Case study: Scaling up active collaborative learning for student success

Does active, collaborative learning address barriers to student success?

While the benefits of active, collaborative learning are widely assumed, they have not been tested at an institutional scale.

Nottingham Trent University, with partners Anglia Ruskin University and the University of Bradford, increased active, collaborative learning at their universities and evaluated this as a strategy to address attainment disparities.

All three universities found common ground in their drive to develop approaches to teaching that respond to the needs of all learners.

However, to adopt active, collaborative learning at large scale a shift in approach was needed, from uptake by the ‘enthusiastic few’, to considered introduction in overall course design and implementation.

While active, collaborative learning has been shown to improve student success on a small scale, there was little evidence as to whether this approach could be scaled up across a provider.

The project’s challenge was to generate evidence of the benefits on a larger scale, which meant evaluation across disciplines, levels of study and providers.

Nottingham Trent University used the SCALE-UP (Student-Centred Active Learning Environments with Upside-Down Pedagogies) model.  

‘SCALE-UP is an active mode of learning which offers an alternative to traditional lectures. In a SCALE-UP class, rather than predominately listening to their lecturers, students learn through solving problems, sharing ideas, giving and receiving feedback, and teaching each other.’

Nottingham Trent University SCALE-UP Handbook

Anglia Ruskin University and University of Bradford used a team-based learning approach.

Team-based learning is ‘a special form of small group learning using a specific sequence of individual work, group work, and immediate feedback to create a motivational framework in which students increasingly hold each other accountable for coming to class prepared and contributing to discussion.’

Michael Sweet (2010) quoted in Sibley and Ostafichuk, 2014, p6 (see Anglia Ruskin University’s webpage on active collaborative learning).

Each provider had experience in using and evaluating the approaches that they chose for this project.

Initially the project focused on educational development, working with module and course leaders to adopt the approaches. In 2017-18:

• 50 per cent of full-time undergraduate courses at Nottingham Trent University had at least one SCALE-UP module, totalling 16,000 students.
• Over 2,700 students at Anglia Ruskin were involved in team-based learning across all five faculties.
• 950 students at the University of Bradford used active, collaborative learning across 26 modules.

Approach to evaluation

The second strand was extensive evaluation, using a mixed methods approach. Data was generated for student engagement, satisfaction, experience, progression, attainment and staff experience.

Quantitative data on outcomes was analysed by student group with a focus on ethnicity and widening participation status – the focus for the OfS programme. The project also looked at outcomes by age, disability, entry qualification, gender and UK/overseas residence.

Surveys, focus groups and interviews explored student and staff experiences.

Overall findings were that the use of active, collaborative learning approaches provides benefits for all students, reducing and in some cases, removing gaps in student progression, attainment, engagement and attendance.

These benefits were seen at each provider and were magnified in contexts in which:

• there was a greater extent of use within a module (Anglia Ruskin University)
• there was greater engagement with team-based learning as a pedagogic model and the benefits of active, collaborative learning were magnified (University of Bradford)
• where students studied three SCALE-UP modules in an academic year for progression, attendance and engagement, or three SCALE-UP modules over a degree for overall attainment (Nottingham Trent University).

Results by provider

Nottingham Trent University

When looking at ethnicity, for those taking three or more SCALE-UP modules:

• the progression gap reduced from 12.9 percentage points to 1.2 percentage points
• the course-level attainment gap reduced from 15.7 percentage points to 1.7 percentage points.

When looking at widening participation status groups, for those taking three or more SCALE-UP modules:

• the progression gap was eliminated from 9.6 percentage points to -1.2 percentage points
• the course-level attainment gap for this group reduced from 10.5 percentage points to 6.5 percentage points.

Anglia Ruskin University

For ethnicity, the attainment gap reduced from 36 percentage points to 21 percentage points.

University of Bradford

When looking at ethnicity:

• the progression gap reduced from 5 percentage points in non-team-based learning modules to -1.3 percentage points in team-based learning modules
• the attainment gap reduced from 3.4 percentage points to -1.1 percentage points.

For widening participation status groups:

• the progression gap reduced from 1.3 percentage points in non-team-based learning modules to 0.6 percentage points in team-based learning modules
• the attainment gap reduced from 2.6 percentage points to -1.3 percentage points.

All the partners are committed to the continued use of active, collaborative learning and intend to grow the approaches to teaching.

The evaluation will inform further development of active learning spaces, will feed into a new curriculum framework (at Anglia Ruskin University) and will be built into criteria for approval for new courses (at Nottingham Trent University).

Further investigation will be undertaken on how the approaches support improved outcomes; for example, the gap that was most resistant to influence across all partners was gender.

Key messages from this case study are:

1. The use of active, collaborative learning approaches does address barriers in student outcomes.
2. Adoption of active, collaborative learning at a provider takes time to mature but benefits can be seen during the first year.
3. Introducing inclusive teaching approaches addresses structural disadvantage and complements other approaches, such as additional student support.
4. Large scale pedagogic change does not simply emerge from practice sharing; professional expertise, in the form of specialised educational development, is needed.
5. Active, collaborative learning is more successful where it is adopted strategically on a course. This requires purposeful team working.
6. Student satisfaction with active collaborative approaches to learning must be considered, particularly when introducing approaches at a larger scale.