title: Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics.
abstract: 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.
authors.affiliation: Department of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195; and srf991@u.washington.edu.
authors.forename: Scott
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Freeman
authors.affiliation: Department of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195; and.
authors.forename: Sarah L
authors.initials: SL
authors.lastname: Eddy
authors.affiliation: Department of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195; and.
authors.forename: Miles
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: McDonough
authors.affiliation: School of Biology and Ecology, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469.
authors.forename: Michelle K
authors.initials: MK
authors.lastname: Smith
authors.affiliation: Department of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195; and.
authors.forename: Nnadozie
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Okoroafor
authors.affiliation: Department of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195; and.
authors.forename: Hannah
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Jordt
authors.affiliation: Department of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195; and.
authors.forename: Mary Pat
authors.initials: MP
authors.lastname: Wenderoth
mesh_terms: D000124:Achievement; D032882:Comprehension; D004738:Engineering / Q000193:education*; D006801:Humans; D008433:Mathematics / Q000193:education*; D016743:Mental Competency; D015201:Meta-Analysis as Topic; D018794:Problem-Based Learning / Q000379:methods*; D012586:Science / Q000193:education*; D013334:Students / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D013672:Technology / Q000193:education; D014495:Universities
keywords: constructivism; evidence-based teaching; scientific teaching; undergraduate education