Pedagogical Foundations of Active Learning: Rethinking Teaching Approaches for the Next Generation of Educators

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.66031/jinea.v2i3.701

Keywords:

Active Learning, Pedagogical Reorientation, Cognitive Engagement, Teacher Facilitation

Abstract

Active learning is widely promoted to enhance learner participation and meaningful learning, yet its conceptualization remains fragmented across instructional techniques, engagement processes, teacher roles, and emerging technological contexts. This conceptual article reconsiders active learning as a coherent pedagogical orientation and develops an integrative account of its pedagogical foundations for the next generation of educators. Drawing on a thematic synthesis of relevant literature, the article identifies interconnected dimensions comprising pedagogical purpose, meaningful learning activity, cognitive engagement, teacher facilitation, learner agency, feedback, relational conditions, and digital/AI environments. The synthesis positions cognitive engagement as a central mechanism through which purposeful activities contribute to meaningful learning, while teacher facilitation and learning conditions sustain this process. The resulting framework conceptualizes active learning as a dynamic, interdependent, and recursive pedagogical system, rather than a linear sequence or collection of techniques. Digital and AI technologies are positioned as contextual pedagogical affordances whose value depends on purposeful integration and critical use. The framework repositions teachers as pedagogical designers and facilitators who orchestrate learning conditions while sustaining learner agency. This conceptualization provides a coherent foundation for understanding active learning and preparing educators to design meaningful, learner-centered environments responsive to contemporary educational demands.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., Khosravi, H., Schunn, C. D., & Drachsler, H. (2026). Pedagogical framework for hybrid intelligent feedback. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 63(2), 554–570. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2025.2499174

Bamford, J., & Moschini, E. (2025). Co-creation of connected and relational learning spaces: A digital and gamified approach in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 44(1), 205–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2024.2429443

Bezanilla, M. J., Fernández-Nogueira, D., Poblete, M., & Galindo-Domínguez, H. (2019). Methodologies for teaching-learning critical thinking in higher education: The teacher’s view. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 33, 100584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100584

Bossi, K. M. L., & Schimiguel, J. (2020). Active methodologies in the teaching of mathematics: State of the art. Research, Society and Development, 9(4), e47942819. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v9i4.2819

Braun, B., Bremser, P., Duval, A., Lockwood, E., & White, D. (2017). What does active learning mean for mathematicians? Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 64(2), 124–129. https://doi.org/10.1090/noti1472

Børte, K., & Lillejord, S. (2024). Learning to teach: Aligning pedagogy and technology in a learning design tool. Teaching and Teacher Education, 148, 104693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104693

Børte, K., Nesje, K., & Lillejord, S. (2023). Barriers to student active learning in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 28(3), 597–615. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1839746

Børte, K., & Zeivots, S. (2026). Active learning in higher education: Inheriting pasts and emerging futures. Active Learning in Higher Education, 27(2), 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/14697874261426575

Broseghini, A., Lõoke, M., Brscic, M., Raffaghelli, J. E., Cardazzo, B., Lotti, A., & Marinelli, L. (2024). Exploring the effectiveness of problem-based learning in an international undergraduate program in veterinary sciences: Students’ satisfaction, experience and learning. Veterinary Sciences, 11(3), Article 104. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci11030104

Cahyono, A. N., & Ludwig, M. (2019). Teaching and learning mathematics around the city supported by the use of digital technology. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(1), Article em1658. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/99514

Chung-Pinzás, A. R., Inche-Mitma, J. L., & Cruz-Chuquizuta, C. (2024). Student perception of the application of active methodologies in a computer-aided design course. Revista Electrónica Educare, 28(2), 78-97. https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.28-2.18444

Costa, I. E. F., Oliveira, S. R. B., Elgrably, I. S., Guerra, A. D. S., Soares, E. M., & Costa, I. V. F. (2023). Using active methodologies for teaching and learning of exploratory test design and execution. Education Sciences, 13(2), Article 115. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020115

Dahlan, T., Judijanto, L., & Hali, F. (2024). Improving the quality of mathematics teacher education: An integrated approach to the 4C skills. JRAMathEdu (Journal of Research and Advances in Mathematics Education), 9(1), 16–31. https://doi.org/10.23917/jramathedu.v9i1.2687

Doolittle, P., Wojdak, K., & Walters, A. (2023). Defining active learning: A restricted systematic review. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 11, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.11.25

Fitrah, M., Sofroniou, A., Setiawan, C., Widihastuti, Yarmanetti, N., Jaya, M. P. S., Panuntun, J. G., Arfaton, A., Beteno, S., & Susianti, I. (2025). The impact of integrated project-based learning and flipped classroom on students’ computational thinking skills: Embedded mixed methods. Education Sciences, 15(4), Article 448. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15040448

Giannakos, M., Azevedo, R., Brusilovsky, P., Cukurova, M., Dimitriadis, Y., Hernandez-Leo, D., Järvelä, S., Mavrikis, M., & Rienties, B. (2025). The promise and challenges of generative AI in education. Behaviour & Information Technology, 44(11), 2518–2544. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2024.2394886

Gravett, K., & Lygo-Baker, S. (2025). Affective encounters in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 50(2), 228–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2332427

