Student views on active learning in the geoscience curriculum
Kordts, R. ; Daae, K. ; de Vareilles, M. ; Gandrud, E. ; Årvik, A.D. and Glessmer, M.S. LU
(2025)
In Nordic journal of STEM education
9(3).
p.19-36
- Abstract
- Active learning is increasingly implemented in higher education, yet students' perspectives on this pedagogical approach remain diverse. This study explores geoscience students' views on active learning within a course at the University of Bergen (UiB) and in relation to their broader study program. Through longitudinal qualitative interviews with two student cohorts, we identified seven main categories related to active learning with few subcategories each: student views on specific active-learning approaches, on instructor characteristics, on assessment systems and exams, on feedback for learning, on prerequisites for active learning, and on active learning vs. other approaches. Four central conclusions were drawn. First, student views... (More)
- Active learning is increasingly implemented in higher education, yet students' perspectives on this pedagogical approach remain diverse. This study explores geoscience students' views on active learning within a course at the University of Bergen (UiB) and in relation to their broader study program. Through longitudinal qualitative interviews with two student cohorts, we identified seven main categories related to active learning with few subcategories each: student views on specific active-learning approaches, on instructor characteristics, on assessment systems and exams, on feedback for learning, on prerequisites for active learning, and on active learning vs. other approaches. Four central conclusions were drawn. First, student views on active learning varied significantly, ranging from highly supportive to critical, expressing a diversity of views on active learning. Second, students distinguished between their opinions on active learning in theory and its practical execution, often expressing appreciation for its benefits despite challenges in adapting to new learning strategies. Third, students struggled with balancing autonomy and structured guidance, as active learning frequently disrupted their established study habits. Fourth, time played a crucial role in shaping student attitudes—initial frustration with active learning often gave way to long-term recognition of its effectiveness in fostering deeper learning. These findings suggest that successful implementation of active learning requires addressing student expectations, providing structured support, and considering the broader curricular context. The study highlights the need for longitudinal assessments of student perspectives to fully capture the evolving nature of their experiences with active learning. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/4e0226f3-17cf-4638-96f8-5b4f6083fcbc
- author
- Kordts, R.
; Daae, K.
; de Vareilles, M.
; Gandrud, E.
; Årvik, A.D.
and Glessmer, M.S.
LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2025
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Nordic journal of STEM education
- volume
- 9
- issue
- 3
- pages
- 19 - 36
- ISSN
- 2535-4574
- DOI
- 10.5324/njsteme.v9i3.6361
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 4e0226f3-17cf-4638-96f8-5b4f6083fcbc
- date added to LUP
- 2025-09-27 10:02:16
- date last changed
- 2025-09-29 11:58:36
@article{4e0226f3-17cf-4638-96f8-5b4f6083fcbc,
abstract = {{Active learning is increasingly implemented in higher education, yet students' perspectives on this pedagogical approach remain diverse. This study explores geoscience students' views on active learning within a course at the University of Bergen (UiB) and in relation to their broader study program. Through longitudinal qualitative interviews with two student cohorts, we identified seven main categories related to active learning with few subcategories each: student views on specific active-learning approaches, on instructor characteristics, on assessment systems and exams, on feedback for learning, on prerequisites for active learning, and on active learning vs. other approaches. Four central conclusions were drawn. First, student views on active learning varied significantly, ranging from highly supportive to critical, expressing a diversity of views on active learning. Second, students distinguished between their opinions on active learning in theory and its practical execution, often expressing appreciation for its benefits despite challenges in adapting to new learning strategies. Third, students struggled with balancing autonomy and structured guidance, as active learning frequently disrupted their established study habits. Fourth, time played a crucial role in shaping student attitudes—initial frustration with active learning often gave way to long-term recognition of its effectiveness in fostering deeper learning. These findings suggest that successful implementation of active learning requires addressing student expectations, providing structured support, and considering the broader curricular context. The study highlights the need for longitudinal assessments of student perspectives to fully capture the evolving nature of their experiences with active learning.}},
author = {{Kordts, R. and Daae, K. and de Vareilles, M. and Gandrud, E. and Årvik, A.D. and Glessmer, M.S.}},
issn = {{2535-4574}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{3}},
pages = {{19--36}},
series = {{Nordic journal of STEM education}},
title = {{Student views on active learning in the geoscience curriculum}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.5324/njsteme.v9i3.6361}},
doi = {{10.5324/njsteme.v9i3.6361}},
volume = {{9}},
year = {{2025}},
}