Interactions Between Student Attitudes, Affect and Outcomes During a Transition to an Active Learning Format in Introductory Physiology

Active learning has been shown in many studies to promote student success, and to narrow the achievement gap for students from underserved groups. Although effective, implementing active learning strategies, particularly in the context of large‐scale changes in course delivery, may be associated with negative outcomes. Resistance to/difficulty with active learning, and perceived uncertainty/unfairness in pedagogies may influence success, and may impact student success differentially across demographic groups. The present study is part of an on‐going attempt to explore the interactions between these affective and cognitive components of learning and success outcomes in the context of a curriculum transition. We present data from 4 academic term offerings of a very high enrollment introductory physiology course, offered in both traditional didactic lecture and hybrid online flipped classroom formats, at a large university with a majority of students from groups historically underserved in STEM (racial/ethnic minority, low‐income, first generation.) We have examined student attitudes toward the course, engagement, and self‐efficacy in science, and have begun a preliminary analysis of performance, retention and failure rates within and across demographic groups. In terms 1 and 3, concurrent lecture and hybrid online/flipped sections of the course were offered, but only hybrid was offered in terms 2 and 4. Hybrid students viewed recordings before lecture, and completed a series of activities for each weekly unit of the course. These included a pre‐class low‐level Bloom's quiz and a metacognitive exercise, in‐class clicker questions and group activities, and a post‐class writing assignment. These activities made up 10% of the final grade, and exams contributed 90%. In term 1, activities were not available for lecture students and grades were based on exams alone. In term 3, lecture students completed the activities (modified slightly for course format) for 10% of the grade. In Term 1, hybrid students were dissatisfied with the course compared to their lecture peers, and expressed frustration with unequal work loads, but recognized the benefit of the hybrid format. Hybrid format improved exam scores for low‐performing students. In Term 2, hybrid students were satisfied with the course. In term 3, lecture students had less satisfaction and poorer exam performance than hybrid students. Extra‐class communication between sections may have lead to these “grass is greener” responses. Inclusion of the activities increased engagement in both formats, however, and completing them was associated with self‐efficacy gains. Student self‐efficacy in writing and communicating science increased with assignment completion in both formats. Responses to the metacognitive activities and evaluations have provided unexpected insights into the challenges and strategies students use to learn physiology, and the associations between course format, equivalence and success. We have used these responses to adjust our teaching strategies to best meet student needs, but further analysis is needed to uncover any interactions or mechanisms that might allow us to maximize the success of underrepresented groups of students in particular.