There is, I think, something ethereal about i —the square root of minus one. I remember first hearing about it at school. It seemed an odd beast at that time—an intruder hovering on the edge of reality.

Usually familiarity dulls this sense of the bizarre, but in the case of i it was the reverse: over the years the sense of its surreal nature intensified. It seemed that it was impossible to write mathematics that described the real world in …

I and i

Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques

creased by 0.47 SDs under active learning (n = 158 studies), and that the odds ratio for failing was 1.95 under traditional lecturing (n = 67 studies). These results indicate that average examination scores improved by about 6% in active learning sections, and that students in classes with traditional lecturing were 1.5 times more likely to fail than were students in classes with active learning. Heterogeneity analyses indicated that both results hold across the STEM disciplines, that active learning increases scores on concept inventories more than on course examinations, and that active learning appears effective across all class sizes—although the greatest effects are in small (n ≤ 50) classes. Trim and fill analyses and fail-safe n calculations suggest that the results are not due to publication bias. The results also appear robust to variation in the methodological rigor of the included studies, based on the quality of controls over student quality and instructor identity. This is the largest and most comprehensive metaanalysis of undergraduate STEM education published to date. The results raise questions about the continued use of traditional lecturing as a control in research studies, and support active learning as the preferred, empirically validated teaching practice in regular classrooms.

/pdf/active-learning-increases-student-performance-in-science-3j0c6wu4k5.pdf

Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics

This study examines the evidence for the effectiveness of active learning. It defines the common forms of active learning most relevant for engineering faculty and critically examines the core element of each method. It is found that there is broad but uneven support for the core elements of active, collaborative, cooperative and problem-based learning.

/pdf/does-active-learning-work-a-review-of-the-research-2erhef7d09.pdf

Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research

When Linda Silverman and I wrote this paper in 1987, our goal was to offer some insights about teaching and learning based on Dr. Silverman’s expertise in educational psychology and my experience in engineering education that would be helpful to some of my fellow engineering professors. When the paper was published early in 1988, the response was astonishing. Almost immediately, reprint requests flooded in from all over the world. The paper started to be cited in the engineering education literature, then in the general science education literature; it was the first article cited in the premier issue of ERIC’s National Teaching and Learning Forum; and it was the most frequently cited paper in articles published in the Journal of Engineering Education over a 10-year period. A self-scoring web-based instrument called the Index of Learning Styles that assesses preferences on four scales of the learning style model developed in the paper currently gets about 100,000 hits a year and has been translated into half a dozen languages that I know about and probably more that I don’t, even though it has not yet been validated. The 1988 paper is still cited more than any other paper I have written, including more recent papers on learning styles.

/pdf/learning-and-teaching-styles-in-engineering-education-50zideuju9.pdf

Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education.

Traditional engineering instruction is deductive, beginning with theories and progressing to the applications of those theories Alternative teaching approaches are more inductive Topics are introduced by presenting specific observations, case studies or problems, and theories are taught or the students are helped to discover them only after the need to know them has been established This study reviews several of the most commonly used inductive teaching methods, including inquiry learning, problem-based learning, project-based learning, case-based teaching, discovery learning, and just-in-time teaching The paper defines each method, highlights commonalities and specific differences, and reviews research on the effectiveness of the methods While the strength of the evidence varies from one method to another, inductive methods are consistently found to be at least equal to, and in general more effective than, traditional deductive methods for achieving a broad range of learning outcomes

Inductive Teaching and Learning Methods: Definitions, Comparisons, and Research Bases

Students have different levels of motivation, different attitudes about teaching and learning, and different responses to specific classroom environments and instructional practices. The more thoroughly instructors understand the differences, the better chance they have of meeting the diverse learning needs of all of their students. Three categories of diversity that have been shown to have important implications for teaching and learning are differences in students' learning styles (characteristic ways of taking in and processing information), approaches to learning (surface, deep, and strategic), and intellectual development levels (attitudes about the nature of knowledge and how it should be acquired and evaluated). This article reviews models that have been developed for each of these categories, outlines their pedagogical implications, and suggests areas for further study.

Understanding Student Differences

Traditional engineering instruction is deductive, beginning with theories and progressing to the applications of those theories. Alternative teaching approaches are more inductive. Topics are introduced by presenting specific observations, case studies or problems, and theories are taught or the students are helped to discover them only after the need to know them has been established. This study reviews several of the most commonly used inductive teaching methods, including inquiry learning, problem-based learning, project-based learning, case-based teaching, discovery learning, and just-in-time teaching. The paper defines each method, highlights commonalities and specific differences, and reviews research on the effectiveness of the methods. While the strength of the evidence varies from one method to another, inductive methods are consistently found to be at least equal to, and in general more effective than, traditional deductive methods for achieving a broad range of learning outcomes.

/pdf/inductive-teaching-and-learning-methods-definitions-2uogfsc1fh.pdf

RICHARD M. FELDER and JONI SPURLIN North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695±7905, USA. E-mail: rmfelder@mindspring.com The Index of Learning Styles (ILS) is an instrument designed to assess preferences on the four dimensions of the Felder-Silverman learning style model. The Web-based version of the ILS is taken hundreds of thousands of times per year and has been used in a number of published studies, some of which include data reflecting on the reliability and validity of the instrument. This paper seeks to provide the first comprehensive examination of the ILS, including answers to several questions: (1) What are the dimensions and underlying assumptions of the model upon which the ILS is based? (2) How should the ILS be used and what misuses should be avoided? (3) What research studies have been conducted using the ILS and what conclusions regarding its reliability and validity may be inferred from the data?

/pdf/applications-reliability-and-validity-of-the-index-of-2q752g10xi.pdf

Richard M. Felder

Papers

Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education.

Inductive Teaching and Learning Methods: Definitions, Comparisons, and Research Bases

Understanding Student Differences

Inductive Teaching and Learning Methods: Definitions, Comparisons, and Research Bases

Applications, Reliability and Validity of the Index of Learning Styles*