Perceptions of Active Learning among Faculty in Student-centered Universities

Abstract

Higher education institutions face challenges integrating active learning (AL) as mandated by the Bologna Process. This requires engaging classroom experiences and support for student success in publications and projects. This study explored the perceptions of academics from engineering and arts and sciences faculties at one public and one private university in Türkiye. It examined their understanding of AL, whether they viewed it as deep AL, its necessity in higher education, and barriers to its implementation. Using a qualitative design with open-ended surveys, responses were analyzed thematically. Findings show most academics associate AL with instructor-led in-class activities, indicating a limited grasp of deep active learning. While they support broader AL adoption, they cited obstacles such as large class sizes, poor infrastructure, unequal resources, limited in-service training, and weak institutional commitment, which hinder effective AL practices despite institutional intentions.

Keywords

• Active Learning
• Deep Learning
• Faculty Perceptions
• Higher Education Pedagogy
• Institutional Barriers

References

1. Auster, E. R., & Wylie, K. K. (2006). Creating Active Learning in the Classroom: A Systematic Approach. Journal of Management Education, 30(2), 333-353. doi:10.1177/1052562905283346
2. Batchelor, D. (2008). Have students got a voice? In R. Barnett & R. Di Napoli (Eds.), Changing identities in higher education: Voicing perspectives (pp.40–54). Routledge: London & New York.
3. Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, Washington DC: School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University.
4. Cattaneo, H. (2017). Telling Active Learning pedagogies apart: from theory to practice. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 6 (2), 144-152.
5. CTL TED University (2023). Implementing Active Learning Strategies in Large Classes.
6. Deveci, T. & Nunn, R. (2018). COMM151: A project-based course to enhance engineering students’ communication skills. Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes, 6(1). 10.22190/JTESAP1801027D.
7. Eddy, S. L., Converse, M., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2017). PORTAAL: A Classroom Observation Tool Assessing Evidence-Based Teaching Practices for Active Learning in Large Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Classes. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-06-0095
8. Erol, M., & Özcan, A. (2016). Exemplary technology incorporated contemporary active learning environments for stem courses. The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational & Social Sciences, 4, 530–537.

9. European Education Area. (2023). Why is the Bologna Process important? Retrieved from https://education.ec.europa.eu/education-levels/higher-education/inclusive-and-connected-higher-education/bologna-process
10. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Wenderoth, M. P., et al. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), 111(23), 8410-8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
11. Graham, C., & Longchamps, P. (2022). Transformative Education: A Showcase of Sustainable and Integrative Active Learning. Routledge.
12. Halonen J. S., Brown-Anderson F., McKeachie W. J. (2002). Teaching thinking. In McKeachie W. J. (Ed.), McKeachie's teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (11th ed., pp. 284–290). Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
13. Hernandez-de-Menendez, M., & Morales-Menendez, R. (2019). Technological innovations and practices in engineering education: a review. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 13, 713-728.
14. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15. Matsushita, K. (Ed.). (2018). Deep Active Learning Toward Greater Depth in University Education. Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-10-5660-4_1
16. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
17. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
18. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd Edition. Sage Publications.
19. Mizokami, S. (2018). Deep Active Learning from the Perspective of Active Learning Theory. In K. Matsushita (Ed.), Deep Active Learning. Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
20. Park, E. L., & Choi, B. K. (2014). Transformation of classroom spaces: traditional versus active learning classroom in colleges. Higher Education, 68, 749–771. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9742-0
21. Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22. PERUSALL. (2023). Increase student engagement. www.perusall.com
23. Phillipson, A., Riel, A., & Leger, A. B. (2018). Between Knowing and Learning: New Instructors’ Experiences in Active Learning Classrooms. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2018.1.4
24. Ragus, E. N. (2020). Active Learning Engagement Classrooms at the University of Central Missouri: Practical Strategies to Implement and Sustain Utilization of Active Learning in Higher Education Using Technology. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri.
25. Sukackė, V., Guerra, AOPdC., Ellinger, D., Carlos, V., Petronienė, S., Gaižiūnienė, L., Blanch, S., Marbà-Tallada, A., Brose, A. (2022). Towards Active Evidence-Based Learning in Engineering Education: A Systematic Literature Review of PBL, PjBL, and CBL. Sustainability, 14(21):13955. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142113955
26. Times Higher Education. (2023). World University Rankings. Retrieved from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2023/world-ranking
27. Trends EUA. (2010). A decade of change in European Higher Education. Retrieved from https://eua.eu/downloads/publications/trends%202010%20a%20decade%20of%20change%20in%20european%20higher%20education.pdf
28. Trends EUA (2015). Learning and Teaching in European Universities. Retrieved from https://eua.eu/downloads/publications/trends%202015%20learning%20and%20teaching%20in%20european%20universities.pdf
29. Trends EUA (2018). Learning and teaching in the European Higher Education Area. Retrieved from https://eua.eu/downloads/publications/trends-2018-learning-and-teaching-in-the-european-higher-education-area.pdf
30. Vivian, R., Falkner, K., Falkner, N., & Tarmazdi, H. (2016). A method to analyze computer science students’ teamwork in online collaborative learning environments. ACM Trans. Comput. Educ. 16, 1–28.