Survey evaluates student perceptions of active learning in ENGG 204 at the University of Calgary, highlighting varied experiences.
Active learning is an instructional method that involves students in activities such as discussions, problem-solving, and hands-on tasks, as opposed to traditional lectures where students passively receive information. Research consistently demonstrates that active learning fosters deeper understanding and long-term retention by encouraging students to engage directly with material rather than passively receiving information. These methods may be particularly effective in large, lecture-based courses where traditional methods can limit student interaction and engagement, but research has encountered difficulty in translating active learning methods to large-enrolment courses, such as those at University of Calgary’s engineering department. Despite these benefits, student perceptions of active learning at the University of Calgary (U of C) vary significantly. Some find the approach engaging and motivating, while others find it intimidating, uncomfortable, or challenging. Students’ perceptions of active learning are often influenced by their prior educational experiences and academic backgrounds. These perceptions significantly shape their willingness to engage with active learning strategies, which directly impacts the overall effectiveness of such instructional approaches in avhieving desired learning outcomes. ENGG 204 is a general first-year materials science course at U of C’s engineering department. It was first offered in the Fall of 2023. Since then, both the course and U of C’s first-year program have undergone significant changes. There is a need to understand how students perceive the effect of these changes on their education and to evaluate the overall effectiveness of them in improving learning. A survey has been conducted to evaluate students’ overall attitudes and satisfaction with active learning techniques in their ENGG 204 course. It was also designed to identify perceived
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mai et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: