Complete Abstracts International Forum on Active Learning Classrooms
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Complete Abstracts
International Forum on Active Learning Classrooms
Wednesday, August 7, 2019
1:30-2:45pm Preconference Effective practices for determining the depth of student Christina Petersen,
BH 312 Workshop understanding in small groups during an ALC class University of Minnesota
session Twin Cities
ALCs are designed to foster small group interactions and discussions to support in-depth understanding of a subject. One of the challenges of teaching
in an ALC is determining if your students have actually achieved an adequate understanding of the material during a class session. Round tables are
ideal for small group conversations, but what is the most effective way to wrap up and synthesize student learning at their tables? How do you balance
hearing from a representative sample of students while avoiding the tedious and boring reporting out from too many students? In this interactive
workshop we will demonstrate several different methods to query student understanding in an ALC. These methods include using different electronic
student response systems for voting, using paper cards for voting, and cold-calling on individual students or tables. For each of these methods we will
provide advantages and disadvantages with respect to student accountability, student comfort levels, and the amount of time needed for instructor
planning and execution. Determining the pros and cons of each approach is informed by published pedagogical literature and feedback from
experienced ALC instructors who have used these methods. You will have the opportunity to experience each of these approaches and there will be
time set aside for discussion and feedback. Your participation will allow you to determine the applicability of each method to teaching students in your
discipline at your institution.
1:30-2:45pm Preconference Using FLEXspace 2.0 to ideate, collaborate, and create Lisa Stephens, University at
BH 330 Workshop campus learning environments Buffalo: The State University
of New York; Rebecca Frazee,
San Diego State University
The workshop will share a proven process on successful integrated learning space planning, project execution and assessment. Participants will ideally
come to the workshop prepared to upload photographs and detailed attributes of a space targeted for renovation, or to document a recently completed
innovative space.
We will begin the workshop with a case study reviewing the planning pathway (and "lessons learned"). Each individual will work on a plan guided by
worksheets to draft principles and plans specific their campus needs. This will include:
1) how to identify and engage the right campus stakeholders to ensure successful project "buy in" and subsequent advocacy,
2) use of the Learning Space Rating System (LSRS) to create a foundation for a campus learning space master plan,
3) establish guiding principles at the project level; and,
14) use of FLEXspace to benchmark and build consensus of room attributes to support the intended pedagogical need
There will also be discussion on how to engage and present outcomes to external contractors and architects. The workshop will conclude by outlining
an action plan to match stakeholders (facilities planners, faculty, AV/IT and academic technologists) with a broader community to support their unique
project expertise, including research tools and best practices for gathering data on the effectiveness of the space once complete.
Following the workshop experience, participants will be invited to continue sharing their plans and experience through several key support initiatives
available in the FLEXspace portal and with key partners (ELI, SCUP, CCUMC, LSC, UBTech, InfoComm, A4LE and others). There will be emphasis
on "closing the loop" with how the practices presented were executed over the following year.
3:00-4:15pm Preconference Design symposium for dream classrooms: Rethinking the Tracey Birdwell,
BH 312 Workshop conversation on space Indiana University
What would happen if instructors were asked to design the classroom of their dreams? Indiana University faculty were asked that and other questions
when they participated in a 2018 classroom design symposium. The symposium, presented through IU's Mosaic Active Learning Initiative, brought
together a diverse group of faculty to brainstorm design concepts for new learning spaces. The resulting designs were broadly shared and have already
influenced conversations about space with many university stakeholders. In this session, participants will experience the symposium themselves.
After giving an overview of our project, participants will receive “room inspiration” documents to discuss within small groups. Then we will engage
participants in small group collaborations to draw and describe their ideal classroom. Then small groups will share their designs with other small
groups. Afterwards, a larger group discussion about the session experience and how that experience could translate onto each participants campus and
with different stakeholder populations. We will also discuss how the Design symposium has influenced the culture of active learning classrooms on the
Indiana University campus.
3:00-4:15pm Preconference Learner behaviors and motivation drive success in Active Gary Smith & Aurora Pun,
BH 330 Workshop Learning Classrooms University of New Mexico
Workshop participants will learn to evaluate their active-learning-classroom (ALC) instructional designs using criteria that combine learners’ overt
behaviors with learners’ motivation to engage with those behaviors. Research demonstrates that achieving high-yield, active-learning experiences
requires specific learner behaviors and the motivation to undertake them. Active-learning proponents point to oft-cited research reporting enhanced
learning gains. However, one need not look far to find published examples and colleague anecdotes of active-learning implementations that failed to
generate such gains. When designing instruction for ALCs it is important to remember that, despite the best intentions of the teacher’s design, the
learner does the learning. Simply creating activities does not assure better learning than listening to a lecture; “active learning” includes a wide range of
variably structured activities that are not equally capable of achieving learning outcomes and do not always successfully engage learner participation.
Regardless of the instructor’s expectations, the necessary learner behaviors for successful acquisition and retention of knowledge and skills may not
occur, and will certainly not happen, if the learner is not motivated to engage in those behaviors. Participants will use the interactive-constructive-
active-passive (ICAP) framework (Chi & Wylie, 2014, Educ. Psych. 49(4):219) to assess overt learner behaviors that should inform active-learning
design. ICAP is combined during the workshop with self-determination theory (SDT; Ryan & Deci, 2017, Self-Determination Theory: Basic
2Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness), which provides insights into what triggers learners’ autonomous motivation to
undertake learning-enhancing behaviors. Small-group activities will enable participants to (a) discover the meanings of ICAP and SDT through
examination of examples from ALC classes; and (b) utilize ICAP and SDT to generate a rubric for instructional design of active learning that
incorporates the two sets of explicitly learner-centered principles that can be applied to their courses.
