Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The goal of this study was to investigate which common instructional methods (active vs. direct) best promote higher level thinking in a psychology course. Over a 5-week period, 71 undergraduates were taught psychology using both active learning and direct instruction. Pre- and post-course assessments were coded as either higher or lower level questions based on Krathwohl’s updated Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Results indicated an interaction effect where higher level thinking was significantly higher in active learning than in direct instruction. In contrast, lower level thinking was not influenced by instructional method. Based on these results, if psychology professors are interested in promoting higher level learning, active learning instruction may be a valuable tool.

Keywords

active learning higher level thinking direct instruction

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Biggs

J. B.

(1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

Butler

Phillmann

K. B.

Smart

(2001). Active learning within a lecture: Assessing the impact of short, in-class writing exercises. Teaching of Psychology, 28(4):257–259.

Dalai

N. P.

(1994). Higher order thinking in MIS. The Journal of Computer Information Systems, 34(4):26–30.

Dunn

(2008). Another view: In defense of vigor over rigor in classroom demonstrations. Teaching of Psychology, 34(4):349–352. doi:10.1080/00986280802374039.

Halonen

J. S.

(2005). The path of less trouble. In Benson

T. A.

Burke

Amstadter

Sidey

Hevern

Beins

Buskit

(Eds.), The teaching of psychology in autobiography: Perspectives from exemplary psychology teachers (pp. 127–134). Retrieved from http://teachpsych.org/resources/e-books/tia2005/tia2005.php

Helman

Horswill

M. S.

(2002). Does the introduction of non-traditional teaching techniques improve psychology undergraduates' performance in statistics?. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 2(1):12–16.

Hwang

Levin

(2002). Examination of middle-school students' independent use of a complex mnemonic system. Journal of Experimental Education, 7(1):25–38.

Krathwohl

D. R.

(2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4):212–218.

Lea

S. J.

Stephenson

Troy

(2003). Higher education students' attitudes to student-centered learning: Beyond “educational bulimia”? Studies in Higher Education, 28(3):321–334.

10.

O'Neill

McMahon

(2005). Student-centred learning: What does it mean for students and lecturers? In Neill

B. O

Moore

McMullin

(Eds)., Emerging issues in the practice of university learning and teaching (pp. 27–36). Dublin: All Ireland Society for Higher Education.

11.

Ormrod

J. E.

(2006). Educational psychology: Developing learners (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall.

12.

Poirier

C. A.

Feldman

R. S.

(2007). Promoting active learning using individual response technology in large introductory psychology classes. Teaching of Psychology, 34(4):194–196.

13.

Shell

W. L.

Kleen

B. A.

(1992). Innovative pedagogies for outcomes based teaching in the core MIS course. The Journal of Computer Information Systems, 33(2):3–7.

14.

Warren

C. S.

(2006). Incorporating multiculturalism into undergraduate psychology courses: Three simple active learning activities. Teaching of Psychology, 33(2):105–109.

15.

Yoder

Hochevar

(2005). Encouraging active learning can improve students' performance on examinations. Teaching of Psychology, 32(2):91–95.

Promoting Higher Level Thinking in Psychology

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References