ACTIVE LEARNING VERSUS PASSIVE LEARNING: CAN BOTH WORK TOGETHER? FOR US, THEY CAN!

Authors

  • Carolina M. Cremasco Barão de Mauá University Center, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil
  • Letícia B. Lima Barão de Mauá University Center, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil
  • Samyr M. B. Martins Barão de Mauá University Center, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil
  • Violeta N. G. Duarte Barão de Mauá University Center, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil
  • Luís H. Montrezor University Center of Araraquara- UNIARA, Araraquara, SP, Brazil

Keywords:

active learning, educational game, active methodology, physiology

Abstract

The use of theoretical classes that contextualize physiological concepts, followed by active methodologies has been common practice in our physiology classes.We employed active learning techniques in the medical course that involved physiology contents. We use brainstorming followed by conceptual maps, question-and-answer games, dramas, memory games, puzzle and portfolio creation.The goal of this assignment was to evaluate the active and passive methodologies in our educational context and to present a memory game – as active methodology - to explain the mechanisms of the electrical and chemical synapses.The game consisted of 2 boards and 40 foam pieces. The boards: one meant for electrical synapses and the other for chemical synapses, were divided into two columns to be fitted by the pieces: characteristics and the order of synaptic physiological events. The players were divided into two (n = 10) groups, one (n = 5) for each type of synapse. One player from each team chose two pieces simultaneously andthey were placed on the corresponding board.This procedure was repeated until one of the groups had filled the board with all the pieces related to the physiological characteristics of the synapses and to the sequences of synaptic events.At the end of the activity, it was concluded that learning the synaptic mechanisms through a playful process was more pleasant and fun compared to theoretical classes only and when strategically applied, active learning and passive learning are useful for teaching and for the learning process of medical school students.

References

I. Angelo, T.A., Cross, K.P. (1993).Classroom Assessment Techniques: a Handbook for College Teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

II. Armbruster, P., Patel, M., Johnson, E., Weiss, M. (2009).Active learning and student-centered pedagogy improve student attitudes and performance in introductory biology. CBE Life Sci Educ 8:203-213.

III. Ausable, D.P. (1963).The Psychology of Meaningful Verbal Learning. New York: Grune and Stratton.

IV. Barkley, E., Cross, P., Major, C.H. (2005).Collaborative Learning Techniques. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

V. Barr, R.B., Tagg, J. (1995).From teaching to learning - a new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change 27:13-25.

VI. Blumberg, P., Michael, J. (1992).The development of self-directed learning behaviors in a partially teacher-centred problem-based learning curriculum. Teach Learn Med 4:3-8.

VII. Borges, S., Mello-Carpes, P.B. (2014).Physiology applied to everyday: the practice of professional contextualization of physiology concepts as a way of facilitating learning. Advan Physiol Educ38: 93-95.

VIII. Bowen, C.W. (2000). A quantitative literature review of cooperative learning effects on high school and college chemistry achievement. J Chem Educa 77:116-119.

IX. Cole, C.R. (1985). Differences between conventional and problem-based curricula in their students’ approaches to studying. Med Educ 19:308-309.

X. Dolmans, D., Schmidt, H. (1996).The advantages of problem-based curricula. Postgrad Med J 72:535-538.

XI. Elliot, M.(1999). Are we going in the right direction? A survey of the under-graduate medical education in Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom from a general practice perspective. Med Teach21:53-60.

XII. Gurpinar, E., Kulac, E., Tetik, C., Akdogan, I., Mamakli, M.(2013). Do learning approaches of medical students affect their satisfaction with problem-based learning? Advan Physiol Educ 37:85-88.

XIII. Hansen, P.A. (2002).Physiology’s recondite curriculum.Advan Physiol Educ26:139-145.

XIV. Knight, J.K., Wood, W.B. (2005). Teaching more by lecturing less. Cell Biol Educ4:298-310.

XV. Lin, Y.H., Liang, J.C., Tsai, C.C.(2012). Effects of different forms of physiology instruction on the development of students’ conceptions of and approaches to science learning. Advan Physiol Educ36:42-47.

XVI. Lord, T.R.(2001). 101 reasons for using cooperative learning in biology teaching. Am Biol Teach63:30-38.

XVII. Marcondes, F.K., Moura, M.J.C.S., Sanches, A., Costa, R., Lima, P.O., Groppo, F.C., Amaral, M.E.C., Zeni, P., Gavião, K.C. and Montrezor, L.H. (2015). A puzzle user to teach a cardiac cycle. Advan Physiol Educ 39:27-31.

XVIII. McNaughton, S., Barrow, M., Bagg, W., Frielick, S. (2016). Capturing the integration of practice-based learning with beliefs, values, and attitudes using modified concept mapping. J Med Educ Curr Develop 3:17-24.

XIX. Michael, J. (2006).Where’s the evidence that active learning works? Adv Physiol Edu 30:159-167.

XX. Michael, J.A. (2004). Mental models and meaningful learning. J Vet Med Educ 31:1-5.

XXI. Michael, J.A.(2001). In pursuit of meaningful learning. Advan Physiol Educ25:145-158.

XXII. Michael, J.A., Modell, H.I. (2003).Active Learning in Secondary and College Science Classrooms: a Working Model of Helping the Learning to Learn.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

XXIII. Montrezor, L.H., Brancaglião, L.F.C., Gonçalves, V.M., Lemos, J.E.S., Rocha, N.F., Marcondes, F.K. (2016). Portfolio as an active learning methodology for the study of endocrine system. Inter Educ& Res J 2(1):42-46.

XXIV. Montrezor, L.H.(2014). The synaptic challenge. Advan Physiol Educ 38:187-190.

XXV. Myers, C., Jones, T. (1993).Promoting Active Learning in Secondary and College Science Classrooms. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

XXVI. Pedersen, S., Liu, M. (2003).Teachers’ beliefs about issues in the implementation of a student-centered learning environment. Educ Technol Res Dev51:57-76.

XXVII. Richardson, D.(2008). Don’t dump the didactic lecture; fix it. Adv Physiol Edu32:23-24.

XXVIII. Smith, K.A., Sheppard, S.D., Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T. (2005).Pedagogies of engagement: classroom-based practices. J Eng Educ94:87-101.

XXIX. SPO/MEC.(2001).Rev Bras Est Pedag 82:117-136.[Portuguese].

Additional Files

Published

15-03-2016

How to Cite

Carolina M. Cremasco, Letícia B. Lima, Samyr M. B. Martins, Violeta N. G. Duarte, & Luís H. Montrezor. (2016). ACTIVE LEARNING VERSUS PASSIVE LEARNING: CAN BOTH WORK TOGETHER? FOR US, THEY CAN!. International Education and Research Journal (IERJ), 2(3). Retrieved from http://ierj.in/journal/index.php/ierj/article/view/179