Gravett, K., Taylor, C. A., & Fairchild, N. (2024). Pedagogies of mattering: Re-conceptualising relational pedagogies in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 29(2), 388–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.1989580

Hall, R. (2024). Generative AI and re-weaving a pedagogical horizon of social possibility. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00445-6

Ilie, M. D., Petegem, P. V., Mladenovici, V., & Maricuțoiu, L. P. (2024). Dynamics of change of academics’ teaching approaches: A latent profile transition analysis. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 81, Article 101349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101349

Johnson, L. C. (2025). Rethinking teaching strategies in digital environments to foster critical thinking and innovation skills. Nusantara Education, 4(2), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.66325/nusantaraeducation.v4i2.251

Kaplan-Rakowski, R., Grotewold, K., Hartwick, P., & Papin, K. (2023). Generative AI and teachers’ perspectives on its implementation in education. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 34(2), 313-338. https://doi.org/10.70725/815246mfssgp

Kim, J., Lee, H., & Cho, Y. H. (2022). Learning design to support student–AI collaboration: Perspectives of leading teachers for AI in education. Education and Information Technologies, 27(5), 6069–6104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10831-6

Lee, D., Colorado-Resa, J. T., & Huh, Y. (2025). Designing an active learning space. TechTrends, 69(2), 310–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-025-01038-4

Lin, J. W., Zhao, S. L., Darmawan, P., & Fatqurhohman, F. (2025). Evaluation of Junior High School Students’ Representation Skills in Differentiated Learning. SMARTH: Journal of Mathematics Education and Learning, 1(2), 63-76. https://doi.org/10.66031/smarth.v1i2.169

Lohr, A., Sailer, M., Stadler, M., & Fischer, F. (2024). Digital learning in schools: Which skills do teachers need, and who should bring their own devices? Teaching and Teacher Education, 152, Article 104788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104788

Ludwig, M., & Jablonski, S. (2021). Step by step: Simplifying and mathematizing the real world with MathCityMap. Quadrante, 30, 242–268. https://doi.org/10.48489/quadrante.23604

Muhamed, H., Syuhada, I. N., Noor, R., & Fatqurhohman, F. (2026). Digital Distraction in University Students: A Critical Analysis for Higher Education Instructional Design. JINEA: Journal of Innovation in Education and Learning, 2(1), 41-54. https://doi.org/10.66031/jinea.v21i.162

Pahi, K., Hawlader, S., Hicks, E., Zaman, A., & Phan, V. (2024). Enhancing active learning through collaboration between human teachers and generative AI. Computers and Education Open, 6, Article 100183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100183

Patiño, A., Ramírez-Montoya, M. S., & Buenestado-Fernández, M. (2023). Active learning and education 4.0 for complex thinking training: Analysis of two case studies in open education. Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), Article 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00229-x

Saidi, S., Suryowati, E., Sholihah, U., & Fatqurhohman, F. (2025). Literature Review on the Role of School Principals in the Society 5.0: Strategies and Future Challenges. RESET: Review of Education, Science, and Technology, 1(1), 55-64. https://doi.org/10.66031/reset.v1i1.20

Sánchez-Rivas, E., Ramos-Núñez, M. F., Linde-Valenzuela, T., & Sánchez-Rodríguez, J. (2023). Percepción del alumnado universitario respecto al aprendizaje basado en proyectos con tecnología. Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 26(1), 71–84. https://doi.org/10.6018/reifop.543281

Sein-Echaluce, M. L., Fidalgo-Blanco, Á., Balbín, A. M., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2024). Flipped Learning 4.0: An extended flipped classroom model with Education 4.0 and organisational learning processes. Universal Access in the Information Society, 23(3), 1001–1013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-022-00945-0

Sidik, D. P., Irawijayanti, F., & Fatqurhohman, F. (2025). The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Enhancing Digital and Data Literacy among Secondary School Students: A Systematic Literature Review. JINEA: Journal of Innovation in Education and Learning, 1(3), 173-188. https://doi.org/10.66031/jinea.132025.38

Solera-Alfonso, A., Delfa-De-la-Morena, J. M., Marconnot, R., Mijarra-Murillo, J.-J., García-González, M., Romero-Parra, N., & Bores-García, D. (2025). University students’ perception of the application of a cooperative methodology in the initial training of physical education teachers: A qualitative study. Retos, 63, 306–316. https://doi.org/10.47197/retos.v63.108012

Udjaja, Y., Guizot, V. S., & Chandra, N. (2018). Gamification for elementary mathematics learning in Indonesia. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering, 8(5), 3860–3865. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijece.v8i5.pp3860-3865

Vale, I., & Barbosa, A. (2023). Active learning strategies for effective mathematics teaching and learning. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(3), 573–588. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/13135

Downloads

Published

10-10-2026

Data Availability Statement

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article. Additional datasets are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Johnson, L. D., & Ramos, M. (2026). Pedagogical Foundations of Active Learning: Rethinking Teaching Approaches for the Next Generation of Educators. JINEA: Journal of Innovation in Education and Learning, 2(3), 189-204. https://doi.org/10.66031/jinea.v2i3.701