Thursday, August 8
8:30-9:30am Keynote Intentional Tech: Teaching principles for technology in Derek Bruff,
Meridian the Active Learning Classroom Vanderbilt University
Ballroom
When faculty walk into an active learning classroom, they’re likely to encounter digital and analog technologies both familiar and strange.
For instructors interested in supporting student learning, determining what’s possible and what’s useful in an active learning classroom can
be challenging. In this talk, we’ll explore a few research-based teaching principles for guiding the use of technology in an active learning
classroom, so that we can be intentional and effective as we take advantage of the affordances of new learning spaces.
10:00-10:45 Paper Is your campus ready to support active learning? Using Adam Finkelstein & Erin
the Learning Space Rating System to create campus-wide McDonagh, McGill University
BH 312 assessment of learning spaces
Many institutions face the challenges of diverse classroom portfolios and competing priorities for renovation. Evidenced-informed decision-making is
critical in developing high quality learning spaces. However, evaluations of learning spaces can take very different paths, many leading to incomplete
pictures of spaces’ potential and actual use. The Learning Space Rating System (LSRS) is a project from Educause focused on providing “measurable
criteria to assess how well the design of classrooms support and enable active learning activities.” The LSRS measures the potential of formal learning
spaces (classrooms), those designed to accommodate face-to-face scheduled meetings of all participants, and can help institutions at all stages of
planning, design, funding, and renovation.
The LSRS evaluates a classroom’s potential to support active learning recognizing that while not all classrooms are Active Learning Classrooms, many
have the potential to support active learning. The LSRS provides a framework to measure individual classrooms on multiple factors as well as measure
institutional readiness and alignment with academic priorities. On a strategic level, the LSRS can foster dialogue about the intended goals for a specific
classroom, and about the overall composition of an institution’s classroom portfolio to support current and future pedagogical practices.
This presentation will review McGill University's year-long process of using the LSRS to evaluate over 250 classrooms across multiple buildings, two
campuses, and many conflicting classroom lists. We will discuss lessons learned, best practices for applying the system, and our methods for
interpreting the resulting data. Ultimately, the process of conducting this review has yielded some interesting and unexpected information about
McGill's classrooms, requiring us to reorient our thinking about how spaces are managed and described at our institution. Participants in this session
can expect to gain some practical tips on implementing an LSRS review of their own campus spaces.
3BH 432 Paper Teacher design in flexible learning spaces Marie Leijon, Malmo
University, Sweden; Elisabet
Malvedo, Naval Warfare
Center; Åse Tieva, Umea
University, Sweden
In this paper, we present results from an ongoing research project on teacher educational development in higher education flexible learning spaces. In
Sweden, several higher education institutions have invested in new flexible learning spaces or in retrofitting existing ones. Much inspiration comes
from ALC and the University of Minnesota (Brooks 2011, 2012; Walker, Brooks & Baepler 2011) but also from Australian ideas on innovative
learning environments (ILEs) (Imms, 2018).
ALC supports pedagogical methods, team teaching, teacher movement and prompts transformative learning, where the teacher becomes a learner
(Brooks, 2012; Ge, Yang, Liao & Wolfe, 2015; Henshaw et al, 2011; Metzger, 2015; Phillipson et al, 2018; Rands et al, 2017). However, there is a lack
of research on teaching in more flexible learning spaces.
The aim is to understand teacher educational development in flexible learning spaces. How do teachers design teaching? Do they experience changes to
their beliefs about teaching and learning?
We will present tentative results from twenty teacher interviews at six Swedish Universities. The interviews were conducted at different times and
forms, both individual and focus groups. The idea is to compare perspectives on teaching from a diverse range of university spaces, but from teachers
that are all new to teaching in higher education flexible learning environments.
The research draws upon ‘Designs for Learning’ (Selander & Kress, 2010). Designs for learning concerns conditions for learning, where the teacher
has a significant role through his or her didactic design. Designs in learning concerns how the teacher make use of space and design interaction.
Designs for learning influences designs in learning and thus affects the interaction (Leijon, 2016).
In the presentation, we will initiate a discussion on how didactic design in flexible learning spaces can be a part of not only a teacher repertoire but also
educational development and scholarly work?
BH 330 Paper Does an active learning classroom improve the Elizabeth Lugosi, University
effectiveness of active learning strategies? of Arizona
In this paper, the usage of six specific Active Learning Strategies is described, along with a comparison of their effectiveness in regular and active
learning classrooms. The same strategies were used in undergraduate college algebra and business calculus classes in both environments at The
University of Arizona. It will be demonstrated that the leveraging of the advantages of collaborative learning spaces enhances the effectiveness of the
application of active learning strategies.
A detailed description of the ArtMath project that students in college algebra classes accomplished during the last semester will also be given. The
ArtMath project was an additional active learning activity developed in collaboration with the School of Art. The ArtMath project is an example of an
active learning activity that cannot be accomplished in a regular classroom. An active learning classroom is a necessity for an interdisciplinary project
4like the ArtMath project.
It will also be shown how a collaborative learning space can contribute to the achievement of some important goals of education. These goals include
increasing participation in group problem-solving, increasing engagement in a mathematical investigation, providing opportunities for communication,
increasing student performance, decreasing math anxiety, decreasing the achievement gap between students with different backgrounds, decreasing the
achievement gap between ethnic groups and different genders. The ArtMath project also demonstrates that the enrichment of the student experience in
the classroom has a positive effect on the achievement of these goals.
