26
Exploring the Impact of Active Learning Spaces on Teaching and Learning Tanya Joosten University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee [email protected] @tjoosten slideshare.net/tjoosten
| Date post: | 08-Jul-2015 |
| Category: |
Education |
| Upload: | tanya-joosten |
| View: | 270 times |
| Download: | 2 times |
Exploring the Impact of
Active Learning Spaces on
Teaching and Learning
Tanya JoostenUniversity of [email protected]@tjoostenslideshare.net/tjoosten
Was the active learning
classroom effective?
CC Flickr Katherine.a
•Electrical Engineering
•Architecture
•Curriculum & Instruction
•Business
Professions
•Women’s Studies
•English
•Art and Design
•Art and Design, Film
Humanities and Arts
•CommunicationSocial Sciences
•BiologyNatural Sciences
Agree Neutral Disagree
Easy Collaboration 89.8 4.1 6.1
Interact more w/Instructor 72 24 4
Effective Communicationw/Classmates
90 4 6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Interactivity
Agree Neutral Disagree
Understand CourseConcepts
60 32 8
Beneficial to Learning 66 30 4
Better Grades onAssignments
46.9 46.9 8.2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Learning
Agree Neutral Disagree
Recommend InstructorContinue Use
76 16 8
Comfortable LearningEnvironment
84 12 4
Appropriate Space for thiscourse
84 14 2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Satisfaction
Agree Neutral Disagree
Movability 86 12 2
Adaptability for differentActivities
78 16 6
Facilitate multiple LearningTypes
71.4 24.5 4.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Flexibility
Perceived learning
Satisfaction
Interactivity
Learning
F(2, 47) = 59.56, p<.001
Approximately 71% of the variance in perceived learning accounted for by interactivity and flexibility(adjusted R2 = .705)
Perceived learning
Satisfaction
Interactivity
Instructor Expectation
Learning
F(2, 46) = 56.72, p<.001
Approximately 77% of the variance in perceived learning accounted for by interactivity and flexibility(adjusted R2 = .772)
Instructor Expectations
Active Learning Activities
Learning
F(2, 47) = 19.615, p<.001
Approximately 43% of the variance in perceived learning accounted for by instructor expectations and active learning activities(adjusted R2 = .432)
Perceived learning
Instructor Expectations
Active Learning Activities
Satisfaction
F(2, 47) = 15.647, p<.001
Approximately 37% of the variance in perceived learning accounted for by instructor expectations and active learning activities(adjusted R2 = .374)
Perceived Satisfaction
How did we measure?
CC Flickr yggg
MySurveys.wikispaces.com
Components
Component # of Variables Variables Alpha Means Standard Dev.
Learning 11
L1, L2, L3, L5, P1, P2, F2, F3, F4, F7, S5 0.957 40.19 8.39
Satisfaction 7
S1, S2, S3, O1, O2, O4, O5 0.926 28.01 5.25
Interactivity 10
I1, I2, I4, I6, I7, I9, I10, I11, I13, I15 0.945 38.03 7.25
Student Interaction w/ ALC Media (not just digital) 5
Q6_16 -Q6_20 0.794 15.45 3.92
Self-Reported Active Learning 8
Q6_2 - Q6_7, Q6_9, Q6_10 0.929 28.88 6.4
Self-Reported Group/Peer Active Learning 4
Q6_8, Q6_11, Q6_12, Q23_6 0.828 15.06 2.89
How was the
classroom designed?
No front and center
Active learning space
How does space design
support new learning?
approaches
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Student Activities
Instructor Activities
76%
62%
68%
80%
70%
76%
44%
64%
36%
58%Require/Creatediscussion
Use Whiteboards
Break into Groups
Asking Questions ofStudents/Classmates
Utilizing OnlineDiscussion andMaterials
Active learning behaviors
Predicting student satisfaction
Learning
Active Learning Activities
Satisfaction
F(2, 47) = 58.57, p<.001
Approximately 70% of the variance in perceived Satisfaction accounted for by learning and active learning(adjusted R2 = .701)
How does ALC impact faculty
development?
