Active learning in higher engineering education: a decalogue for the design of post-lecture online quizzes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.45498Keywords:
active learning, learning strategy, online quiz, post-lecture test, engineering, Bipolar LadderingAbstract
Quizzes are a valuable addition to the ever-growing toolkit of active learning strategies in higher education. In distance learning contexts, quizzes are frequently used to assess students’ level of knowledge, to encourage their participation and to support knowledge retention or academic performance. Despite a wealth of studies about quizzes in general, and pre-lecture quizzes in particular, there is relatively little empirical work examining post-lecture online quizzes. This paper discusses Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Engineering students’ experiences with weekly post-lecture online quizzes in a management subject. Participants took a single attempt, automatically graded, quiz on Moodle Learning Management System (LMS) after each subject unit. Once the learning experience was completed, qualitative research was carried out through a Bipolar Laddering (BLA) tool, designed to extract positive and negative perceptions of the students on the implemented online quiz model. Overall, our analysis shows that students view post-lecture online quizzes as a valuable active learning strategy, especially useful as a practice for high-stakes exams. Regular low-stakes quizzing was perceived to foster ongoing engagement with the subject material, to support continuous review and self-directed learning. Building on the student-reported insights, the researchers formulated ten design considerations that may inform the development of effective post-lecture online quizzes, which can be easily implemented in both remote and face-to-face learning contexts.
Downloads
References
Allsop, J., Young, S. J., Nelson, E. J., Piatt, J., & Knapp, D. (2020). Examining the benefits associated with implementing an active learning classroom among undergraduate students. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 32(3), 418-426.
Andrews, M. E., Graham, M., Prince, M., Borrego, M., Finelli, C. J., & Husman, J. (2020). Student resistance to active learning: Do instructors (mostly) get it wrong? Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 25(2), 142-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952.2020.1861771
Arthurs, L. A., & Kreager, B. Z. (2017). An integrative review of in-class activities that enable active learning in college science classroom settings. International Journal of Science Education, 39(15), 2073-2091. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1363925
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom (1991 ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports). ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, The George Washington University. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED336049
Brink, A. G. (2013). The impact of pre- and post-lecture quizzes on performance in intermediate accounting II. Issues in Accounting Education, 28(3), 461-485. https://doi.org/10.2308/iace-50445
Cook, B. R., & Babon, A. (2017). Active learning through online quizzes: Better learning and less (busy) work. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 41(1), 1–-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2016.1185772
Dengri, C., Gill, A., Chopra, J., Dengri, C., Koritala, T., Khedr, A., Korsapati, A. R., Adhikari, R., Jain, S., Zec, S., Chand, M., Kashyap, R., Pattan, V., Khan, S. A., & Jain, N. K. (2021). A review of the quiz, as a new dimension in medical education. Cureus, 13(10), e18854. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.18854
Dicheva, D., Dichev, C., Agre, G., & Angelova, G. (2015). Gamification in education: A systematic mapping study. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(3), 75-88.
Doolittle, P., Wojdak, K., & Walters, A. (2023). Defining active learning: A restricted systematic review. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 11, Article 25. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.11.25
Driessen, E. P., Knight, J. K., Smith, M. K., & Ballen, C. J. (2020). Demystifying the meaning of active learning in postsecondary biology education. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 19(4), ar52. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-04-0068
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4-58. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612453266
Evans, T., Kensington-Miller, B., & Novak, J. (2021). Effectiveness, efficiency, engagement: Mapping the impact of pre-lecture quizzes on educational exchange. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.6258
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410-8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Gillmor, S., Poggio, J., & Embretson, S. (2015). Effects of reducing the cognitive load of mathematics test items on student performance. Numeracy, 8(1), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.5038/1936-4660.8.1.4
Gosavi, C. S., & Arora, S. (2022). Active learning strategies for engaging students in higher education. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 36(S1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2022/v36is1/22167
Gowele, J. E. (2024). The impact of quizzes on improving mathematics performance among higher education students. The Journal of Informatics, 4(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.59645/tji.v4i1.397
Gyllen, J. G., Stahovich, T. F., Mayer, R. E., Entezari, N., & Darvishzadeh, A. (2021). Priming productive study strategies with preparatory quizzes in an engineering course. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 35(1), 169-180. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3750
Hartikainen, S., Rintala, H., Pylväs, L., & Nokelainen, P. (2019). The concept of active learning and the measurement of learning outcomes: A review of research in engineering higher education. Education Sciences, 9(4), Article 276. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9040276
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Heil, J., & Ifenthaler, D. (2023). Online assessment in higher education: A systematic review. Online Learning, 27(1), 187-218. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v27i1.3398
Hennink, M., & Kaiser, B. N. (2022). Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests. Social Science & Medicine, 292, 114523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523
Horna-Saldaña, C., & Canaleta, X. (2024). Application of universal design for learning and digital fabrication in the creation of a tool for inclusive teaching of the ordering of chemical elements. Journal of Chemical Education, 101(12), 5261-5271. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00679
Howell, R. A. (2021). Engaging students in education for sustainable development: The benefits of active learning, reflective practices and flipped classroom pedagogies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 325, 129318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129318
Kirzner, R. S., Alter, T., & Hughes, C. A. (2021). Online quiz as exit ticket: Using technology to reinforce learning in face-to-face classes. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 41(2), 151-171. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2021.1898521
Klein, K., Calabrese, J., Aguiar, A., Mathew, S., Ajani, K., Almajid, R., & Aarons, J. (2023). Evaluating active lecture and traditional lecture in higher education. Journal on Empowering Teaching Excellence, 7(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.26077/ba42-a5cc
Kozanitis, A., & Nenciovici, L. (2023). Effect of active learning versus traditional lecturing on the learning achievement of college students in humanities and social sciences: A meta-analysis. Higher Education, 86(6), 1377-1394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00977-8
López-Tocón, I. (2021). Moodle quizzes as a continuous assessment in higher education: An exploratory approach in physical chemistry. Education Sciences, 11(9), Article 500. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11090500
Majuri, J., Koivisto, J., & Hamari, J. (2018). Gamification of education and learning: A review of empirical literature. In Proceedings of the 2nd International GamiFIN Conference (pp. 11-19). CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2186.