BH 420B Paper Who’s driving this thing? Preparing for success: Team Kelsey Metzger & Daniel
teaching in ALCs Marell, University of
Minnesota Rochester
There is a rapidly growing body of research literature addressing the impact of Active Learning Classrooms (ALCs) on student engagement and
learning, but fewer studies have focused on investigating instructional practices and instructors in ALCs. Moreover, little to no information on best
practices for multiple instructors in these learning spaces has been reported, although the presence of multiple instructors or facilitators simultaneously
seems to be frequently implemented in these spaces. Models of co-teaching (i.e. the use of multiple instructors simultaneously engaged in instruction in
one classroom) have been studied and written about mostly in the context of K-12 education
Compared to traditional lecture-based instruction in large auditorium-style rooms, instruction in ALC-style spaces typically engages students in a
reduced-lecture pedagogical model focused on cooperative, active learning strategies guided by facilitators. Using student-centered approaches requires
on-the-spot facilitation and redirection that is often supported by multiple instructors and teaching assistants. As such, ALCs impose unique
requirements on the teaching team in order to implement effective collaborative models of instruction to support learning activities. Although the need
to work effectively and collaboratively as a team of instructors is apparent, how to do so can be a complex and daunting endeavor.
This session will provide an overview of the challenges presented by coordinating a team of instructors across the design, implementation, and
assessment phases of the teaching and learning cycle of a course. We will explore the experiences of the presenters – two instructors with different
longevity of teaching in ALCs – including the exploration of student perceptions of team teaching and provide specific examples of how teaching in a
team is different than teaching as a solo instructor. The session will close with specific strategies to hit the ground running in preparing to team teach a
course in an ALC.
BH 432 Roundtable Assessing student learning in courses based in the ALC Erin Malone, University of
Minnesota Twin Cities
The purpose of this session is to develop broader and more complete assessments for ALC courses.
How do you assess the wide variety of skills learned and honed in the active learning classroom (ALC)? ALC sessions can improve group function
skills, collaborative learning, application, and critical thinking. However, assessing those skills and outcomes can be challenging with large classes,
both in terms of the assessment design and in grading the product. If the course is primarily based in an ALC, this is a crucial step for course design
5and student assessment. Defaulting to a knowledge-based examination typically only measures a fraction of the outcomes. Asking for written products
can mean days of hand grading.
Backwards design can help restructure our typical examinations to better fit the goals and outcomes of the ALC. This round table discussion will ask
participants to outline how they currently assess student performance in the ALC and discuss how that matches the goals and observations of their ALC
sessions. The presenter has identified some methods that seem to work and can lead the discussion toward possible options.
As her team-based learning course progressed over the years, the presenter realized she was only assessing student knowledge and application. Even
that was challenging as many of the cases had multiple right answers and approaches. However, when she switched to an individual knowledge
component and group case challenges, she was able to better measure group function, resource finding, knowledge application, critical thinking and
metacognition. She is excited to share ideas and discuss additional methods of determining student competency levels in a more complete and authentic
manner.
11:00-11:45 Paper Inclusive excellence and Active Learning Classrooms Stafford Cox, Ali Rezaei,
Francine Vasilomanolakis, &
BH 312 Dennis LuPresto,
California State University
Long Beach
California State University, Long Beach supports ten (10) Active Learning Classrooms (ALC) with varying seating capacity and design. In an effort to
provide compelling evidence that would support the advocacy of these classrooms, web-based surveys were developed for those faculty and students
who were assigned to an ALC for the Fall 2018 semester.
Faculty (N=100) were asked to complete an ALC assessment survey and they were asked to recruit their students (N = 4,000) to take a similar ALC
assessment survey. Data collection started September 21, 2018 and ended November 11, 2018. The completed non-random surveys resulted in 48
faculty and 820 students assigned to one of eight (8) ALC’s. Among the faculty and student respondents, they represent our eight colleges: Education
(42%, 37%), Liberal Arts (35%, 25%), Natural Sciences and Mathematics (10%, 9%), Health and Human Services (6%, 15.7%), Arts (4%, 5%),
Engineering (0%, 3%), Business Administration (0%, 3%) and Continuing and Professional Education (0%, 1%) with over 75 disciplines represented.
Our research objective is twofold. First, we investigate how the ALC enables student collaboration across disciplines and what ALC features
predispose instructors and students to engage in group assignments. Secondly, we seek to illustrate successful “inclusive excellence” as it has been a
general tenet that collaborative learning environments lead to better student experiences with growth in critical thinking, interpersonal communication
skill and learning satisfaction.
Findings focus on respondent perceptions as related to ALC accommodations such as the number of tables, chairs, flat-panels, display monitors,
centralized teaching stations, document cameras and writable surfaces. Responses to critical thinking, student to faculty and student to student
interactions are presented with a focus on ALC training for instructors. Finally, we compare the perceptions of the instructors and students with
recommendations for universities building Active Learning Classrooms.
6BH 432 Paper Contextual influences on student perceptions of social Bernie Dodge, Katie Hughes,
environment in Active Learning Classrooms & James Frazee,
San Diego State University
This paper will present the results of five semesters of research on four different ALCs. The Social Context of Active Learning Environments (Baepler
et al, 2016) instrument was used to determine student perceptions of the social environment in these classrooms. Using summary statistics across all
four classrooms, the paper will focus on how student perceptions of social environments are shaped by the discipline of courses taught and the physical
characteristics of each room. In addition, the paper will report on follow-up discussions with faculty whose courses were at the extremes of SCALE’s
four subscales will be reported. The paper and session are intended to shed light on the validity of the SCALE instrument as well as implications for
ALC design.
