Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38820334›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Beyond active learning: Using 3-Dimensional learning to create scientifically authentic, student-centered classrooms.

Melanie M Cooper, Marcos D Caballero, Justin H Carmel, Erin M Duffy, Diane Ebert-May, Cori L Fata-Hartley, Deborah G Herrington, James T Laverty, Paul C Nelson, Lynmarie A Posey and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Exam reform: an opportunity for the redistribution of academic power.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2024
    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

15 authors.

Melanie M CooperDepartment of Chemistry, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7050-8649
Marcos D CaballeroDepartment of Physics & Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0717-4583
Justin H CarmelDepartment of Chemistry & Biochemistry and STEM Transformation Institute, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9281-3751
Erin M DuffyScience Department, Solebury School, New Hope, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Diane Ebert-MayDepartment of Plant Biology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.
Cori L Fata-HartleyHuman Biology Program, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.
Deborah G HerringtonDepartment of Chemistry, Grand Valley State University, Allendale, Michigan, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6682-8466
James T LavertyDepartment of Physics, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas, United States of America.
Paul C NelsonHuman Biology Program, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9341-4170
Lynmarie A PoseyDepartment of Chemistry, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7713-0637
Jon R StoltzfusDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9502-1557
Ryan L StoweDepartment of Chemistry, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5548-495X
Ryan D SweederLyman Briggs College, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5488-4927
Stuart TessmerDepartment of Physics & Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.
Sonia M UnderwoodDepartment of Chemistry & Biochemistry and STEM Transformation Institute, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4919-2758

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, much of the emphasis for transformation of introductory STEM courses has focused on "active learning", and while this approach has been shown to produce more equitable outcomes for students, the construct of "active learning" is somewhat ill-defined and is often used as a "catch-all" that can encompass a wide range of pedagogical techniques. Here we present an alternative approach for how to think about the transformation of STEM courses that focuses instead on what students should know and what they can do with that knowledge. This approach, known as three-dimensional learning (3DL), emerged from the National Academy's "A Framework for K-12 Science Education", which describes a vision for science education that centers the role of constructing productive causal accounts for phenomena. Over the past 10 years, we have collected data from introductory biology, chemistry, and physics courses to assess the impact of such a transformation on higher education courses. Here we report on an analysis of video data of class sessions that allows us to characterize these sessions as active, 3D, neither, or both 3D and active. We find that 3D classes are likely to also involve student engagement (i.e. be active), but the reverse is not necessarily true. That is, focusing on transformations involving 3DL also tends to increase student engagement, whereas focusing solely on student engagement might result in courses where students are engaged in activities that do not involve meaningful engagement with core ideas of the discipline.

Indexed as

Problem-Based LearningStudentsCurriculumHumansLearningScience

Identifiers

PMID38820334
PMCPMC11142574

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.