Implementation of Active Learning in BPM Education

Marzena Grzesiak

doi:10.7494/dmms.2024.si.6696

Authors

Marzena Grzesiak Faculty of Management and Economics, Gdańsk University of Technology, Gdańsk, Poland https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5217-1061

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7494/dmms.2024.si.6696

Keywords:

BPM education, active learning, improvement

Abstract

The challenges that are faced by BPM educators are not only related to the evolution of the BPM concept and technological trends but also to the changing expectations and attitudes of students as well as the requirements of the labor market. Active learning promotes the better memorization and understanding of even tricky issues. Active-learning methods are increasingly being implemented, and their effectiveness is being studied in numerous scientific studies. Many studies have confirmed that better learning outcomes are achieved through active learning. Implementing flipped learning in a previous academic year and supplementing it with other active methods in the following year allowed for course improvements; students showed more outstanding commitment and satisfaction with the classes. The introduction of changes to the Business Process Modeling and Process Management courses was dictated by, among other things, the desire to adapt to the postulates that have been developed in the BPM educator community regarding the scope of the knowledge and the skills that were transferred within the courses. The changes concerned both lectures (reviews and updates of content, abandonments of the form of administration) and the laboratory (changes of program, preparations for certification). The conclusions from the observations of the pilot implementation of the changes in the courses constituted the basis for refining the materials and methods in the next academic year.

References

Aupperlee, A. (2021). New research shows learning is more effective when active. Pittsburgh, PA, USA: Carnegie Mellon University. URL: https://www.cmu.edu/news/stories/archives/2021/october/active-learning.html [27.08.2024].

Bernstein D.A. (2018). Does active learning work? A good question, but not the right one. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 4(4), pp. 290–307. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000124.

Bonwell C.C. & Eison J.A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. 1991 ASHE-ERIC higher education reports. Washington, D.C., USA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, The George Washington University. URL: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED336049.

Bredow C.A., Roehling P.V., Knorp A.J. & Sweet A.M. (2021). To flip or not to flip? A meta-analysis of the efficacy of flipped learning in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 91(6), pp. 878–918. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211019122.

CITL (n.d.). Teaching Strategies. Bloomington. IN, USA: Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning, Indiana University Bloomington. URL: https://citl.indiana.edu/teaching-resources/teaching-strategies/index.html [20.12.2024].

CTE (n.d.). Tip Sheets: Blended Learning and Educational Technologies. Waterloo: Centre for Teaching Excellence, University of Waterloo. URL: https://uwaterloo.ca/centre-for-teaching-excellence/catalogs/tip-sheets/category/blended-learning-and-educational-technologies [20.12.2024].

CTI (n.d.). Active Learning. Ithaca, NY, USA: Center for Teaching Innovation, Cornell University. URL: https://teaching.cornell.edu/teaching-resources/active-collaborative-learning/active-learning [20.12.2024].

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), pp. 8410–8415. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111.

Grzesiak M. & Moszyński M. (2024). Application of the flipped learning methodology at a business process modelling course – A case study. In: C. Di Ciccio, W. Fdhila, S. Agostinelli, D. Amyot, H. Leopold, M. Krčál, M. Malinova Mandelburger, G. Polančič, K. Tomičić-Pupek, K. Gdowska, T. Grisold, P. Sliż, I. Beerepoot, R. Gabryelczyk & R. Plattfaut, Business Process Management: Blockchain, Robotic Process Automation, Central and Eastern European Educators and Industry Forum. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 527. Cham: Springer, pp. 303–312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-70445-1_19.

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 Science, 9(4), 276. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9040276.

Jensen J.L., Kummer T.A. & d. M. Godoy P.D. (2015). Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning. CBE Life Science Education, 14(1), 5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-08-0129.

Nguyen K.A., Borrego M., Finelli C.J., DeMonbrun M., Crockett C., Tharayil S., Shekhar P., Waters C. & Rosenberg R. (2021). Instructor strategies to aid implementation of active learning: a systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 8, 9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00270-7.

PDST (n.d.). Active Learning Methodologies. Professional Development Service for Teachers. URL: https://tiny.pl/0zp3krk8 [27.08.2024].

Prince M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), pp. 223–231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x.

Rosemann M. & vom Brocke J. (2014). The six core elements of business process management. In: J. vom Brocke & M. Rosemann (Eds.), Handbook on Business Process Management 1: Introduction, Methods, and Information Systems. Second Edition. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 105–122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45100-3_5.

SkillHub (n.d.). 15 Active Learning Strategies and Examples. Skill Hub. URL: https://www.skillshub.com/blog/active-learning-strategies-examples/ [20.12.2024].

Sliż P., Berniak-Woźny J., Brzychczy E., Gabryelczyk R., Gdowska K., Grzesiak M., Napieraj A., Podobińska-Staniec M., Potoczek N.R., Szelągowski M., Senkus P. & Kluza K. (2024). Business process management education in Poland: A manifesto for academic teaching. e-mentor, 2(104), pp. 91–98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15219/em104.1661.

Strelan P., Osborn A. & Palmer E. (2020). The flipped classroom: A meta-analysis of effects on student performance across disciplines and education levels. Educational Research Review, 30, 100314, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100314.

Talbert R. & Bergmann J. (2017). Flipped Learning: A Guide for Higher Education Faculty. New York, London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003444848.

Theobald E.J., Hill M.J., Tran E., Agrawal S., Arroyo E.N., Behling S., Chambwe N., Cintrón D.L., Cooper J.D., Dunster G., Grummer J.A., Hennessey K., Hsiao J., Iranon N., Jones L. II, Jordt H., Keller M., Lacey M.E., Littlefield C.E., Lowe A., Newman S., Okolo V., Olroyd S., Peecook B.R., Pickett S.B., Slager D.L., Caviedes-Solis I.W., Stanchak K.E., Sundaravardan V., Valdebenito C., Williams C.R., Zinsli K. & Freeman S. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(12), pp. 6476–6483. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117.