BH 330 Paper Getting ready for the grand opening: Supporting faculty Jennifer Ogg Anderson,
through active learning transformations University of Louisville
In this session, the presenter will describe the efforts of one mid-sized regional research institution to prepare faculty to teach in its new active learning
classroom building with more than 20 ALCs. In 2017, active learning classroom (ALC) development and implementation was identified as the top
strategic technology in higher education, and entire buildings dedicated to ALCs recently have opened at a number of institutions. In order to teach
effectively in ALCs, faculty must adopt pedagogies and acquire technical skills appropriate for these learning spaces. As ALCs become more
ubiquitous, how can universities best support instructors in preparing for active learning teaching?
The session will review a range of training options for faculty new to active learning, including face-to-face programming (faculty learning
communities, short workshops, multi-day institutes, departmental partnerships) and online programming options (online modules and web-based
resources), as well as summary results of a campus-wide survey on teaching practices that assessed the impact of these programs. The session will
conclude with a facilitated brainstorming session about getting started, including pros and cons of various approaches. Participants will identify key
strategies for promoting active learning pedagogies at their own institutions.
Participants in this session will:
• Consider elements involved in designing new active learning spaces
• Brainstorm key organizational, design and pedagogical strategies for preparing faculty to teach in ALCs and garnering faculty buy-in
• Analyze opportunities and barriers related to promoting active learning pedagogies and technologies
• Create an action plan for promoting conversations about ALCs and active learning implementation at their own institutions
BH 131B Demonstration Use Intention/Reflection to engage the active learner Kerry Fierke & Gardner Lepp,
University of Minnesota
Twin Cities
7The purpose of this demonstration is to help educators engage students in an active learning classroom by identifying learner interest. The practice
introduced involves having students articulate their own learning outcomes for a given educational experience, and then reflecting on the achievement
of those outcomes after the experience through the use of technology. This process, known as Intention/Reflection (I/R), leads to greater levels of
student investment and engagement, which creates an improved course experience for students and faculty.
Information presented will include data from several research studies on the I/R practice conducted across a variety of educational settings. Discussion
may include various questions focused on specific types of learners and implementation within diverse learning environments (e.g. didactic,
experiential, co-curricular). Participants will also develop a customized I/R practice, which they can use immediately in their own learning
environments.
The demonstration will consist of:
1) A brief description and participation in an Intention/Reflection (I/R) practice.
2) Group synthesis of ideas and questions for ALC classroom settings that can be implemented immediately by educators.
BH 420B Roundtable The digital challenges and opportunities in an online ALC Niklas Brinkfeldt, Dalarna
context University; Åse Tieva,
Umeå University
An Active Learning Classroom (ALC) facilitates a learning environment where faculty can engage with their students through collaborative learning
activities and where the students are active in the learning process. Besides this, the ALC environment provides a framework for the expectations of
teacher-and student roles.
In a physical learning environment, both the teachers and the students’ roles are heavily affected by the nature of the environment. In a lecture-hall, the
layouts of the room reflect an assumption that lecture is the primary mode of instruction with the teachers in a central role and the students in a passive
position, whilst in an ALC room the teachers place is amongst the students as a facilitator of learning.
The digital, online environments on the other hand, do not provide the same expectations for participant roles as the physical environment does. It is
therefore the teachers´ responsibility to define roles and expectations in a digital learning environment. This might be challenging both regarding the
communication of expectations as well as knowing how you as a teacher would like to utilize the digital room in your teaching.
As one teacher might perceive the online environment perfect for lecturing or any other passive student form, another teacher might perceive the online
environment suitable for student centered and active learning. How the teachers perceive the online environment is affected by how the online
environment is introduced to both teachers and students and the variation of tools available.
In this round table discussion we would like to address the concept of ALC in an online, digital learning environment from three perspectives:
• How can we inspire teachers to work more student centered on line?
8• Is there a need for various tools as a complement to e-meeting services?
• What are the experiences from bringing ALC to an online environment?
12:45-1:30pm BH 312 POSTER SESSION
What achievement gap? Interconnectedness levels the playing field in ALCs
Carolyn J. Hushman, Aurora Pun, & Sushilla Knottenbelt, University of New Mexico
Studies show that active learning classrooms (ALCs) have shown to have a positive influence on student learning (e.g. Brooks, 2010; Chiu & Cheng,
2017). This research typically compares traditional classrooms to ALCs without examining learning differences between different student subgroups.
The present study examined concept-inventory learning gains within different demographic groups among 412 undergraduate students enrolled in
introductory chemistry and geology courses. Students completed pre-and post-tests aligned to individual course student learning outcomes and learning
gains were calculated based on the percentage difference between the two. Students also completed the Social Context and Learning Environments
(SCALE; Baepler et al., 2014) at the end of semester. Notably there were no significant differences in learning gains based on gender, socioeconomic
status (SES), or ethnicity. This result is contrary to the common references to STEM achievement gaps related to these factors. Also notable, there were
significant demographic relationships with some sub-factors of the SCALE. For example, students who identified as low SES, female or under-
represented minority (URM) had more positive impressions of the student-student interaction and the informal instructor-student interactions. These
findings provide evidence that instruction in courses taught in ALCs could help to close the achievement gap found in higher education introductory
science courses, as measured here by learning gains, through greater interconnectedness between students and instructors. Learning environments that
enhance the interconnectedness between students have been found to enhance learning for groups of students who commonly also identify as lower
SES, URM, or both (Fe & Chavez, 2013; Kulturel-Konak et al., 2011; Stump, Hilpert et al., 2011).
