**3. Technique development and process**

The students must represent O.D. consultant roles [43], in practical presentation examples, which can be real or created, presenting the situation that leads to the intervention, also justifying the technique utility for the presented situation and how it should be applied.

The work is measured in a way inspired by a case base learning Blooms Taxonomy [44] where students are evaluated according to a punctuation of 0 to 20 points in each technique with weighted scale in each executed techniques either, that we mention again:


**5.** Involvement in the activity [21]. Students do a transformational form involve them on practice, searching references, and doing experiences and categorize data samples, discussions, results, and conclusions, during the investigation timeline, complying with all determinations made between everybody compromised (10%weight).

**3.1. Research sample to applicate active learning**

instruments.

by the students are as follows:

3rd: exposition and communication (34)

4rd: preparation for the debate (22, 3)

5th: involvement in the activity (22)

2nd: teamwork (37)

6th: problem solver (21).

2nd: team work:

tion and communication (, 992). 3rd: exposition and communication:

Our research sample translates a finalist group, composed of 22 students (17 females and 5 males), with the age average of 22 years, from a higher education course of a higher institution published during the frequency of an Organizational Development signature from a HRM graduation on which active learning and O.D. techniques were applied. We also use communication instruments, such as e-mail and the social net "whatsapp", for doing the work anytime and everywhere for the necessities, interests, and needs, and databases about O.D. techniques. For consultation and evaluation, consulting works and presentations, and measure, we used Excel and SPSS as

Introductory Chapter: Active Learning—Beyond the Future

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.84758

9

According to what we observed, the active learning techniques with an average punctuation

In a certain way, the students obtained good achievements with this, where we can say that the active learning is better than the classical techniques (expositive learning), they work in an interactive way, they prepare the studies, the meetings, and the presentations, working together, and made excellent projects. Nevertheless, we still continue to develop the techniques, because the students are not so good in argumentations and either in the commitment to the action or in the problem solving, where this last aspect concerns us since they are creative, and as we did not measure their creative profile, we cannot know what type are they. Supposedly, they seem as disseminators because they disseminate activities around the case ideas, and get things done adapting it to work discarding theories but not fitting the facts. They also try things out than thinking and try too many approaches till one is completely acceptable, but taking action is more difficult. So, maybe these are the truth, cause them main active learning profile is improvisators and wranglers, and together are team workers and communicators. The correlation with

the main techniques is significative by applying the Pearson correlation as follows:

• correlation with teamwork (, 867) and with exposition and communication (, 911).

• correlation with preparation for improvisation and ability to argue (, 867) and with exposi-

1st: preparation for improvisation and ability to argue:

**3.2. Results, discussion, and contributions in the field of higher education**

1st: preparation for improvisation and ability to argue (42, 22)

**6.** Problem solving [22]. Students develop a wide range of ideas with flexibility and resources, according to a well-defined problem, to solve in a creative form (10%weight).

Considering the highest score of each technique, we obtain a profile according to the respective techniques, therefore:


Other scores (maximum score) are intended to differentiate from each other independently of the obtained profile.

This profile is not inflexible, depends from many human factors in a task development, and from previously acquired competences, but it will not have a restrictive character since active learning, at least as far as organizational development is concerned, is a continuum for the future, for the change, and evolution.

#### **3.1. Research sample to applicate active learning**

Our research sample translates a finalist group, composed of 22 students (17 females and 5 males), with the age average of 22 years, from a higher education course of a higher institution published during the frequency of an Organizational Development signature from a HRM graduation on which active learning and O.D. techniques were applied. We also use communication instruments, such as e-mail and the social net "whatsapp", for doing the work anytime and everywhere for the necessities, interests, and needs, and databases about O.D. techniques. For consultation and evaluation, consulting works and presentations, and measure, we used Excel and SPSS as instruments.

#### **3.2. Results, discussion, and contributions in the field of higher education**

According to what we observed, the active learning techniques with an average punctuation by the students are as follows:

1st: preparation for improvisation and ability to argue (42, 22)

2nd: teamwork (37)

**5.** Involvement in the activity [21]. Students do a transformational form involve them on practice, searching references, and doing experiences and categorize data samples, discussions, results, and conclusions, during the investigation timeline, complying with all

**6.** Problem solving [22]. Students develop a wide range of ideas with flexibility and resources,

Considering the highest score of each technique, we obtain a profile according to the respec-

**1.** Organizer [45]: a student that can obtain communication planning competencies to meet the interlocutor's needs and expectations, namely student colleagues in the classroom social dynamics. The students receive highest punctuation in preparation for debate. **2.** Collaborator [46]: a student who improves the study questions, brings experimental knowledge, establishes trust among the colleagues, helps you search for data and interpret it laterally, assists colleagues in collective learning processes, from various perspectives, and to check that the analysis seems appropriate. The students receive highest punctuation in teamwork. **3.** Communicator [47]: a student who delivers dialogs with logic conducting the others to generate communicational attitudes, which discloses information on change, in an appropriate manner, seeks to learn from peers and to help those improve their ability to provide answers, and helps them to be able to confront the criticism and manipulation, indicating clues for searching solutions to improve the dialog. The students receive highest punctua-

**4.** Improviser [48] and arguer [49]: a student who uses spontaneously and creatively his talent to explore unusual issues and makes unplanned decisions, helping her colleagues to solve problems, taking critiquing decisions. The students receive highest punctuation in preparation for improvisation, and use rhetoric and other modes of argumentation and discursive strategies helping others to develop empathy characteristics with their dialogues and provide transparent forms of explanation regarding the issues. The students

receive highest punctuation in preparation for improvisation and ability to argue.

