The concept of 'active learning' has been gaining ground in higher education in recent years. Drawing on work in Experiential Learning Theory (ELT) (see Kolb 1984; Kolb and Kolb 2005; learningfromexperience.com), an active learning approach encompasses a wide range of strategies and methods that seek to place student participation and 'learning-by-doing' at the centre of teaching practice. In this, it takes the constructivist perspective of ELT that positions learning as a holistic process in which new concepts are brought into dialogue with students' existing beliefs and ideas, seeing social knowledge as 'created and recreated in the personal knowledge of the learner' (Kolb and Kolb 2005). In this, rather than simply encouraging activity over more traditional lecture-style teaching, active learning sets out to integrate the four stages of Kolb's learning cycle into teaching practice: concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualisation, and active experimentation (see Kolb 1984). It thus emphasises not only activity and experience but also thinking and reflection on these activities as key to facilitating deep learning. While active learning has gained much popularity in teaching approaches in recent years, there is still considered to be some resistance to its implementation in higher education. In the context of Geography, active learning methods such as learning diaries, e-portfolios, sound walks, and online debate have become an increasing presence in academic teaching. Scheyvens et al (2008), however, have considered some of the myths that, they suggest, perpetuate a certain resistance to its implementation in the discipline. I here draw out some of these myths and the arguments around them as they are, I suggest, likely to be relevant to many other subjects.
The first is the idea that 'just "doing" is active learning' (p.60). In contrary to this, Scheyvens et al (2008) argue that it is necessary to go beyond engagement and encourage students to see the relevance of an activity to particular learning objectives; a connection that might be realised through critical reflection on the 'doing' and the learning process engendered by it. They also contend with ideas that active learning requires considerable background knowledge (and thus is not suitable for new students), suggesting that, with clear goals, students can actively participate with little previous knowledge. The positioning of active learning approaches as requiring prohibitive amounts of preparation and engagement from both students and lecturers can also inhibit its employment in the classroom. Here it is argued that this can be minimised if activities and reflection upon them are made part of assessment, which can also be carried out through peer-review for heavy project-based activities. Lastly, active learning has often been placed in opposition to the practice of lecturing and what some see as 'the transmission of fundamental knowledge' (Elliott 2005:54). The article argues that such beliefs are based on a mistaken idea of teaching as 'transmission' that ignores the processes of decoding and interpretation that constitute learning. In this Scheyvens et al (2008) argue that active engagement, in combination with the necessary and valuable contributions of lecture-style methods, might offer important opportunities for the break down, comprehension and assimilation of information that leads to deep learning.
So how might we seek to overcome these myths and integrate active learning into our teaching? Scheyvens et al (2008) offer some useful points in this regard:
1. Make active learning an integrated part of the course objectives (rather than an occasional add-on) in order to facilitate a sustained deep learning experience.
2. Introduce students to an active learning approach early on in a course in order to 'normalise' this method of learning and help mitigate potential resistance from students used to the more passive and anonymous lecture-centred approach.
3. Give students clear guidance on how to actively participate and help students see the value of such approaches; a process that will often require time and repetition.
4. Weight assessment appropriately in order to encourage active learning, which might encourage students to take activities seriously.
5. Emphasise the importance of abstract conceptualisation and reflection as an integral part of the active learning process, which also helps students to see the relevance of activities.
Active learning has many benefits, including the development of critical thinking, the encouragement of deep over surface learning, and the building of skills in communication, collaboration, and teamwork. It is also important in motivating and engaging students in the classroom, and encouraging reflection on (and thus a better understanding of) their personal learning processes. I have sought to make active learning part of my teaching practice at RHUL, where I have found activities such as brainstorming, reading discussion, on-the-spot image analysis, and group debate to be productive and interesting ways to build critical thinking and deepen understanding. Looking forward I hope to continue to explore these methods and their possibilities for putting student participation at the centre of teaching practice.
Elliott, D. (2005) Early mornings and apprehension: active learning in lectures, Journal of Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 4:1, pp. 53–58.
Kolb, D.A. (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of learning and development, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall
Kolb, A.Y. and Kolb, D.A. (2005) Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing Experiential Learning in Higher Education, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4:2, pp. 193-212.
Scheyvens, R., Griffin, A.L., Jocoy, C.L., Liu, Y. & Bradford, M. (2008) Experimenting with Active Learning in Geography: Dispelling the Myths that Perpetuate Resistance, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 32:1, pp. 51-69.
The first is the idea that 'just "doing" is active learning' (p.60). In contrary to this, Scheyvens et al (2008) argue that it is necessary to go beyond engagement and encourage students to see the relevance of an activity to particular learning objectives; a connection that might be realised through critical reflection on the 'doing' and the learning process engendered by it. They also contend with ideas that active learning requires considerable background knowledge (and thus is not suitable for new students), suggesting that, with clear goals, students can actively participate with little previous knowledge. The positioning of active learning approaches as requiring prohibitive amounts of preparation and engagement from both students and lecturers can also inhibit its employment in the classroom. Here it is argued that this can be minimised if activities and reflection upon them are made part of assessment, which can also be carried out through peer-review for heavy project-based activities. Lastly, active learning has often been placed in opposition to the practice of lecturing and what some see as 'the transmission of fundamental knowledge' (Elliott 2005:54). The article argues that such beliefs are based on a mistaken idea of teaching as 'transmission' that ignores the processes of decoding and interpretation that constitute learning. In this Scheyvens et al (2008) argue that active engagement, in combination with the necessary and valuable contributions of lecture-style methods, might offer important opportunities for the break down, comprehension and assimilation of information that leads to deep learning.
So how might we seek to overcome these myths and integrate active learning into our teaching? Scheyvens et al (2008) offer some useful points in this regard:
1. Make active learning an integrated part of the course objectives (rather than an occasional add-on) in order to facilitate a sustained deep learning experience.
2. Introduce students to an active learning approach early on in a course in order to 'normalise' this method of learning and help mitigate potential resistance from students used to the more passive and anonymous lecture-centred approach.
3. Give students clear guidance on how to actively participate and help students see the value of such approaches; a process that will often require time and repetition.
4. Weight assessment appropriately in order to encourage active learning, which might encourage students to take activities seriously.
5. Emphasise the importance of abstract conceptualisation and reflection as an integral part of the active learning process, which also helps students to see the relevance of activities.
Active learning has many benefits, including the development of critical thinking, the encouragement of deep over surface learning, and the building of skills in communication, collaboration, and teamwork. It is also important in motivating and engaging students in the classroom, and encouraging reflection on (and thus a better understanding of) their personal learning processes. I have sought to make active learning part of my teaching practice at RHUL, where I have found activities such as brainstorming, reading discussion, on-the-spot image analysis, and group debate to be productive and interesting ways to build critical thinking and deepen understanding. Looking forward I hope to continue to explore these methods and their possibilities for putting student participation at the centre of teaching practice.
Elliott, D. (2005) Early mornings and apprehension: active learning in lectures, Journal of Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 4:1, pp. 53–58.
Kolb, D.A. (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of learning and development, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall
Kolb, A.Y. and Kolb, D.A. (2005) Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing Experiential Learning in Higher Education, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4:2, pp. 193-212.
Scheyvens, R., Griffin, A.L., Jocoy, C.L., Liu, Y. & Bradford, M. (2008) Experimenting with Active Learning in Geography: Dispelling the Myths that Perpetuate Resistance, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 32:1, pp. 51-69.