An investigation of English language teaching methodology for reading comprehension in the Chinese college context
Xi Chen, Harbin Institute of Technology, China
This study aims to investigate effective English language teaching methodology in the Chinese college reading context to enhance reading
comprehension in an active learning environment. First, the literature was reviewed between the Grammar Translation Methods and Task-Based
Language Teaching. By comparing the literature of these two English language approaches, it is found out that Task-Based Language Teaching will be
effective in reading comprehension for creating an active learning environment for language acquisition. Through conducting meaningful and
communicative tasks, college students in China can have better reading comprehension in cooperative group learning. The review of the theoretical
underpinnings for task-based language teaching is under the framework of the sociocultural theory. Two core concepts of sociocultural theory--the
zone of proximal development (ZPD) and scaffolding-- are introduced to justify the task-based approach in the reading instruction. Then, the tasks are
discussed with Ellis`s task design criteria and reading strategies to show that tasks as the media can be viewed as scaffolding to promote the
learners`zone of proximal development (ZPD).A research question is proposed to explore the effectiveness of reading comprehension between the two
English teaching methods for active learning in the college reading contexts. In order to see what works in the language classroom, pragmatism
paradigms and mixed-methods research will be elaborated. An explanatory design of mixed methods research is selected with first the collection of
quantitative data and later the qualitative data. For the quantitative design, two intact classes with one as the experimental group and one as the control
group will be selected for the quasi-experiment. For the qualitative design, the semi-structured interviews and questionnaires will be devised for
9probing the in-depth data of reading comprehension in the two different teaching approaches. Issues of validity, reliability and limitations are also
addressed at the end of the paper.
Building flexible learning spaces utilizing faculty & student driven design
G. Alex Ambrose, University of Notre Dame
Many IT, facilities management, and registrar units work in silos in designing, building, allocating, managing, and renovating classrooms.
Additionally, the problem of missing key stakeholders’ voices (students & faculty) in the learning space design process will be defined.
How do you get faculty and student voices into the learning space design process? Learn how faculty and student-driven data design can evolve a
campus’ learning space design process. We will provide a history and evolution of the University of Notre Dame’s learning space research & design
methodology, an approach which captures faculty and student voices to create data-driven design decisions. Some of the questions we will be able to
answer with our framework and tools are: How do you get faculty and student voices into the learning space design process? What do four semesters of
learning space evaluation surveys from over a thousand students and dozens of faculty from multiple disciplines tell us? What can we learn from
designing and testing small, medium, and large Active Learning Classroom prototypes to guide future classroom design and budgets? Where do we get
the most “bang for the buck” with regard to furniture, technology, or space? What are student/faculty learning space perceptions, recommendations,
and impacts? Which data-driven design decisions were made to continually improve our process? What bottom-up partnerships, processes, and
guidelines did we develop that were aligned to top-down strategic visions and goals?
How the design of a large Active Learning Classroom impacts teaching and learning
Peter Newbury, Tamara Freeman, Janine Hirtz, John Hopkinson, Sajni Lacey, & W. Stephen McNeil, University of British
Columbia - Okanagan
When course instructors use active learning strategies, more students are more successful (Freeman et al., 2014). Facilitating effective active learning
in large classes can be challenging because the layout of large classrooms often hinders student-student collaborations and student-instructor
interactions. At the University of British Columbia Okanagan campus, we recently built a 400-seat active learning classroom (Talbert & Mor-Avi,
2018). To assess the impact of the design, we observed large lower-division Chemistry and Physics classes taught by course instructors before and after
they taught their courses in the new classroom. COPUS observations (Smith et al., 2013) reveal what teaching strategies are achievable in the new
learning space. Distributions of students’ grade and drop/fail/withdrawal rates show the impact of the design, and the teaching it permits, on student
success. The results inform the instructional design of courses offered in the classroom, guide the professional development of course instructors
scheduled for the classroom, and influence the design of future learning spaces on the campus.
The Mosaic Blog: A platform and resource for Active Learning Classrooms
Kelly Scholl, Indiana University
In 2017, Indiana University debuted the Mosaic blog (https://blogs.iu.edu/mosaiciu/) to give those who teach and learn in our active learning
classrooms a platform to share their experiences with, and contributions to, IU’s Mosaic active learning classrooms. The blog features faculty
contributions about their own teaching in Mosaic classrooms, student reflections on their experiences learning in Mosaic classrooms, and IU staff
10contributions on the design, development, and support of Mosaic classrooms. The blog helps to share Indiana University’s evolving story with active
learning classrooms, including our successes and lessons learned, from the 2015 launch of the Mosaic Initiative to the present day.
Significantly, the Mosaic blog also operates as a living repository of examples for teaching in our active learning classrooms. By connecting specific
blog entries to our Resources Page (https://mosaic.iu.edu/resources/index.html) on the Mosaic Web site, we are able to publish and feature examples
for how to leverage whiteboards, various digital technologies, and classroom space for active learning. Thus, the blog is both a community platform
and a resource for active learning classrooms.
Exploring the instructional orientations of graduate teaching assistants
Ting Huang, University of Minnesota Twin Cities
The “active learning classroom (ALC)” is a learning model that content learning is shifted from inside to outside of classroom. It features student-
centered activities. In addition, we know from research that teachers' beliefs about teaching orientation may be a prerequisite to changing their teaching
practices. This mixed methods study drew data from classroom observations (750 minutes) and 34 interviews with 17 graduate teaching assistants
(GTAs) during two semesters. These GTAs came from five majors in college of education. The study outlines the relationship of classroom ALC
activities, participants' teaching experiences and current teaching support. Last, it reports the changes in their teaching orientation over time. This study
also offers consideration of factors in developing a ALC.