**5.** Committed to work [50]: a student makes inquiries and uses independent and creative thinking skills helping others in the same way to get more results from the workflow and never gives up the flow. The students receive highest punctuation in involvement in the activity. **6.** Problem solver [51]: a student who shares interests, resilience, immersions, with other colleagues in team activities toward a solution, a strategy, and an objective, to solve a problem and overcome challenges. The students receive highest punctuation in problem solving.

Other scores (maximum score) are intended to differentiate from each other independently

This profile is not inflexible, depends from many human factors in a task development, and from previously acquired competences, but it will not have a restrictive character since active learning, at least as far as organizational development is concerned, is a continuum for the

determinations made between everybody compromised (10%weight).

tive techniques, therefore:

8 Active Learning - Beyond the Future

tion in exposition and communication.

of the obtained profile.

future, for the change, and evolution.

according to a well-defined problem, to solve in a creative form (10%weight).

3rd: exposition and communication (34)

4rd: preparation for the debate (22, 3)

5th: involvement in the activity (22)

6th: problem solver (21).

In a certain way, the students obtained good achievements with this, where we can say that the active learning is better than the classical techniques (expositive learning), they work in an interactive way, they prepare the studies, the meetings, and the presentations, working together, and made excellent projects. Nevertheless, we still continue to develop the techniques, because the students are not so good in argumentations and either in the commitment to the action or in the problem solving, where this last aspect concerns us since they are creative, and as we did not measure their creative profile, we cannot know what type are they. Supposedly, they seem as disseminators because they disseminate activities around the case ideas, and get things done adapting it to work discarding theories but not fitting the facts. They also try things out than thinking and try too many approaches till one is completely acceptable, but taking action is more difficult. So, maybe these are the truth, cause them main active learning profile is improvisators and wranglers, and together are team workers and communicators. The correlation with the main techniques is significative by applying the Pearson correlation as follows:

1st: preparation for improvisation and ability to argue:

• correlation with teamwork (, 867) and with exposition and communication (, 911).

2nd: team work:

• correlation with preparation for improvisation and ability to argue (, 867) and with exposition and communication (, 992).

3rd: exposition and communication:

• correlation with teamwork (, 992) and with preparation and ability to argue (, 911).

We had the privilege to verify, through the direct experience with the students, that the use of active learning is very useful to the students because this helps them to grow up their knowledge, and apply it in several determinated areas for their future, but more allows to increase their curiosity, essential competencies for the progress of personal knowledge, and increase the relationship between students and teachers, and working together with teams that provides live experiences in an interactive way evolving with the technology and creating it.

**References**

DOI: 10.1109/tvcg.2017.2745878

DOI: 10.1080/0309877x.2017.130256

10.1080/14703297.2016.1189843

DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2017.09.024

Intelligence:1-1. DOI: 10.1109/tpami.2018.2840980

on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI, 2013). pp. 1572-1578

Fuzzy Systems;**26**(1):292-309. DOI: 10.1109/tfuzz.2017.2654504

Learning;**10**(3):277-284. DOI: 10.1016/j.cptl.2017.11.015

Medical Education;**52**(1):34-44. DOI: 10.1111/medu.13463

[1] Melnikov AA, Poulsen Nautrup H, Krenn M, Dunjko V, Tiersch M, Zeilinger A, et al. Active learning machine learns to create new quantum experiments. Proceedings of the

Introductory Chapter: Active Learning—Beyond the Future

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.84758

11

[2] Fischer G. Beyond hype and underestimation: Identifying research challenges for the future of MOOCs. Distance Education;**35**(2):149-158. DOI: 10.1080/01587919.2014.920752

[3] Roberts JC, Ritsos PD, Jackson JR, Headleand C. The explanatory visualization framework: An active learning framework for teaching creative computing using explanatory visualizations. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics;**24**(1):791-801.

[4] Hopman EWM, MacDonald MC. Production practice during language learning improves comprehension. Psychological Science;**29**(6):961-971. DOI: 10.1177/0956797618754486 [5] Li C, Wang X, Dong W, Yan J, Liu Q, Zha H. Joint active learning with feature selection via CUR matrix decomposition. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine

[6] Nie F, Wang H, Huang H, Ding C. Early active learning via robust representation and structured sparsity. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Joint Conference

[7] Bell H, Bell R. Applying enterprise: Active learning environments for business higher National Diploma students. Journal of Further and Higher Education;**42**(5):649-661.

[8] Lughofer E, Pratama M. Online active learning in data stream regression using uncertainty sampling based on evolving generalized fuzzy models. IEEE Transactions on

[9] Rockich-Winston N, Train BC, Rudolph MJ, Gillette C. Faculty motivations to use active learning among pharmacy educators. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching &

[10] McCullough K, Munro N. Finance students' experiences of lecture-based active learning tasks. Innovations in Education and Teaching International;**55**(1):65-73. DOI:

[11] Berkhout JJ, Helmich E, Teunissen PW, van der Vleuten CPM, Jaarsma ADC. Context matters when striving to promote active and lifelong learning in medical education.

[12] Tüysüzoğlu G, Yaslan Y. Sparse coding based classifier ensembles in supervised and active learning scenarios for data classification. Expert Systems with Applications;**91**:364-373.

[13] Resaland GK, Moe VF, Bartholomew JB, Andersen LB, McKay HA, Anderssen SA, et al. Gender-specific effects of physical activity on children's academic performance: The

National Academy of Sciences;**115**(6):1221-1226. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1714936115
