context to another (Gadgil and Nokes-Malach, 2012).”
BackgroundHow assessment drives learning in neurosurgical higher training
Morgan, M. K., Clarke, R. M., Weidmann, M. J., Laidlaw, J. D., & Law, A. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2005.12.011 · Cited by 18 · cited 1×
“Additional studies have supported this finding that students learn what they are tested on (Morgan et al., 2007; Wormald et al., 2009).”
Evaluating students' acquisition of factual material when studying independently or with a partner
Wood, E., Willoughby, T., Reilley, S., Elliott, S. E., & Ducharme, M. (1995) · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1995.tb01145.x · Cited by 16 · cited 1×
“Second, a deeper understanding of the material is often gained when students share and explain their answers to other students (i.e., work in small groups; L4; Wood et al., 1995, 1999; Renkl, 2002; Sampson and Clark, 2009; Menekse et al., 2013).”
BackgroundThe A218C polymorphism of tryptophan hydroxylase gene and migraine.
Erdal, N., Herken, H., Yılmaz, M., Erdal, E. M., & Bayazıt, Y. (2007) · Journal of clinical neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2006.04.018 · Cited by 14
16: The Influence of Disciplinary Differences on Consultations with Faculty
Lee, V. (2000) · doi:10.1002/j.2334-4822.2000.tb00374.x · Cited by 10 · cited 1×
“At the institutional level, these barriers include a reward system that can lead faculty members to devote less time and effort to teaching (Lee, 2000) and limited institutional effort to train graduate students or faculty members on teaching methods (Cole, 1982; Weimer, 1990).”
BackgroundDevelopmental differences in study behavior.
Wood, E., Willoughby, T., McDermott, C. H., Motz, M., Kaspar, V., & Ducharme, M. (1999) · doi:10.1037//0022-0663.91.3.527 · Cited by 10 · cited 2×
“Second, a deeper understanding of the material is often gained when students share and explain their answers to other students (i.e., work in small groups; L4; Wood et al., 1995, 1999; Renkl, 2002; Sampson and Clark, 2009; Menekse et al., 2013).”
Background13: Fragmentation Versus Integration of Faculty Work
Kreber, C., & Cranton, P. A. (2000) · To improve the academy · doi:10.1002/j.2334-4822.2000.tb00371.x · Cited by 10 · cited 2×
“This complexity, in and of itself, is a second barrier: changes in teaching practice can feel overwhelming because of the number of aspects that must be considered, and this can lead to paralysis and inaction (Kreber and Cranton, 2000).”
Background
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- Aggarwal P, 2008, J Market Educ, 30, 255, 10.1177/0273475308322283 · DOI
- American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2013, Describing and Measuring Undergraduate STEM Teaching Practices
- Bouwma-Gearhard J, 2012, Int J Teach Learn High Educ, 24, 180
- Bybee RW, 2006, The BSCS 5E Instructional Model: Origins and Effectiveness
- Cole CC, 1982, Improving Instruction: Issues and Alternatives for Higher Education, AAHE-ERIC Higher Education Report no. 4
- Eichinger D, 1991, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, in Chicago, IL
- Elliot ES, 1988, J Pers Soc Psychol, 54, 5, 10.1037/0022-3514.54.1.5 · DOI · Paper page
- Ellis K, 2000, Hum Commun Res, 26, 264
- 10.1187/cbe.06-09-0194 · DOI · Paper page
- Fritschner LM, 2000, J High Educ, 71, 342
- Henderson C, 2009, Phys Educ Res, 5, 1
- Hoekstra A, 2011, Learn Media Technol, 2011, 1
- Jensen JL, 2014, Educ Psychol Rev, 2014, 1
- Kane TJ, 2013, Ensuring Fair and Reliable Measures of Effective Teaching: Culminating Findings from the MET Project’s Three-Year Study
- National Science Foundation, 2013, Widening Implementation and Demonstration of Evidence-Based Reforms (WIDER), NSF 13–552 Program Solicitation
- President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, 2012, Engage to Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduate with Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics
- Turpen C, 2009, Phys Rev Spec Top Phys Educ Res, 5, 1
- Turpen C, 2010, Phys Rev Spec Top Phys Educ Res, 6, 1
- Weimer M, 1990, Improving College Teaching: Strategies for Developing Instructional Effectiveness
- Wood E, 1994, Albta J Educ Res, 40, 57
- Wood E, 1999, J Educ Psychol, 91, 527, 10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.527 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., Chambwe, N., Cintrón, D. L., Cooper, J. D., Dunster, G., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1916903117 · Cited by 1,387
The Curious Construct of Active Learning
Lombardi, D., Shipley, T. F., Astronomy Team, B. T., Bailey, J. M., Bretones, P. S., Prather, E. E., Ballen, C. J., Knight, J., Smith, M. K., Stowe, R. L., et al. (2021) · Gothic.net · doi:10.1177/1529100620973974 · Cited by 547
“Examples include the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP; Sawada et al., 2002), the Teaching Dimensions Observation Protocol (Hora et al., 2013), the Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS; Smith et al., 2013), the Practical Observation Rubric to Assess Active Learning (Eddy et al., 2015…”
BackgroundCooper, K. M., Downing, V. R., & Brownell, S. (2018) · International Journal of STEM Education · doi:10.1186/s40594-018-0123-6 · Cited by 298
“There are many different ways to enact active learning, but typically active learning includes students working with other students during class and more frequent assessment of student learning in the classroom (Eddy et al. 2015b; Freeman et al. 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialCooper, K. M., & Brownell, S. (2016) · CBE - Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.16-01-0074 · Cited by 188
Fear of Negative Evaluation and Student Anxiety in Community College Active-Learning Science Courses
Downing, V. R., Cooper, K. M., Cala, J. M., Gin, L. E., & Brownell, S. E. (2020) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.19-09-0186 · Cited by 237
“…can reduce bias with regard to who is called on in college science courses; in biology courses in which random call is not practiced and students volunteer to answer questions, only 40% of female voices are heard, even when females make up 60% of the class (Eddy et al., 2014, 2015; Tanner, 2013).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Eddy, S. L., Converse, M., & Wenderoth, M. P.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Eddy, Sarah L.
- Venue
- CBE—Life Sciences Education
- Published
- 2015-06
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- ar23
- ISSN
- 1931-7913 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4477739
- OpenAlex
- W2307728084
- Cited by
- 182
- References
- 85
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 70.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-sa
- Locations
- CBE—Life Sciences Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1118890)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
- Keywords
- active learning, evidence-based teaching practices, classroom observation tools, instructor feedback, adult learners, discipline-based education research
- MeSH terms
- Engineering, Humans, Logic, Mathematics, Science, Students, Teaching, Technology, Universities, Reproducibility of Results, Program Development, Problem-Based Learning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review