The study makes two contributions to ALCs. First, the study analyzes four factors related to ALC of undergraduates taught by GTAs: mentorship,
training, teaching experiences, and teaching orientations. Second, this study reports the importance of mentor’s involvement and experiences in GTA’s
teaching and how that related to ALCs.
These GTAs are pivotal instructors but understudied link in the research pipeline of ALC, because they serve as primary instructors in substantial
classes (>30%) for undergraduate students at large universities. Mentorship in teaching and training in departmental/university were significantly
related to change in teaching orientation toward more ACL beliefs. Yet, research is scare on education school GTAs involvement in ALCs.
This study fills a gap in the research line of ALCs and GTA studies on undergraduate education by investigating the four factors (mentorship, training,
experiences, and orientations) of GTAs and their impact on ALCs.
Lessons learned from opening a new classroom building
Wiebke Kuhn, Auburn University
Universities around the world are spending millions of dollars building new classrooms and classroom buildings or renovating existing spaces. Auburn
University’s classroom building opened in 2017, with 26 engaged and active student learning (EASL) classrooms, 40 study spaces, plenty of informal
seating for studying collaboratively or individually, and a direct connection to the library, effectively combining formal learning in classrooms with
informal learning and its resources in and around the library. The Mell Classroom Building @ RBD Library bustles with learning life every day, almost
24/7, but building this kind of new onto the old brought its own set of challenges, from large, organizational and administrative challenges to small,
concrete challenges in, for example, furnishing decisions. Large and small decisions have a significant impact on the success of a new or renovated
11building, and these decisions are made in different areas of the design and construction process, often without an easy way to compile a comprehensive
list. Having a single person, in the Provost’s Office, connect with all the stakeholders, helped connect different areas of expertise. The purpose of this
poster is to provide examples of large and small challenges and decisions made in constructing this building that may not be on everyone’s mind when
designing spaces. The goal is to raise awareness and showcase what we learned so that other institutions can be aware of these issues, for example what
not to do with terrazzo flooring, whom all to include in continuing construction meetings, what furnishings to avoid. At Auburn University, we have
carefully tracked these issues to inform our next large building initiative, currently in the design phase with a planned opening of 2021. The interactive
poster will allow for others to leave questions and suggestions that will be collected and made available digitally.
Improving intra-professional collaboration
Jeff Stefani, Karin Quick, & Cyndee Stull, University of Minnesota Twin Cities
Project-based assessment of critical thinking in a dental microbiology and immunology course
Kristin Shingler & Paul Jardine, University of Minnesota Twin Cities
Designing and implementing active learning labs that emphasize practical aspects of anatomy and kinesiology for
occupational therapy students
Meena Iyer, University of Minnesota Twin Cities
Improving student interaction through active classroom strategies: Using multimedia & peer review
Leann Shore, University of Minnesota Twin Cities
A simple technique to illustrate immunoglobulin gene rearrangement in the Active Learning Classroom
Michelle Henry-Stanley & Donna Spannaus-Martin, University of Minnesota Twin Cities
Personal experience from redesign of an electro engineering course for active student participation
Jennifer Leijon, Uppsala University, Sweden
This presentation concerns the pedagogical development of an electro engineering course, Rotating Electrical Machines, given at Uppsala University
during the spring in 2019. In previous years, the students were dissatisfied with the course and found it very complicated. Many students failed their
exams. Our goal was to maintain the same level of the course, but to activate the students to increase their understanding and participation. The work
resulted in video lectures online, formative evaluations, audio literature, individual labs and discussions among the students during classes. Simple
things, as booking a better room for the lessons, clearly improved the student engagement. The course literature was reorganized by a previous doctoral
student, as a cheaper alternative than regular books. A study visit at ABB Machines gave insights to future working possibilities.
In 2017, only 25% of the students passed the first exam. In 2019, after a year of improvements etc., the number of passing students on the first exam
was 72 %. Course evaluations were collected twice during the semester. The pedagogical development was funded by TUFF, Uppsala University, and
has been presented at Uppsala University, but not internationally. Further, we will write a scientific paper mainly focusing on the work with the
12individual labs. Finally, I will give some insight into the view of a young woman teaching in a male dominated field - highlighting the need of more
female engineers. In particular, there is a need of more women working with electricity, addressing many growing societal challenges. This calls for
engineers with not just technical skills, but also generic or soft skills, increasing the need of active student participation and variation in the engineering
education.
1:45-2:30pm Plenary Putting the pieces together to create a Mosaic Stacy Morrone,
BH 230 Address Indiana University
This session will describe Indiana University’s journey in creating the Mosaic active learning initiative and the various pieces that make up
the initiative. Research findings on what worked and what didn’t work in Mosaic active learning classrooms will also be shared. The session
will conclude with a discussion of how classroom master plans can support active learning.
2:45-3:30pm Paper How much does space matter? Using active learning pedagogy in Justin Bruner, Michigan
traditional and Active Learning Classrooms State University; R. H.
BH 330 Affloo 1, C. E.
Nellenbach 1, J. Hagaman
1, A. Bowers 1. J. Riley
1, A. Brudzinski 1, J,
Amting 1, A. M. Dietsch
2, & M. E. Lehman 1
1 Central Michigan
University
2 University of Nebraska
Lincoln
This study explores the impact of teaching a health professions course in an active learning space on student perceptions by comparing data from the
same course, using the same active learning pedagogy, and the same instructor, but two different classroom spaces. One section of the course is taught
in a traditional classroom while the other section is taught in an active learning classroom (ALC). This allows for a meaningful comparison between the
two different classroom spaces.
