Effect of time spent on active learning on exam performance: A controlled case study on a course with different instructors but identical teaching materials

Active learning, including student thinking and discussion in class, has been shown to increase student learning gains. However, it is less clear how variations in how instructors implement active learning affect student gains. Our study aims to investigate the extent to which the time spent on individual active learning activities influences student performance. We hypothesized that instructors who let students spend more time on individual thinking and peer discussion on practice problems associated with particular learning objectives will have better student exam scores on exam questions addressing those objectives. To test this hypothesis, we obtained a large data set of classroom recordings and student exam scores from an introductory biology course at a large four-year university, where three instructors shared identical teaching materials and exams for different course offerings. Contrary to our hypothesis, although the three instructors spent significantly different amounts of time on episodes of thinking and peer discussion, there was no correlation between the total time spent on active learning activities and student performance on exam questions. Linear mixed-effects modeling of the effect of length of episodes of student thinking and discussion on exam score found that the amount of course time spent on active learning activities did not reliably predict student performance on associated exam questions. This result held true even when only considering learning objectives with high variations in performance between offerings, difficult exam questions, or within-instructor performance. Although our study was only conducted in one course, our results imply that time spent per individual episode of student thinking or peer discussion may not be the primary factor explaining the positive effects of active learning and that it may be worthwhile to explore other factors. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.