Active learning is a broad category that encompasses many of the other ideas below. This section therefore serves as a short introduction to the empirical basis of the textbook.
We want students to acquire durable, long-term knowledge and skills. Study after study has shown that the best way to accomplish that is through effortful activity and various forms of feedback.
Active learning is effective because our brains must convert short-term memory into long-term knowledge, and that process simply doesn't happen efficiently in a passive learning environment.
Converting short-term memory into durable learning is a cognitive expense, and we have to make our brains bother to rewire and strengthen synapses. Many active learning techniques, such as interleaving practice, connecting to prior knowledge, and retrieval practice are methods for getting the brain to do that work.
Traditional textbooks group all the exercises of the same type together. Students do problems in blocks, one type at a time, and instructors rarely assign problems from past chapters in new problem sets.
A large body of research suggests that is not an effective way to practice and learn. Students learn best by interleaving problems of different types, not doing the same type of problem in a block (then moving on to another type of problem).
Students also benefit from interleaving that mixes past problems and previously learned skills with new ones. Doing so helps students make connections with prior knowledge; it reinforces previous learning by provided spaced-out review; and it requires greater cognitive effort because students can't mindlessly solve a new problem type in a block.
Our textbook uses continuous interleaving, both within sections and in every problem set.
A key aspect of durable learning is connecting new information to prior knowledge. Each connection to prior knowledge strengthens neural pathways to new information and gives us more ways to access that information later.
A great way to activate prior knowledge is to use already-learned skills in new ways. Doing so reinforces those skills while contextualizing and making meaningful the new information as well.
See Ambrose et al. 2010; Bransford et al. 2000.
- Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M.C., Norman. M.K. (2010). How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
- Ausubel, D. P. (2000). The acquisition and retention of knowledge: A cognitive view. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
- Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Arlington, VA: ISTE.
- Bransford, J., et al. (eds.) (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Expanded Edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
- Brown, P., Roediger, H. L., & McDaniel, M.A. (2014). Make it stick. The science of successful learning. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
- Butler, A. (2016). Facilitating the development of students as self-directed learners. Presentation at the OnRamps Annual Summer Institute, Austin, TX.
- Butler, A. C. (2010). Repeated testing produces superior transfer of learning relative to repeated studying. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(5), 1118-1133.
- Butler, A. C., Cantor, A. D., Raley, N. D., & Marsh, E. J. (2016). Applying knowledge to difference contexts during learning promotes subsequent transfer. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Psychological Science, Chicago, IL.
- Butler, A. C., Godbole, N., & Marsh, E. J. (2013). Explanation feedback is better than correct answer feedback for promoting transfer of learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 290-298.
- Goldstein, E. B. (2011). Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research, and everyday experience. Australia: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
- Jensen, J. L., Kummer, T. A., & Godoy, P. (2015). Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 14(1), 1-12.
- Karpicke, J. D., & Aue, W. R. (2015). The testing effect is alive and well with complex materials. Educational Psychology Review, 27(2), 317-326.
- Karpicke, J. D., & Blunt, J. R. (2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying with concept mapping. Science, 331(6018), 772-775.
- Karpicke, J. D., & Zaromb, F. M. (2010). Retrieval mode distinguishes the testing effect from the generation effect. Journal of Memory and Language, 62(3), 227-239.
- Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30-43.
- Lang, J. M. (2016). Small teaching: Everyday lessons from the science of learning. New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.
- Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user’s manual. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Nunes, L. D., & Karpicke, J. D. (2015). Retrieval-based learning: Research at the interface between cognitive science and education. In R. A. Scott & S. M. Kosslyn (Eds.), Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences (pp. 1-16). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
- O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85-95.
- Pierce, R., & Fox, J. (2012). Vodcasts and active-learning exercises in a “flipped classroom” model of a renal pharmacotherapy module. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 76(10), 196.
- Plotinkoff, D. (2013). Classes should do hands-on exercises before reading and video, Stanford researchers say. Retrieved from http://news. stanford.edu/news/2013/july/flipped-learning-model-071613.html.
- Roediger, H. L., & Butler, A. C. (2011). The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(1), 20-27.
- Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006a). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249-255.
- Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006b). The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(3), 181-210.
- Schell, J. (2016). Flipped Learning by Design. Leadership, 22(2), 11-16.
- Schell, J., & Mazur, E. (2015). Flipping the chemistry classroom with peer instruction. In J. García-Martínez & E. Serrano-Torregrosa (Eds.), Chemistry education: Best practices, opportunities, and trends (pp. 319- 341). Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH.
- Schneider, B., Wallace, J., Blikstein, P., & Pea, R. (2013). Preparing for future learning with a tangible user interface: The case of neuroscience. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 6(2), 117-129.
- Strayer, J. F. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation, and task orientation. Learning Environments Research, 15(2), 171-193.
- Yong, D., Levy, R., & Lape, N. (2015). Why no difference? A controlled flipped classroom study for an introductory differential equations course. Primus, 25(9-10), 907-921.