The results will contribute empirical evidence to support the use of ALCs and active learning pedagogy in the health professions. Additionally, the
educational methods utilized in this study may serve as a helpful model to inform future course adaptation and development of a classroom community
that is particularly supportive for students who may be unfamiliar with active learning or ALCs.
The implementation of active learning pedagogy can potentially disrupt learning as students may not be familiar with this style of instruction. ALCs
constitute a further disruption as the space and structure differs from traditional classrooms that students’ may have previously experienced.
13This study aims to effectively address the problem by utilizing a quasi-treatment/control model where the classroom space serves as the treatment
(ALC) and control (traditional). Results indicate that students in the traditional space had positive perceptions of the active learning pedagogy but not
of the space. Students in the ALC had positive perceptions of both the pedagogy and the space.
BH 432 Paper Development matters: How participating in an FLC can foster Jason FitzSimmons, Emily
faculty efficacy of teaching in active learning spaces Bonem, & Dave Nelson,
Purdue University
Active learning research typically follows an observational framework, identifying the frequency of certain activities in a single class period.
Observations carry fidelity but are difficult to scale to large programs. Our study examines how participating in a course redesign FLC impacts
instructor perceptions of teaching in active learning spaces with a broad population. We conducted brief interviews among a pool of 336 instructors to
explore the frequency of collaborative student learning and instructor comfort and flexibility or discomfort with different types of active learning
classrooms (ALCs). Interviews were conducted with instructors teaching in a newly constructed active learning center with comprising 6 different
classroom configurations totally 26 ALCs. These teachers include 91 instructors who have completed a semester-long faculty learning community
focused on redesigning a course. By interviewing similar numbers of FLC fellows and non-FLC participants, we can compare the specific effects of the
FLC.
During this session, we will discuss our three research questions about the influence of the faculty learning community: 1) Does participation in the
FLC influence instructors to increase the amount of collaboration in active learning spaces; 2) Do the two groups of instructors vary on their comfort
and confidence in using active learning spaces; and 3) Does the FLC provide instructors with greater cognitive flexibility when engaging with active
learning space configurations. We will share our methods for recruiting and interviewing instructors as well as the results examining differences in
instructor perceptions of teaching in an ALCs. We will also ask participants to discuss their experiences working with instructors teaching in active
learning spaces and how our results may inform their work with instructors participating in an FLC. Preliminary data indicates that FLC participants
dedicate more class time to active learning and demonstrate greater comfort and flexibility with active learning spaces.
BH 412 Paper Model building and simulations in ALCs: Powerful tools for Uma Swamy & Sonia
student learning Underwood, Florida
International University
Introductory college-level courses are typically designed as surveys of the discipline to be a “mile wide and an inch deep”. Students typically are
expected to “learn” vast amounts of content, but do not spend enough time making critical connections between concepts. In an active learning
classroom (ALC) we can provide students with opportunities to work on and build crucial connections and place them in context such that if they need
to recall these ideas especially in a new context, they will have a better chance of doing so. In understanding the relationship between molecular
structure and function, students are expected to translate drawing Lewis structures of a compound into its 3-dimensional structure and then use this to
14predict its properties (boiling point, vapor pressure) both in vitro and in vivo. Consequently, students need to make the connections between the various
concepts involved - drawing Lewis Structures, Electron geometry, Molecular geometry, Polarity, Intermolecular forces and its effect on properties. All
classes are conducted in an ALC with undergraduate Learning Assistants (LAs) and the instructor serving as facilitators. In Phase 1 students work
together in groups with their Learning Assistants (LAs) and Instructor to learn how to draw Lewis structures. In Phase 2 groups of students run
simulations, build models with balloons and candy. As they work on understanding electron/ molecular geometry and determining polarity with their
peers, they are building mental models that will allow them to make connections. In Phase 3 they predict what kinds of intermolecular forces are
present and diagram them. It is essential that students draw out these intermolecular forces to showcase their mental models. The LAs and instructor
work with students to adjust their mental models allowing students to build better understanding. In Phase 4 students use their knowledge to predict the
properties of the compound.
BH 131B Roundtable Actively sneaking up on faculty who don’t think they need or Samantha Shields, Sunay
have time for faculty development Palsole, & Karan Watson,
Texas A&M University
Successful use of new teaching spaces is highly dependent on faculty using the technology and space. This presents an opportunity and challenge to
help move faculty who may not think they need upskilling or have the time to avail of faculty development opportunities. Understanding the challenges
that come with adopting new pedagogical techniques either for use in a new state of the art learning space or a more traditional classroom, we
developed the Active Learning in Engineering Program (ALEP) as a way engage faculty who may or may not think they want or need faculty
development. ALEP is designed to aid faculty in assimilating evidence-based practices into their existing course(s). Our research in preparing and
supporting faculty as they transition pedagogical paradigms into those that engage and cultivate students in an active learning environment is of current
need and will grow as more active learning spaces are designed and built.
Our roundtable will get experienced faculty development leaders talking about getting faculty engaged. Using a Socratic approach, facilitators will
pose questions to drive attendees planning their own faculty development program focused on the changing instructor role. As questions are posed,
attendees will be provided table-talk time followed by share outs and discussion. Facilitators will share what we did at our institution during each share
out. Groups will record their ideas in a Google Drive document for reporting out and sharing. These documents will also serve as a “take-away plan”
for participants.
Potential Questions: 1. What are salient outcomes or cross-cutting big ideas for a faculty development program? 2. What are salient components
necessary to get faculty engaged in a faculty development program? 3. What is the most effective way to structure a faculty development program (e.g.,
single disciplinary focus vs. multi-disciplinary focus?, active learning space characteristic focus?)? 4. How do you know if your faculty development
program worked?
