Active Learning and the Graduate Classroom: How Gender and International Student Status Affect Preferences and Experiences

Abstract

This article uses new survey data to examine student preferences and experiences with active learning among a graduate student cohort across two key identity markers: international student status and gender. Our survey of students enrolled in a Master of International Relations program suggests that most view active learning favorably and believe it improves learning outcomes. We find that, contrary to conventional wisdom, international students prefer active learning to traditional lectures at the same levels as domestic students. Our findings also indicate that women prefer active learning as much as, and in some cases more than, men. We discuss potential reasons for these preferences and experiences and conclude with suggested avenues for future research.

Keywords:

• Active learning
• graduate students
• gender
• international students

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 For more on gender bias in IR course design see Colgan (2017). For data on percentage of international student enrolments by country see OECD (2020). For example, in 2018, international students comprised 53% of master’s program enrolments in Australia (OECD 2020, 233).

2 This survey was carried out under approval from Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee, Project ID 16804. Note: students are enrolled in a taught-master’s program with a mixture of lecture and seminar-style delivery formats, which can be distinct from PhD coursework that often consists entirely of small seminars.

3 In practice, active learning in Monash University’s master’s program include activities such as think-pair-shares, debates, and simulations, rather than more individual actions such as responding to an on-screen survey.

4 In Australia, the classification “international student” refers to students who do not qualify as domestic students (Australian or New Zealand citizen, Australian permanent resident, or Australian permanent humanitarian visa holder). For gender categories, students were given the option of “other” but no students opted for this selection. Note: the gender composition of domestic (F, 60.8%t; M, 39.2%) and international students (F, 56.1%; M, 43.9%) was similar to the survey sample as a whole (F, 58.7%; M, 41.3%).

5 For each of these questions, independent samples t-tests (two-tailed) showed no statistically significant differences between domestic and international students.

6 Independent samples t-tests (two-tailed) indicated a statistically significant difference between men and women at the .01 level for active learning being preferred for learning class material, and at the .05 level for active learning being preferred for applying class material.

7 While the differences between male and female students did not meet the threshold for statistical significance for these questions, in each case, the direction of the relationship did indicate greater preference for active learning among women.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Steven T. Zech

Steven T. Zech is a Lecturer (Assistant Professor) in the Department of Politics and International Relations at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia where he serves as Deputy Director of the Master of International Relations program. He teaches graduate courses on contemporary security topics and political violence issues. His research focuses on how communities respond to political violence and terrorism at the local level and he has conducted extensive fieldwork on self-defense forces in Peru, as well as militias in the Philippines and the United States. His work has appeared in journals such as International Studies Review, Journal of European Public Policy, Terrorism and Political Violence, Defence and Peace Economics, Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, Defense & Security Analysis, and the Journal of Terrorism Research. He is coauthor of the book Recovering Civility during COVID-19 (Palgrave Macmillan, 2021). He received his Ph.D. from the University of Washington.

Maria Rost Rublee

Maria Rost Rublee is an Associate Professor of International Relations at Monash University, Chair of the International Security Studies Taskforce on Diversity, and President of Women in International Security–Australia. She is an international relations scholar whose work interrogates the social construction of national security, including nuclear politics, maritime security, and diversity in security studies. Her current projects include survey experiments and nuclear politics, lived experiences of security studies scholars, and how university pedagogy socializes students about what “national security” means. Dr. Rublee’s work has been supported by the Australian Department of Defence, the Canadian Department of National Defence, the United States Institute of Peace, the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Japan Foundation, among others. Her work has been published in a variety of international journals, including Security Studies, Survival, European Journal of Public Policy, Contemporary Security Policy, International Studies Review, and Comparative Political Studies. Dr. Rublee’s book, Nonproliferation Norms: Why States Choose Nuclear Restraint, received the Alexander George Book Award for best book in political psychology, awarded by the International Society for Political Psychology. She is past Chair of the International Security Studies Section of ISA, an editorial board member of International Affairs, Contemporary Security Policy and the Nonproliferation Review, and a former editor of International Studies Perspectives. She received her Ph.D. from George Washington University.

Aleksandar Deejay

Aleksandar Deejay is a Research Fellow at the Australian National University School of Regulation and Global Governance (RegNet). His research interests include the discourses and governing practices surrounding emerging technologies and infrastructures; in particular, the constructed mundanities, invisibilities, and ignorance around technological artifacts, infrastructures, platforms, and futures that impact vulnerable groups. He has taught courses in international relations, governance, and social theory. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Melbourne.

William M. Flanik

William M. Flanik is a Senior Lecturer and Program Director of the MA of International Relations in the Department of Politics and International Relations at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia. His scholarly interests include foreign policy decision-making, cognitive linguistic approaches to discourse analysis, and the scholarship of learning and teaching. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Toronto.