Author
Listed:
- Fan Xiao
(College of Educational Sciences, Harbin Normal University, Harbin 150025, China
These authors contributed equally to this work.)
- Chenglong Wang
(College of Educational Sciences, Harbin Normal University, Harbin 150025, China
College of Educational Sciences, Harbin University, Harbin 150086, China
These authors contributed equally to this work.)
- Jun Jiang
(College of Educational Sciences, Harbin Normal University, Harbin 150025, China)
Abstract
Active learning has increasingly been adopted as an evidence-aligned approach to improving learning quality in university physics—a domain characterized by high conceptual abstraction, persistent misconceptions, and substantial variability in student performance. Evidence from physics education research indicates that active-learning designs can outperform lecture-dominant instruction in conceptual learning and student engagement; however, reported effects vary substantially across instructional settings and implementation models. Here, empirical studies and review-level syntheses are integrated to delineate (i) the instructional components that most reliably underpin successful active learning, (ii) the mechanisms through which these components influence learning processes and outcomes, and (iii) the boundary conditions that moderate effectiveness across higher-education contexts. The synthesis is further situated within sustainability-oriented higher education by linking physics active-learning designs to competence development relevant to quality education, climate literacy, and collaborative problem solving. Evidence spanning flipped classroom implementations, peer instruction, collaborative problem solving, inquiry- and project-based approaches, and technology-enhanced formats is organized into a component–mechanism–outcome framework structured along cognitive, affective, and behavioral pathways. Two deliverables are advanced: an integrative mechanism model connecting instructional components to mediating processes, learning outcomes, and sustainability-aligned competencies, and an operational toolbox that translates the evidence into actionable design heuristics, measurement options, and scaling considerations. By redirecting attention from “which strategy works” to “which components work, how, and under what conditions,” the review aims to support instructors, departments, and institutions seeking scalable, evidence-aligned active learning in university physics.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:6:p:2791-:d:1891945. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.