Content area
Academic institutions are increasingly adopting active learning methods to enhance educational outcomes. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we investigated neurobiological differences between active learning and traditional lecture-based approaches in university physics education. Undergraduate students enrolled in an introductory physics course underwent an fMRI session before and after a 15-week semester. Coactivation pattern (CAP) analysis was used to examine the temporal dynamics of brain states across different cognitive contexts, including physics conceptual reasoning, physics knowledge retrieval, and rest. CAP results identified seven distinct brain states, with contributions from frontoparietal, somatomotor, and visuospatial networks. Among active learning students, physics learning was associated with increased engagement of a somatomotor network, supporting an embodied cognition framework, while lecture-based students demonstrated stronger engagement of a visuospatial network, consistent with observational learning. These findings suggest significant neural restructuring over a semester of physics learning, with different instructional approaches preferentially modulating distinct patterns of brain dynamics.
Details
Grade Point Average;
Science Education;
Educational Research;
Creative Thinking;
School Demography;
Active Learning;
Learning Strategies;
Lecture Method;
Educational Methods;
Cognitive Processes;
Persistence;
Group Activities;
Age Differences;
Meta Analysis;
Instructional Materials;
Comprehension;
Family Income;
Brain;
Classrooms;
Course Content;
Networks;
Learner Engagement;
Physics;
Educational Strategies
Embodied cognition;
Students;
Neuroimaging;
Magnetic resonance imaging;
Collaboration;
Teaching methods;
Functional magnetic resonance imaging;
Observational learning;
Brain research;
Colleges & universities;
Medical imaging;
Cognition & reasoning;
Classrooms;
Active learning;
Physics;
Science education;
Educational materials;
Semantics
1 Department of Psychology, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA (ROR: https://ror.org/02gz6gg07) (GRID: grid.65456.34) (ISNI: 0000 0001 2110 1845)
2 Department of Physics, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA (ROR: https://ror.org/02gz6gg07) (GRID: grid.65456.34) (ISNI: 0000 0001 2110 1845)
3 Department of Population and Public Health Sciences, Keck School of Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA (ROR: https://ror.org/03taz7m60) (GRID: grid.42505.36) (ISNI: 0000 0001 2156 6853)
4 Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA (ROR: https://ror.org/046rm7j60) (GRID: grid.19006.3e) (ISNI: 0000 0000 9632 6718)
5 Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA (ROR: https://ror.org/046rm7j60) (GRID: grid.19006.3e) (ISNI: 0000 0000 9632 6718); Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA (ROR: https://ror.org/046rm7j60) (GRID: grid.19006.3e) (ISNI: 0000 0000 9632 6718)
6 Department of Medicine, Perlman Center of Advanced Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA (ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10) (GRID: grid.25879.31) (ISNI: 0000 0004 1936 8972)
7 Department of Physics, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA (ROR: https://ror.org/04bdffz58) (GRID: grid.166341.7) (ISNI: 0000 0001 2181 3113)