Transform Home

Newsletter Contents

Featured Articles

Calendar of Events

Ongoing Programs for Faculty

Editor's Note

ADT News

Upcoming Conferences

Article Reviews

Transform Archive

About Transform

Active Learning Classrooms

by J.D. Walker and Aimee Whiteside

Introduction

In recent years, large-format classes of 100 or more students have become increasingly common on American college and university campuses. They are often seen as efficient ways of coping with rising enrollments in fiscally difficult times (Cuseo, 2007; Stanley & Porter, 2002).

But any instructor who has taught such a class understands the challenges of the large-enrollment classroom. These challenges, which are amply documented in the scholarly literature (Bligh, 2000; Carbone, 1999; Wulff , Nyquist & Abbott, 1987), include:

• achieving student-student and student-instructor interaction;
• a truncated range of feasible assessment techniques;
• limited feedback on student learning; and
• limited cognitive and emotional engagement.

In addition to concerns about large class size, recent scholarly literature reflects the awareness that physical spaces have the potential to affect how, what, and how much students learn (Chism, 2006; Lomas & Oblinger, 2006; Milne, 2006; Brown & Long, 2006; Dori & Belcher, 2005; Strange & Banning, 2002; Chism & Bickford, 2002; Montgomery, 2008).

In response to this research, the University of Minnesota's Office of Classroom Management, under the leadership of Steve Fitzgerald, created a new option among its more traditional classroom spaces: Active Learning Classrooms (ALCs), located in the Biological Sciences Center, Room 64 and in the Electrical Engineering/Computer Science Building, Room 2-260. The ALCs are state-of-the-art "smart" classrooms specially designed to promote interaction, inquiry-based learning, and collaboration in mid-sized and large enrollment classes.

These learning spaces feature large circular tables that seat nine students with capacity for several laptop computers for collaborative work. Instruction in these classrooms typically centers on hands-on activities and problems that require students to interact to reach a solution. Students can display their work on large LCD screens mounted around the room to promote small- and/or large-group discussion, and the rooms feature 360-degree glass markerboards around the circumference of the classroom.

Research

The novelty of the ALCs called for research to determine how instructors adapted their teaching techniques to the new learning spaces, how students reacted to the new environment, and how well the spaces' technological components functioned to help students and instructors reach class goals. In the academic year 2007-2008, the Office of Information Technology's (OIT) Digital Media Center (DMC) partnered with the Office of Classroom Management (OCM) to design and conduct exploratory research intended to answer these questions (see ALC Pilot Evaluation Team, 2007).

More specifically, the research questions that guided the investigation were as follows:

1. What were faculty attitudes and expectations with respect to the ALCs?
2. How did students perceive and respond to the new learning spaces?
3. How were the technological components of the ALCs used? Did the spaces affect which teaching/learning strategies instructors chose?

The data collection methods used in this investigation included instructor interviews, student and instructor questionnaires, class observations, and student focus groups. Data were drawn from courses in a wide variety of disciplines, including Writing Studies, History of Medicine, Biology, and Computer Science.

Findings

Overall, the ALCs were very well received by both instructors and students. Instructors did adapt their teaching techniques to the new learning spaces and frequently found themselves in the role of learning coach or facilitator. Students found the classrooms effective at promoting teamwork and collaboration. Finally, reactions to the technology and physical features of the ALCs were generally very positive, with certain features singled out for special praise.

1. Faculty attitudes and expectations. Instructors had high expectations when they began teaching in the ALCs and strongly positive attitudes toward the spaces at the end of the term. They reported that the ALCs changed their classroom experience in a number of ways, including:

• the overall relationship they had with their students deepened; they felt closer to their students;
• their role changed in the ALCs; one instructor noted a shift to the role of a learning coach or facilitator;
• each of the instructors felt that the experience in the ALCs changed the relationship students have with each other, which was a benefit for collaborative projects;
• teaching in the ALC was a different experience and may require major changes in instructional strategies; and
• all of the instructors interviewed expressed a strong desire to keep teaching in the ALCs in the future.

2. Student perceptions and comfort levels. Students also had strongly positive attitudes toward the ALCs. They reported:

• numerous positive comments regarding teamwork and collaboration with their classmates;
• the ability of ALCs to appeal to a variety of student learning styles; and
• a sense that their professors were close and more accessible to them in the ALCs than in traditional classrooms.

