Don't Believe the Gripe! Increasing Course Structure in a Large Non-majors Neuroscience Course

Active teaching is increasingly accepted as a better option for higher education STEM courses than traditional lecture-based instruction. However, concerns remain regarding student preferences and the impact of increased course structure on teaching evaluations. Undergraduates in a non-majors neuropharmacology course were enrolled in an enriched blended course format, providing online case-based learning opportunities in a large lecture hall setting. Students working in small assigned groups solved weekly case studies developed to teach basic neuropharmacology concepts. All case study assignments were peer reviewed and content was further reinforced with a weekly online quiz. A comparison of scores on equivalent midterm and final exam questions revealed that students enrolled in the High-Structure course scored better than students from the previous year that took a more traditional Low-Structure lecture-based course. Student performance increased significantly for exam questions that required Bloom's level understanding. When surveyed, students in the High-Structure course reported some regret for the lack of traditional lecture and revealed some disapproval towards the extra work required for active teaching and peer review. Yet, we saw no change in quantitative instructor evaluation between sections, challenging the idea that student resistance towards increased work lowers course evaluation scores. Future instructors using active learning strategies may benefit from revealing to students the value of increased course structure on performance outcomes compared with traditional lecture courses.