Student Grades Improve, Failure Rate Drops in Active-Learning STEM Classes

A significantly greater number of students fail science, engineering and math courses taught lecture-style than fail in classes incorporating active learning that expects them to participate in discussions and problem-solving beyond what they’ve memorized.

Active learning also improves exam performance — in some cases enough to change grades by half a letter or more so a B-plus, for example, becomes an A-minus.

These findings are from the largest and most comprehensive analysis ever published of studies comparing lecturing to active learning in undergraduate education, says Scott Freeman, a University of Washington principal lecturer in biology and lead author of a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences the week of May 12.

Co-authors are Mary Wenderoth, Sarah Eddy, Miles McDonough, Nnadozie Okoroafor and Hannah Jordt, all with the UW biology department, and Michelle Smith, University of Maine assistant professor in the School of Biology and member of the Maine Center for Research in STEM Education.

The researchers based their findings on 225 studies of undergraduate education across all of the STEM areas: science, technology, engineering and mathematics. They found that 55 percent more students fail lecture-based courses than classes with at least some active learning. Two previous studies looked at subsets of the STEM areas and none before considered failure rates.

On average across all the studies, a little more than one-third of students in traditional lecture classes failed — that is, they either withdrew or got Fs or Ds, which generally means they were ineligible to take more advanced courses.

On average with active learning, a little more than one-fifth of students failed.

“If you have a course with 100 students signed up, about 34 fail if they get lectured to but only 22 fail if they do active learning according to our analysis,” Freeman says.

“There are hundreds of thousands of students taking STEM courses in U.S. colleges every year, so we’re talking about tens of thousands of students who could stay in STEM majors instead of flunking out — every year.”

This could go a long way toward meeting national calls like the one from the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology saying the U.S. needs a million more STEM majors in the future, Freeman says.

Attempts by college faculty to use active learning, long popular in K–12 classrooms, started taking off in the mid-1990s, Freeman says, though lecturing still dominates.

“We’ve got to stop killing student performance and interest in science by lecturing and instead help them think like scientists,” he says.

In introduction to biology courses, Freeman’s largest UW class had 700 students. He expects students to read their $200 textbooks and arrive in class knowing the material for the day. Quizzes on the assigned readings keep their feet to the fire.

“These students got into college by being ferocious memorizers so we don’t need to spend class time going over what they’ve already read,” Freeman says. “A reading assignment on how sperm and eggs form might then lead me to ask the class how male contraceptives might work. After giving them time to come up with their own ideas and rationale, I might give them a couple more minutes to discuss it with each other, and then I call on students randomly to start the discussion.”

Knowing they could get called on at any time encourages students to stay focused, he says.

Smith, of UMaine, agrees.

“Students are asked to come to my class with their ‘minds on,’” says Smith, who has incorporated active learning into her classes for eight years.

“My main teaching responsibility includes a general genetics course for undergraduates. My teaching philosophy is that students learn best when they actively engage in the classroom, their conceptions of the material are acknowledged and used as a starting point for instruction and they see the relevance of the material they are learning.”

Wenderoth, a UW principal lecturer and paper co-author, says having students use clickers — hand-held wireless devices — to answer multiple-choice questions in class is another example of how active learning keeps students engaged. “We characterize it as, ‘Ask, don’t tell,’” she says.

For the paper, researchers examined more than 640 studies comparing lecturing with some kind of active learning. The studies, conducted at four-year and community colleges mainly in the U.S., appeared in STEM education journals, databases, dissertations and conference proceedings.

Some 225 of those studies met the standards to be included in the analysis including: assurances the groups of students being compared were equally qualified and able; that instructors or groups of instructors were the same; and that exams given to measure performance were either exactly alike or used questions pulled from the same pool of questions each time.

The data were considered using meta-analysis, an approach long used in fields such as biomedicine to determine the effectiveness of a treatment based on studies with a variety of patient groups, providers and ways of administering the therapy or drugs.

The findings showed grade improvements on exams increased an average of 6 percent. Using grading typical in UW’s introductory biology, physics and chemistry courses, a gain of 6 percent would have raised students half a grade turning a C-plus into a B-minus, for example, or a B-plus into an A-minus.

If the failure rates of 34 percent for lecturing and 22 percent in classes with some active learning were applied to the 7 million U.S. undergraduates who say they want to pursue STEM majors, some 2.38 million students would fail lecture-style courses versus 1.54 million with active learning. That’s 840,000 additional students failing under lecturing, a difference of 55 percent compared to the failure rate of active learning.

“That 840,000 students is a large portion of the million additional STEM majors the president’s council called for,” Freeman says.

Community colleges and universities could help faculty incorporate effective active learning by providing guidance — UMaine, for instance, has the Faculty Incentive Grant Program and University Course Observation Program supported by the RiSE Center.

“My hope is that this article both inspires STEM instructors to use active learning strategies, and institutions to provide sustained professional development for faculty, postdocs and graduate students,” Smith says.