3. Use of technology and teaching/learning strategies. Both students and instructors responded to questions about the ALCs' technology and its integration into teaching-learning activities.
Their largely positive observations included:

• collaborative, student-centered learning activities were more common in the ALCs compared to traditional classrooms;
• the round tables, document camera, glass markerboards, and student display screens were the most important features of the ALCs;
• the glass markerboards were thought by some students and instructors to be overly reflective; and
• the round tables seemed to be the key to the changes in student-student relationships in the ALCs.

Future Directions

This research on the ALCs was limited in several ways. To begin with, the instructors of the courses included in the study were self-selected, in the sense that they volunteered to teach in the ALCs. Their responses to the new learning spaces may therefore not be representative of the reactions of the broader faculty population at the University of Minnesota.

Furthermore, the 2007-2008 research was largely limited to recording student and instructor perceptions of the ALCs. While those perceptions were overwhelmingly positive, they may be subject to a variety of distortions, such as a novelty effect.

Future research should overcome these limitations by recruiting faculty members from the general population and by examining, through comparison-group research designs, the effects of teaching in new learning spaces on variables including student-learning outcomes.
In fall 2008, the OIT's DMC extended its learning spaces research through an Archibald Bush Foundation grant for innovative teaching and technology strategies (http://www.umn.edu/ohr/teachlearn/faculty/innovative/index.html).

This project, which involved undergraduate students as full partners in the research process, examined both formal learning spaces, such as the ALCs, as well as the informal learning spaces in which students study. Results from this study will be available in summer 2009.

References

ALC Pilot Evaluation Team (2007). Active Learning Classrooms Pilot Evaluation: Fall 2007 Findings and Recommendations. Minneapolis: Office of Information Technology's Digital Media Center. Retrieved from the Internet on November 25, 2008, at http://dmc.umn.edu/activelearningclassrooms/alc2007.pdf.

Bligh, D.A. (2000). What's The Use Of Lectures? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brown, M. & Long, P. (2006). Trends in learning space design. In D.G. Oblinger (Ed.) Learning spaces. EDUCAUSE. http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/PUB7102i.pdf.

Carbone, E. (1999). Students behaving badly in large classes. In S.M. Richardson (Issue Ed.) New Directions in Teaching and Learning: Issue 77. Promoting Civility: A Teaching Challenge (pp. 35-43). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Chism, N.V.N. (2006). Challenging traditional assumptions and rethinking learning spaces. In D.G. Oblinger (Ed.), Learning spaces. EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from the Internet on December 1, 2007 at http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7102.pdf.

Chism, N.V.N. & Bickford, D.J. (2002). Improving the environment for learning: An expanded agenda. In N.V.N. Chism & D.J. Bickford (Issue Eds.) New Directions for Teaching and Learning: Issue 92. The importance of physical space in creating supportive learning environments (pp. 91-98). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cuseo, J. (2007). The empirical case against large class size: Adverse effects on the teaching, learning, and retention of first-year students. Journal of Faculty Development, 21.

Dori, Y.J. & Belcher, J.W. (2005). How does technology-enabled active learning affect students' understanding of scientific concepts? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 243-279.

Lomas, M. & Oblinger, D.G. (2006). Student practices and their impact on learning spaces. EDUCAUSE. http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ PUB7102b.pdf.

Milne, A. (2006). Designing blended learning space to the student experience. In D.G. Oblinger (Ed.), Learning spaces. EDUCAUSE. http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/PUB7102k.pdf.

Montgomery, T. (2008). Space matters: Experiences of managing static formal learning spaces. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9, 122-138.

Stanley, C.A., & Porter, M.E. (2002). Teaching large classes: A brief review of the research. In C.A. Stanley & M.E. Porter (Eds.), Engaging large classes: Strategies and techniques for college faculty (pp. 143-152). Bolton, MA: Anker.

Strange, C. & Banning, J. (2001). Educating by design: Creating campus learning environments that work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Wulff, D.H., Nyquist, J.D., & Abbott, R.D. (1987). Students' perceptions of large classes. In M.G. Weimer (Issue Ed.) New Directions for Teaching and Learning: Issue 32. Teaching large classes well (pp. 17-30). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

J. D. Walker is the manager of Evaluation and Research Services and Aimee Whiteside is a research and evaluation consultant, at the Office of Information Technology's Digital Media Center.