3:45-4:30pm Paper A comprehensive support initiative to prepare Health Science Christina Petersen,
faculty for teaching in ALCs Christine Mueller, &
BH 330 Janelle Nivens, University
of Minnesota Twin Cities
15The Academic Health Center (AHC) at the University of Minnesota is constructing a 7-story ALC building which opens in Spring, 2020. Many UMN
AHC faculty have little experience teaching with active learning and even fewer have experience teaching in an ALC. Lack of preparedness on the part
of instructors can lead to inappropriate teaching methods used in ALCs which can negatively impact student learning, attitudes, and motivation to learn
in these spaces. Other institutes of Higher Education have created successful faculty development programs to support instructors who move into
ALCs, which informed our work. The Center for Educational Innovation partnered with the AHC Interim Associate Vice President to create a series of
support efforts tailored to the needs of our AHC clinical faculty. This 3 –year initiative collected feedback from college educational deans to design a
range of support options that would be useful to faculty. In this session we will introduce all of our support programs, which include a year-long
fellowship program, tailored workshops and webinars, faculty learning communities, online web resources and more. We will describe our advertising
efforts and tell you which efforts were most successful and why we believe they were. This session will provide suggestions for tailoring faculty
support for a particular group of faculty participants, designing active learning teaching support for clinical faculty, and leveraging the construction of
new teaching space to promote student-centered teaching.
BH 432 Paper The Active Learning Initiative: Supporting teaching in the ALC Luciano da Rosa dos
and beyond Santos & John
Cheeseman,
Mount Royal University
As evidence for the effectiveness of active learning grows in the educational literature (e.g., Freeman et al., 2014), post-secondary institutions are
designing classrooms that foster active learning principles. Regardless of the type of active learning classroom built, such learning spaces present an
innovation that requires instructors to use specific teaching approaches in order for students to take full advantage of the affordances of the space (Van
Horne & Murniati, 2016). As such, developing teaching capacity for the use of active learning classrooms is a paramount component of a successful
implementation of these learning spaces. The goal of this session is to introduce a faculty development initiative employed at our institution to support
development on the topic of active learning and usage of our active learning classroom.
In Fall 2018, Mount Royal University opened its first active learning classroom as an experimental learning space. In order to support this innovative
classroom, the Academic Development Centre, MRU’s teaching and learning centre, developed a series of short- and long-term faculty development
initiatives to support faculty members. Although initially designed in response to the opening of our ALC, this active learning initiative aims to support
instructors who wish to enhance student engagement through active learning pedagogies in any learning spaces. In this session, presenters will
introduce the active learning initiative and its faculty development offerings. We will then host a discussion on how initiatives such as the one being
presented can support teaching practices in the ALC and beyond.
BH 420B Demo Using secular meditative practices as a starting point for in-class Jake Wright, University of
discussion Minnesota Rochester
Contemplative Pedagogy (CP) is one of a number of pedagogical theories aimed at addressing shortcomings of more traditional pedagogies, especially
with respect to traditional pedagogy’s perceived production of uncritical, unquestioning students. CP centers on contemplative activities, both within
16and outside the classroom, that ask students to actively engage with mental states and experiences like thoughts, beliefs, and emotional reactions. CP as
a general pedagogical theory has a number of benefits for students, including increased attention, a reduction in distractive thoughts, increased
creativity and information processing, and the ability to integrate multiple self-identities into their classroom experience. Further, CP allows students to
engage in what Pulkki, Dahlin, and Värri call “hidden, pre-reflective realms of experience.”
Using an introductory philosophy class as a case study, my paper examines the benefits and challenges of a specific CP practice. Lectio Divina (LD) is
a contemplative exercise based on medieval monastic meditation on scriptural passages. In its religious form, it involves four steps of reading,
reflection, prayer, and further reflection. This practice can be secularized for incorporation in the classroom by replacing the prayer component with
small group discussion and adding an additional all-class discussion to synthesize students’ experiences with LD.
LD as an in-class contemplative activity has a number of specific benefits, including allowing students to attend to the noncognitive aspects of
philosophical practice, giving students the space to discuss noncognitive reactions, making students more willing to offer novel and risky
interpretations of material, and the opportunity to engage in independent disciplinary practice. These benefits come with attendant challenges, most
notably the time required to successfully engage in LD—between 20 and 35 minutes. I conclude my discussion by considering strategies for shortening
the time required for the activity while maintaining the bulk of LD’s benefits.
BH 131B Roundtable Faculty development: Critical skills for teaching in a team-based Carla Stellrecht & Teresa
learning classroom Horton,
University of Michigan
Michigan’s (LSA) implementation of Team-based Learning classrooms started in the Fall of 2016 with a small pilot room of 64 seats, writable walls
and student computing capabilities. Currently, we have three rooms with capacities that range from 64 seats to 134 students. Our approach to faculty
development has grown with each room launch, starting from a couple of planning documents and a list of literature to a website with a variety of
resources (video clips of instructors, course summaries, technical how-to information, classroom management resources, group formation resources), a
workshop, and a robust support/observation model.
Our plan for a roundtable discussion on this topic will include:
The basics of our faculty development model
Brainstorming around the bare minimum skills instructors need to have to be successful in these specialized spaces. Situations participants have
encountered, lessons learned.
A worksheet will facilitate this discussion. On the front will be the highlights of the Michigan experience. On the back will be a worksheet that people
can use to identify ideas that they want to take home.
BH 412 Roundtable Exploring and overcoming instructor barriers to adopting active Julian Allen,
learning techniques Georgia State University
17You can also read