Mitchell, A., Petter, S., & Harris, A. (2017). Learning by doing: Twenty successful active learning exercises for information systems courses. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 16, 21-46. https://doi.org/10.28945/3643
Nuci, K. P., Tahir, R., Wang, A. I., & Imran, A. S. (2021). Game-based digital quiz as a tool for improving students’ engagement and learning in online lectures. IEEE Access, 9, 91220-91234. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3088583
Owens, D. C., Sadler, T. D., Barlow, A. T., & Smith-Walters, C. (2020). Student motivation from and resistance to active learning rooted in essential science practices. Research in Science Education, 50(1), 253-277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9688-1
Petchamé, J., Iriondo, I., Korres, O., & Paños-Castro, J. (2023). Digital transformation in higher education: A qualitative evaluative study of a hybrid virtual format using a smart classroom system. Heliyon, 9(6), e16675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16675
Petchamé, J., Iriondo, I., Torné, O., & Solanellas, F. (2024). Student perceptions of project-based learning when studying information systems in an ICT engineering program: Taking advantage of active learning. Education Sciences, 14(11), Article 1148. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14111148
Petchamé, J., Iriondo, I., Villegas, E., Fonseca, D., Romero Yesa, S., & Aláez, M. (2021). A qualitative approach to help adjust the design of management subjects in ICT engineering undergraduate programs through user experience in a smart classroom context. Sensors, 21(14), 4762. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21144762
Pifarré, M., & Tomico, O. (2007). Bipolar laddering (BLA): A participatory subjective exploration method on user experience. In Proceedings of the 2007 Conference on Designing for User eXperiences (pp. 2-13). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1389908.1389911
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
Raes, A., Vanneste, P., Pieters, M., Windey, I., Van Den Noortgate, W., & Depaepe, F. (2020). Learning and instruction in the hybrid virtual classroom: An investigation of students’ engagement and the effect of quizzes. Computers & Education, 143, 103682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103682
Roediger, H. L., III, & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249-255. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x
Ross, B., Chase, A.-M., Robbie, D., Oates, G., & Absalom, Y. (2018). Adaptive quizzes to increase motivation, engagement and learning outcomes in a first year accounting unit. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), Article 30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0113-2
Rossi, I. V., de Lima, J. D., Sabatke, B., Nunes, M. A. F., Ramirez, G. E., & Ramirez, M. I. (2021). Active learning tools improve the learning outcomes, scientific attitude, and critical thinking in higher education: Experiences in an online course during the COVID-19 pandemic. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 49(6), 888-903. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21574
Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795
Stoyanova, S., & Giannouli, V. (2022). Online testing as a means of enhancing students’ academic motivation during the coronavirus pandemic. Education Sciences, 13(1), Article 25. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13010025
Tharayil, S., Borrego, M., Prince, M., Nguyen, K. A., Shekhar, P., Finelli, C. J., & Waters, C. (2018). Strategies to mitigate student resistance to active learning. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0102-y
Tofade, T., Elsner, J., & Haines, S. T. (2013). Best practice strategies for effective use of questions as a teaching tool. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(7), Article 155. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe777155
Vaismoradi, M., & Snelgrove, S. (2019). Theme in qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 20(3), Article 23. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-20.3.3376
Veletsianos, G., Kimmons, R., Larsen, R., & Rogers, J. (2021). Temporal flexibility, gender, and online learning completion. Distance Education, 42(1), 22-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1869523
Villalonga Pons, J., Besalú, M., Samà Camí, A., & Sancho-Vinuesa, T. (2023). Estrategias de aprendizaje de estudiantes de ingeniería en línea. RIED-Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 26(2), 237-256. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.26.2.36257
Yang, C., Luo, L., Vadillo, M. A., Yu, R., & Shanks, D. R. (2021). Testing (quizzing) boosts classroom learning: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 147(4), 399-435. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000309
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dubravka Novkovic, Ricardo Torres Kompen, Josep Petchamé
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The articles that are published in this journal are subject to the following terms:
1. The authors grant the exploitation rights of the work accepted for publication to RIED, guarantee to the journal the right to be the first publication of research understaken and permit the journal to distribute the work published under the license indicated in point 2.
2. The articles are published in the electronic edition of the journal under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. You can copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, adapt, remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
3. Conditions for self-archiving. Authors are encouraged to disseminate electronically the OnlineFirst version (assessed version and accepted for publication) of its articles before publication, always with reference to its publication by RIED, favoring its circulation and dissemination earlier and with this a possible increase in its citation and reach among the academic community.
