DOCUMENT RESUME ED 336 049 HE 024 886 AUTHOR Bonwell, Charles C.; Eison, James A. TITLE Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. 1991 ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports. INSTITUTION Association for the Study of Higher Education.; ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, Washington, D.C.; George Washington Univ., Washington, DC, School of Education and Human Development. SPONS AGENCY Office of Educational Research and Improvement(ED), Washington, DC. REPORT NO ISBN-1-878380-06-7; ISSN-0884-0040 PUB DATE 91 CONTRACT RI88062014 NOTE 121p. AVAILABLE FROM ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, TheGeorge Washington University, One Dupont Circle, Suite 630, Washington, DC 20036-1183 ($17.00). PUB TYPE Information Analyses - ERIC Clearinghouse Produc s (071) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC05 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS College Faculty; Cooperative Learning; Debate; *Discussion (Teaching Technique); Dramatic Play; *Experiential Learning; Faculty Development; Higher Education; *Instructional Effectiveness; Large Group Instruction; *Lecture Method; Peer Teaching; Role Playing; *Teaching Methods; Visual Learning IDENTIFIERS *Arstive Learning ABSTRACT This monograph examines the nature of activelearning at the higher education level, the empiricalresearch on its use, the common obstacles and barriers thatgive rise to faculty resistance, and how faculty and staff can implementactive learning techniaues. A preliminary section defines active learning andlooks at the current climate surrounding the concept. A secondsection, entitled "The Modified Lecture" offers ways that teachers canincorporate active learning into their most frequently used format:the lecture. The following section on classroom discussion explains theconditions and techniques needed for the most useful type of exchange.Other ways to promote active learning are also describedincluding: visual learning, writing in class, problem solving,computer-based instruction, cooperative learning, debates, drama,role playing, simulations, games, and peer teaching. A section onobstacles to implementJmg active learning techniquesleads naturally to the final section, "Conclusions and Recommendations,"which outlines the roles that each group within the university canplay in order to encourage the implementation of active learningstrategies. The text includes over 200 references and anindex. (JB) ********************X************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are thebest that can be made from the original document, *********************************************************************** A U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of L ducational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) %This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it C Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality _ Points ot view or opinions stated in this doco merit do not necessarily represent otlic OERI position or policy BEST COPY AVAILABLE Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom by Charles C Bonwell and James A. Eison ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report Nr 1,1991 Prepared by Clearinghouse on Higher Education ERIC The George Washington UniversiO) In cooperation with Association for the Study ASI-1* of Higher Education Published by The School of Education and Human Development egiftonThe George Washington University nye Ay WASHINGTON DC Jonathan D. Fife, Series Editor Cite as Bonwell, Charles C., and JamesA. Eison. 1991. ActiveLearn- ing; Creating Excitementin the Classroom.ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1.Washington, D.C.: The George Washington University, Schoolof Education and Human Development. Library of CongressCatalog Card Number91-65608 ISSN 0884-0040 ISBN 1-878380-08-7 Managing Editor: BryanHollister Manuscript Editor: BarbaraFishel, Editech Cover design by MichaelDavid Brown, Rockville,Maryland The ERIC Clearinghouse onHigher Education invitesindi- viduals to submit proposalsfor writing monographsfor the ASHE-ERIC Higher EducationReport series. Proposals must include: five pages. 1. A detailed manuscriptproposal of not more than 2. A chapter-by-chapteroutline. commit- 3. A 75-word summary tobe used by several review tees for theinitial screening and ratingof each proposal. 4. A vita and a writingsample. *RIO Clearinghouse on HigherEducation School of Educationand Human Development The George WashingtonUniversity One Dupont Circle, Suite630 Washington, DC 20036-1183 This publication wasprepared partially withfunding from the Office of EducationalResearch and Improvement,U.S. Department of Education,under contract no. EDRI-88-062014. The opinions expressedin this report do notnecessarily reflect the positions orpolicies of OERI or theDepartment. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Throughout the 1980s, numerous leaders in the field of higher education (Cross 1987) and a series of national reports (Study Group 1984) repeatedly urged college and universityfaculty to actively involve and engagestudents in the process of learn- ing. Despite the urgency of these calls, research consistently has shown that traditional lecture methods, in which pro- fessors talk and students listen, dominate ;:ollege and uni- versity classrooms. It is therefore rtiportant to know the nature of active learning, the empirical research onits use, the common obstacles and barriers that give rise to faculty members' resistance to interactive instructional techniques, and how faculty, faculty developers, administrators, andedu- cational researchers can make real the promise of active learning. What Is Active Learning and Why Is It Important? Surprisingly, educators' use of the term "active learning" has relied more on intuitive understanding than a common defi- nition. Consequently, many faculty assert that all learning is inherently active and that students are therefore actively involved while listening to formal presentations in the cla,s- room. Analysis of the researchliterature (Chickering and Cam- son 1987), however, suggeststhat s udents must do more than just listen: They must read, write, discuss, or be engaged in solving problems. Most important, to be activelyinvolved, students mast engage in such higher-order thinking tasks as analysis, synthesis, andevaluation. Within this context, it is proposed that strategies promoting activelearning be de- fined as instructional activities involving students in doing things and thinking about what they are doing. Use of these techniques in the classroom is vitalbecause of their powerful impact upon students' learning. For exam- ple, several studies have shown that students prefer strategies promoting active learning to traditional lectures. Other re search studies evaluating students' achievement have dem- onstrated that many strategies promoting active learning are comparable to lectures in promoting the mastery of content but superior to lectures in promoting the development of students' skills in thinking and writing. Further, some cog- nitive research has shown that a significant numberof indi- viduals have learning styles best served by pedagogical tech- niques other than lecturing. Therefore, a thoughtful and scholarly approach to skillffil teaching requires that faculty Active Learning become knowledgeable about the many ways strategies pro- moting active learning have been successfully used across the disdplines. Further, each faculty member should engage in self-reflection, exploring his or her personalwillingness to experiment with alternativeapproaches to instruction. How Can Active Learning Be Incorporated In the Clamroom? The modification of traditional lectures (Penner 1984) is one way to incorporate activelearning in the classroom. Research has demonstrated, for example, that if afaculty memb-r allows students to consolidate their notes by pausing three times for two minutes each during a lecture,studers will learn significantly more information (Ruhl, Hughes, and Schloss 1987). IWO other simple yet effective ways to involve students during a lecture are to insert briefdemonstrations or short, ungradedwriting exercises followed by class dis- cussion. Certain alternatives to the lectureformat further increase students' level of engagement: (1) thefeedback lec- ture, which consists of twominilectures separated by a small- group study sessionbuilt around a study guide, and (2) the guided lecture, in which students listen to a 20- to 30-minute presentation without -king notes, followed bytheir writing for five minutes svfKle/ remember and spending the re- mainder of the class riod in small groups clarifying and elaborating ,,ae maten, . These approaches to modifying traditional lectures give rise to a common question: "Is the large class aspecial case?" Although a commonly shared perception among faculty is that large classes preclude significant participationby stu- dents, the literature suggests otherwise (Frederick1986). For example, a faculty member in a class of any size can instruct students to write a brief response to a question, to pairwith a partner seated onthe left or right, and then to compare and contrast both responses. Discussion in class is one of the most commonstrategies promoting active learningwith good reason.If the objectives of a course are to promote long-term retentionof information, to motivate students towardfurther learning, to allow students to apply information in newsettings, or to develop students' thinking skills, then discussion is preferable tolecture (McKeachie et al. 1986). Research has suggested,hcwever, that to achieve