Promoting Active-Learning Instruction and Research (PALIR) in Kinesiology Departments

in Kinesiology Review
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD  $24.95

Student 1 year subscription

USD  $41.00

1 year subscription

USD  $54.00

Student 2 year subscription

USD  $77.00

2 year subscription

USD  $101.00

This article describes the implementation and evaluation of an initiative to promote active learning through facility renovation and faculty training. Twenty faculty representing a variety of academic areas from 2 departments participated in a 3-part active-learning professional development workshop series. Department of Health and Human Performance faculty (N = 14) teaching 19 courses and 416 of the students in the new active classroom were surveyed on their attitudes on the facilities, room design, professional development, and active-learning instruction. Consistent with previous active-learning research, there were subtle differences between student and faculty perceptions of the importance of renovation features, active-learning exercises, and philosophy of the learning process. The initiative was effective in helping predisposed faculty to implement active-learning experiences in their classes and engaging in more scholarship of teaching and learning, as well as enhancing the visibility of the department as a leader in active learning and the scholarship of teaching and learning at the university.

Knudson and Meaney are with the Dept. of Health and Human Performance, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX.

Knudson (dk19@txstate.edu) is corresponding author.
  • Baepler, P., Walker, J.D., Brooks, D.C., Saichaie, K., & Petersen, C.I. (2016). A guide to teaching in the active learning classroom. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Beichner, R.J., Saul, J.M., Abbott, D.S., Morse, J.J., Deardorff, D.L., Allain, R.J., . . . Risley, J.S. (2007). The Student-Centered Activities for Large Enrollment Programs (SCALE-UP) project. Research-Based Reform of University Physics. Retrieved from http://www.per-central.org/document/ServeFile.cfm?ID=4517 October 2, 2018.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Boyer, E.L. (1991). The scholarship of teaching from: Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. College Teaching, 39, 11–13. doi:10.1080/87567555.1991.10532213

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Brownell, S.E., & Tanner, K.D. (2012). Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: Lack of training, time, incentives and, tensions with professional identity? CBE—Life Sciences Education, 11, 339–346. PubMed ID: 30183571 doi:10.1187/cbe.12-09-0163

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cavanagh, M. (2011). Students’ experience of active engagement through cooperative learning activities in lectures. Active Learning in Higher Education, 12, 23–33. doi:10.1177/1469787410387724

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Coleman, L.A., Holcomb, D.F., & Rigden, J.S. (1998). The introductory university physics project 1987–1995: What has it accomplished? American Journal of Physics, 66, 124–137. doi:10.1119/1.18830

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cotner, S., Loper, J., Walker, J.D., & Brooks, D.C. (2013). “It’s not you, it’s the room”—Are the high-tech, active learning classrooms worth it? Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(6), 82–88. doi:10.2505/4/jcst13_042_06_82

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dancy, M., & Henderson, C. (2010). Pedagogical practices and instructional change of physics faculty. American Journal of Physics, 78, 1056–1063. doi:10.1119/1.3446763

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ebert-May, D., Derting, T.L., Hodder, J., Momsen, J.L., Long, T.M., & Jardeleza, S.E. (2011). What we say is not what we do: Effective evaluation of faculty development programs. BioScience, 61, 550–558. doi:10.1525/bio.2011.61.7.9

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M.P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 8410–8415. doi:10.1073/pnas.1319030111

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Garceau, L.R., Ebben, W.M., & Knudson, D. (2012). Teaching practices of the undergraduate introductory biomechanics faculty: A North American survey. Sports Biomechanics, 11, 542–558. PubMed ID: 23259243 doi:10.1080/14763141.2012.725764

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Haake, R.R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 64–74. doi:10.1119/1.18809

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hamill, J. (2007). Biomechanics curriculum: Its content and relevant to movement sciences. Quest, 59, 25–33. doi:10.1080/00336297.2007.10483533

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Henderson, C., & Dancy, M.H. (2009). Impact of physical education research on the teaching of introductory quantitative physics in the United States. Physical Review Special Topics—Physics Education Research, 5, 020107. PubMed ID: 30080952 doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.020107

