Active Learning That Distracts from Learning
Because I teach mixed demographic courses, I often look out at a sea
of distracted and unmotivated faces. Motivation is a large part of
learning (Pintrich and deGroot, 2003). So, I use active learning
activities, such as think-pair-share, to not only motivate students
(Marbach-Ad et al., 2001), but also to enhance student learning (Bonwell
and Eison, 1919; Freeman et al., 2014). If I’m being honest, active
learning also has the added perk of distracting students from the
monotony of my voice. Yet, in the past few years, I have begun to wonder
if I have taken it too far? Am I simply using active learning as a way
of keeping bored students active?
Recently, I created a set of tactile active learning activities
developed to capture my kinesthetic learners. These activities range
from using balloons to work on why cells are small to playing with PVC
pipes to feel the rigidity of a microtubule.
I have been happily entering the classroom with my tactile-inspired
kits being absolutely certain that I would engage students and enhance
their learning. However, I have noticed a rather curious and alarming
trend. When I implement my kinesthetic activities, more students are
missing the corresponding test question. For example, on one particular
question about cell size, when I used my balloon activity, I went from
53 ± 3% students getting it right to 35 ± 4% students getting it right.
So instead of capturing more students, I lost upwards of 15% of them.
This led me to ask the
question: in my attempt to capture and motivate students, am I distracting them
from learning? I feel that I use active learning appropriately because I align
learning activities with well-constructed learning goals and/or critical
inquiry ideals. Therefore, I believe that I am engaging unmotivated students rather
than simply keeping them busy. However, I do wonder if by engaging them in the
activity, I am taking their attention away from learning the content.
Noticing this trend in my
assessment outcomes has been eye-opening. For now, I watch for activities that
are negatively impacting student success on assessments. When I notice that the
activity distracts from student learning, I dial back on the active learning
and work on capturing student attention prior to teaching them the content.
Based on this experience, I continuously remind myself that engaging students
doesn’t always mean that the engagement is useful for learning the material at
hand. In my attempt to have an enjoyable, maybe even fun, class, I may be
sacrificing student attention and learning.
References:
Bonwell, C. C., and J.A.
Eison. 1991. Active learning: creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC
Higher Education Report No. 1, Washington, D.C.: The George Washington
University, School of Education and Human Development.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L.,
McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., and M.P. Wenderoth. 2014.
Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and
mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences, 111, 8410-8415.
Marbach-Ad G., Seal O. and P. Sokolove. 2001.
Student attitudes and recommendations on active learning: a student-led survey
gauging course effectiveness. J. Coll. Sci. Teach, 30, 434–438.
Pintrich
P.R. and E.V. De Groot.
2003. A Motivational Science Perspective on the Role of Student Motivation in
Learning and Teaching Contexts. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 95, 667-686.
Adriana LaGier is associate professor of biology at Grand View University.
