Active Learning is known to improve undergraduate STEM course comprehension, however specific Active Learning subtype efficacies were unexplored and student enjoyment with the learning experience was undocumented. With Frank Church, I analyzed 6 years of a biology course taught at UNC in order to accomplish 5 tasks: (i) update the active learning definition; (ii) introduce active learning subtypes; (iii) compare student comprehension between subjects taught with active learning or lecturing within a course; (iv) explore the efficacy of different active learning subtypes; and (v) determine student satisfaction with Active Learning techniques.

Methods include paired t-tests, Kruskal-Wallis Test, and Mann-Kendall Trend Test. I controlled our overall alpha using DCSF and Holm-Bonferroni step-down method. We have evidence to suggest the subtypes vary in efficacy. We found a small difference in comprehension between subjects taught with Active Learning versus Lecture Learning. The survey reveals a positive time-trend in students’ perceived individual utility of Active Learning (years 2012-2018).

This research will soon be submitted to CBE- Life Sciences Education for review and publication. Once published, an updated link will be provided.