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Henderson, C., Dancy, M.H., & Niewiadomska-Bugaj, M. (2012). Use of research-based instructional strategies in introductory physics: Where do faculty leave the innovation-decision process? Physical Review Special Topics—Physics Education Research, 8, 020104. PubMed ID: 30080952 doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.020104

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Huyn, J., Ediger, R., & Lee, D. (2017). Students’ satisfaction on their learning process in active learning and traditional classrooms. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 29, 108–118.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Joy, M., Foss, J., King, E., Sinclair, J., Sitthiworachart, J., & Davis, R. (2014). Incorporating technologies into a flexible teaching space. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45, 272–284. doi:10.1111/bjet.12040

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • King, E., Joy, M., Foss, J., & Sitthiworachart, J. (2015). Exploring the impact of a flexible, technology-enhanced teaching space on pedagogy. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52, 522–535. doi:10.1080/14703297.2014.896222

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Machemer, P.L., & Crawford, P. (2007). Student perceptions of active learning in a large cross-disciplinary classroom. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8, 9–30. doi:10.1177/1469787407074008

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McConnell, D.A., Chapman, L., Czajka, C.D., Jones, J.P., Ryker, K.D., & Wiggen, J. (2017). Instructional utility and learning efficacy of common active learning strategies. Journal of Geoscience Education, 65, 604–625. doi:10.5408/17-249.1

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McNeil, J., & Borg, M. (2018). Learning spaces and pedagogy: Towards the development of a shared understanding. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 55(2), 228–238. doi:10.1080/14703297.2017.1333917

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Michael, J. (2007). Faculty perceptions about barriers to active learning. College Teaching, 55(2), 42–47. doi:10.3200/CTCH.55.2.42-47

  • Miller, C.J., & Metz, M.J. (2014). A comparison of professional-level faculty and student perceptions of active learning: Its current use, effectiveness, and barriers. Advances in Physiology Education, 38, 246–252. PubMed ID: 25179615 doi:10.1152/advan.00014.2014

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, E.L., & Choi, B.K. (2014). Transformation of classroom spaces: Traditional versus active learning classroom in colleges. Higher Education, 68, 749–771. doi:10.1007/s10734-014-9742-0

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Patrick, L.E., Howell, L.A., & Wischusen, W. (2016). Perceptions of active learning between faculty and undergraduates: Differing views among departments. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 17(3), 55–63.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93, 223–231. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sawada, D., Piburn, M.D., Judson, E., Turley, J., Falconer, K., Benford, R., & Bloom, I. (2002). Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: The reformed teaching observation protocol. School Science and Mathematics, 102, 245–253. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2002.tb17883.x

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sawers, K.M., Wicks, D., Mvududu, N., Seeley, L., & Copeland, R. (2016). What drives student engagement: Is it the learning space, instructor behavior or teaching philosophy? Journal of Learning Spaces, 5(2), 26–38.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sirum, K.L., Madigan, D., & Kionsky, D.J. (2009). Enabling a culture of change—A life science faculty learning community promotes scientific teaching. Journal of College Science Teaching, 38(3), 38–44.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Smith, C.V., & Cardaciotto, L. (2011). Is active learning like broccoli? Student perceptions of active learning in large lecture classes. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11, 53–61.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Soneral, P.A.G. & Wyse, S.A. (2017). A SCALE-UP mock-up: Comparison of learning gains in high- and low-tech active-learning environments. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 16, 12. PubMed ID: 30183571 doi:10.1187/cbe.16-07-0228

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Welsh, A.J. (2012). Exploring undergraduates’ perceptions of the use of active learning techniques in science lectures. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42, 80–87.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • White, P.J., Larson, I., Styles, K., Yuriev, E., Evans, D.R., Short, J.L., . . . Eise, N. (2015). Using active learning strategies to shift student attitudes and behaviours about learning and teaching in a research intensive educational context. Pharmacy Education, 15, 162–172.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wilson, H.K., & Cotgrave, A. (2016). Factors that influence students’ satisfaction with their physical learning environments. Structural Survey, 34, 256–275. doi:10.1108/SS-01-2016-0004

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 37 37 1
Full Text Views 4 4 0
PDF Downloads 3 3 0