Gateway engineering courses pose a substantial challenge for first-year students and are often characterized by high failure rates and considerable cognitive load. Although the literature highlights the benefits of active learning in STEM courses, most studies have focused primarily on achievement outcomes and have less frequently examined process-oriented indicators such as ongoing performance and examination behavior. This study examined the impact of active learning in a core physics course in engineering on academic achievement, ongoing performance, failure rates, and examination patterns, and assessed the unique contribution of the instructional model to predicting the final course grade within a high-stakes gateway context.

A comparative quasi-experimental design was conducted between two independent groups (N = 105): a traditional instruction group (n = 61) and an active learning group (n = 44), which included in-class problem solving, structured scaffolding, simulations, preparatory tasks, and continuous digital communication designed to support conceptual understanding and sustained engagement. Both groups followed the same syllabus and completed identical assignments and examinations. Data included final grade, mean assignment grades, assignment submission rate, course failure, and attendance at the second examination session. Analyses comprised Mann–Whitney tests, chi-square tests, Z-tests for independent proportions, and hierarchical regression models.

Significant differences were found in final grades, mean assignment grades, and submission rates in favor of the active learning group. Lower failure rates and lower attendance at the second examination session were also observed. Hierarchical regression indicated a significant and unique contribution of the instructional intervention to the prediction of final grades beyond assignment performance. The findings suggest that active learning in cognitively demanding core engineering courses is associated with improved achievement, reduced failure, and altered examination behavior, offering an integrative empirical perspective for evaluating structural pedagogical reform in STEM higher education contexts.