Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33630945›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

What really impacts the use of active learning in undergraduate STEM education? Results from a national survey of chemistry, mathematics, and physics instructors.

Naneh Apkarian, Charles Henderson, Marilyne Stains, Jeffrey Raker, Estrella Johnson, Melissa Dancy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Student perceptions of inclusive pedagogy in undergraduate STEM classrooms.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Cultivating Enduring Changes in Assessment Through a Life Sciences Community of Practice.Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Naneh ApkarianSchool of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States of America.
Charles HendersonMallinson Institute for Science Education, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0334-6739
Marilyne StainsDepartment of Chemistry, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States of America.
Jeffrey RakerDepartment of Chemistry, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3715-6095
Estrella JohnsonDepartment of Mathematics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, United States of America.
Melissa DancyCenter for STEM Learning, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Six common beliefs about the usage of active learning in introductory STEM courses are investigated using survey data from 3769 instructors. Three beliefs focus on contextual factors: class size, classroom setup, and teaching evaluations; three focus on individual factors: security of employment, research activity, and prior exposure. The analysis indicates that instructors in all situations can and do employ active learning in their courses. However, with the exception of security of employment, trends in the data are consistent with beliefs about the impact of these factors on usage of active learning. We discuss implications of these results for institutional and departmental policies to facilitate the use of active learning.

Indexed as

Educational PersonnelUniversitiesEngineeringHumansMathematicsPhysicsProblem-Based LearningStudentsSurveys and QuestionnairesTechnologyUnited States

Identifiers

PMID33630945
PMCPMC7906388

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.