THE IMPACT OF ACTIVE LEARNING STRATEGIES ON STUDENT PERFORMANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

Аннотация

This study investigates the influence of active learning strategies on student performance and engagement in higher education settings. Using a mixed-methods approach, the research examines outcomes across three university courses over one academic term. The results reveal that active learning methods significantly improve academic performance and increase student engagement, especially when combined with collaborative group activities. This article contributes to the growing body of literature that supports shifting from passive lectures tointeractive, student-centered learning environments. Keywords:Active learning, student engagement, academic performance, higher education, collaborativelearning, interactiveteaching strategies. Introduction. In recent years, educators have increasingly recognized the limitations of traditional lecture-based teaching and sought more engaging approaches to improve student outcomes. Active learning—which involves students in the learning process through discussions, problem-solving, case studies, and group work—has emerged as a powerful strategy for improvingboth performance and engagement (Freeman et al., 2014). Active learning is rooted in constructivist theories that emphasize the importance of interaction, feedback, and real-world application in knowledge acquisition. While many studies support its effectiveness, questions remain about how specific strategies impact learning outcomes in diverse classroom settings. This study aims to evaluate the impact of active learning strategies onstudentperformance and engagement inuniversity-level courses. Materials andMethod. Participants. The study involved 180 undergraduate students enrolled in three courses (Psychology, Biology, and Education) at [University Name]. Students were randomly divided intocontrol (traditional lecture-based) and experimental (activelearning) groups. Learning Strategies Used. The experimental group used the following active learning methods:  Think-Pair-Share page2482 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ISSN:2692-5206,ImpactFactor:12,23 AmericanAcademicpublishers,volume05,issue05,2025 Journal: https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai  Case-based learning  Peer instruction  Problem-solvingtasks  Real-time polling andquizzes (e.g., Kahoot, Mentimeter) Thecontrol group received standard lectures without interactivecomponents. Data Collection 1. AcademicPerformance: Measured using mid-term andfinal exam scores. 2. StudentEngagement: Assessed viaa validated questionnaire (Fredricks et al., 2004)on behavioral, emotional, and cognitiveengagement. 3. Qualitative Feedback: Collected through focus group discussions with students from bothgroups. Data Analysis. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS (v.26). Independent t-tests and ANOVA were used to compare academic performance. Engagement scores were compared usingMann-Whitney U-tests. Qualitativedatawere codedand thematically analyzed. Results andDiscussion AcademicPerformance. Studentsintheactive learning group scored significantly higher:  Midterm average:Experimental =78.3%, Control =71.5%(p <0.01)  Final examaverage: Experimental = 81.2%,Control= 74.0%(p < 0.01) The performance gain was most pronounced in Biology, possibly due to the effectiveness of hands-on, inquiry-based activities in that subject. EngagementScores  Behavioralengagementincreased by26%  Emotionalengagement increased by18%  Cognitiveengagementincreased by23% Students reported feeling more motivated and involved in their learning when active methodswere used. Qualitative Feedback. Students described active learning as “interactive,” “fun,” and “memorable.” Challenges included time constraints and unfamiliarity with group work at first. However, most studentsadapted quickly and preferred thisapproach bytheend of theterm. Discussion. The results strongly support prior research indicating that active learning enhances academic outcomes and engagement (Michael, 2006). The study also highlights that the type of active strategy matters—peer instruction and problem-based learning were particularly effective. Furthermore, instructor preparedness and classroom culture played a role page2483 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ISSN:2692-5206,ImpactFactor:12,23 AmericanAcademicpublishers,volume05,issue05,2025 Journal: https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai in student receptivity to active methods. Educators must receive training and support to implementthese strategies effectively. Conclusion. This study confirms that active learning strategies significantly improve both academic performance and student engagement in university settings. When properly implemented, these methods foster a deeper understanding of course content, encourage participation, andincrease motivation. Future research should explore long-term impacts, strategy customization based on student profiles, and applications in online learning environments. For