scholarly journals A strategic assessment of audience response systems used in higher education

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin H. Kay ◽  
Ann LeSage
Keyword(s):  
Control Device ◽  
Audience Response System ◽  
Audience Response ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Audience Response Systems ◽  
Response System ◽  
Assessment Feedback ◽  
Strategic Assessment ◽  
Response Systems ◽  
Based Instruction

<span>An audience response system (ARS) permits students to respond to multiple choice questions using a remote control device. All responses are instantly displayed, usually in chart form, and subsequently reviewed and discussed by the instructor and the class. This paper offers a comprehensive review of teaching strategies used with ARS and includes a discussion of general, motivational, assessment based, and learning based approaches. Several promising strategies have been identified, particularly collecting formative assessment feedback and peer based instruction. More systematic, detailed research in a broader range of contexts is recommended.</span>

Benefits of Electronic Audience Response Systems on Student Participation, Learning, and Emotion

2007 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 253-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey R. Stowell ◽  
Jason M. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Positive Emotion ◽  
Introductory Psychology ◽  
Student Feedback ◽  
Audience Response System ◽  
Classroom Participation ◽  
Audience Response ◽  
Audience Response Systems ◽  
Response System ◽  
Response Card ◽  
Response Systems

We compared an electronic audience response system (clickers) to standard lecture, hand-raising, and response card methods of student feedback in simulated introductory psychology classes. After hearing the same 30-min psychology lecture, participants in the clicker group had the highest classroom participation, followed by the response card group, both of which were significantly higher than the hand-raising group. Participants in the clicker group also reported greater positive emotion during the lecture and were more likely to respond honestly to in-class review questions.

Millennial Student Preference of Audience Response System Technology

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-9
Author(s):  
Stephen L. Firsing ◽  
John F. Yannessa ◽  
Fredanna A. D. McGough ◽  
John Delport ◽  
Mariel C. Po ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Audience Response System ◽  
Audience Response ◽  
Audience Response Systems ◽  
Millennial Students ◽  
Response System ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
Response Systems ◽  
Research Studies

Previous research studies have found that audience response systems or “clickers” provide significant classroom, learning, and assessment benefits in higher education. However, there are few to no research studies that have pitted popular clicker systems against each other using data collected from a sample of millennial students in public health–related professions. As a result, the purpose of this study was to compare two popular audience response systems in the college classroom with undergraduate students, specifically those studying public health. The study was implemented using a mixed methods quasi-experimental crossover design with three observation points over one academic year. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected. Findings suggest that undergraduate students prefer using a dedicated “clicker” system to respond to questions from an audience response system than a system that requires them to use their personal cell phones.

scholarly journals Using Audience Response Systems To Encourage Student Engagement And Reflection On Ethical Orientation And Behavior

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (10) ◽  
pp. 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melinda J. Micheletto
Keyword(s):  
Audience Response System ◽  
Audience Response ◽  
Ethical Orientation ◽  
Audience Response Systems ◽  
Classroom Discussions ◽  
Response System ◽  
Unethical Behaviors ◽  
Response Systems ◽  
Personal Level ◽  
And Behavior

The purpose of this study was to use an audience response system (ARS) to engage students in classroom discussions concerning sensitive and controversial topics (e.g., business ethics), assess students ethical orientation and conduct in unethical behaviors, and encourage reflection on their personal level of ethicality. Students used ARS devices to respond anonymously to questions regarding specific business-related ethical scenarios in a Principles of Marketing class. Students were asked six questions regarding their own conduct in certain behaviors and one question to evaluate their self-reported level of ethicality before the lecture/discussion and then again after the lecture/discussion. Nearly ninety-two percent of the students (n=65) reported that they believed they were an ethical person at the beginning of the lecture/discussion and only seventy-three percent of the students (n=52) reported that they believed they were an ethical person at the end of the lecture/discussion. The study showed that an ARS can be used to engage students in classroom discussion that results in significant student reflection on the topic.

scholarly journals Contingent teaching through low-tech audience response systems

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 235
Author(s):  
M. Sara Lowe ◽  
Katharine V. Macy ◽  
Sean M. Stone
Keyword(s):  
Formative Assessment ◽  
Student Learning ◽  
Audience Response System ◽  
Audience Response ◽  
Audience Response Systems ◽  
Response System ◽  
Technology Students ◽  
Computer Classroom ◽  
Response Systems ◽  
Gathering Data

For one-shot instruction sessions, formative assessment is the most feasible method for gathering data to aid contingent teaching, the practice of adapting to learners’ needs. Various technologies aid in the quick and efficient gathering of data on student learning in the classroom that can be used for formative assessment. Outside of a library teaching space or computer classroom, it is difficult to know what technology is available, what technology students can access, and how best to aid data collection that engages students, provides meaningful data to allow for contingent teaching, and is not dependent on student technology ownership. A low-tech audience response system has provided an opportunity to collect data on student learning and enable contingent teaching. This project report contributes to the field of information literacy research describing how a low-tech audience response system supports contingent teaching and innovates practice in different classroom situations.

scholarly journals Effects of Gamification on the Benefits of Student Response Systems in Learning of Human Anatomy: Three Experimental Studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (24) ◽  
pp. 13210
Author(s):  
Juan J. López-Jiménez ◽  
José L. Fernández-Alemán ◽  
José A. García-Berná ◽  
Laura López González ◽  
Ofelia González Sequeros ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Learning System ◽  
Student Response ◽  
Human Anatomy ◽  
Audience Response System ◽  
Audience Response ◽  
Audience Response Systems ◽  
Response System ◽  
Response Systems ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Academic Year

This paper presents three experiments to assess the impact of gamifying an audience response system on the perceptions and educational performance of students. An audience response system called SIDRA (Immediate Audience Response System in Spanish) and two audience response systems with gamification features, R-G-SIDRA (gamified SIDRA with ranking) and RB-G-SIDRA (gamified SIDRA with ranking and badges), were used in a General and Descriptive Human Anatomy course. Students participated in an empirical study. In the academic year 2019–2020, a total of 90 students used RB-G-SIDRA, 90 students employed R-G-SIDRA in the academic year 2018–2019, and 92 students used SIDRA in the academic year 2017–2018. Statistically significant differences were found between final exam grades obtained by using RB-G-SIDRA and SIDRA, U = 39.211 adjusted p = 0.001 and RB-G-SIDRA and R-G-SIDRA U = 31.157 adjusted p = 0.015, thus finding strong evidence with respect to the benefit of the badges used in RB-G-SIDRA. Moreover, in the students’ SIDRA systems scores, statistically significant differences were found between RB-G-SIDRA and SIDRA, U = −90.521 adjusted p < 0.001, and between R-G-SIDRA and SIDRA, U = −87.998 adjusted p < 0.001. Significant correlations between individual and team scores were also found in all of the tests in RB-G-SIDRA and G-SIDRA. The students expressed satisfaction, engagement, and motivation with SIDRA, R-G-SIDRA, and RB-G-SIDRA, thus obtaining a final average assessment of 4.28, 4.61, and 4.47 out of 5, respectively. Students perform better academically with gamified versus non-gamified audience response systems. Findings can be used to build a gamified adaptive learning system.

scholarly journals Use of audience response systems for summative assessment in large classes

2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Terence M Hancock
Keyword(s):  
Student Attitudes ◽  
Summative Assessment ◽  
Audience Response System ◽  
Audience Response ◽  
System Technology ◽  
Audience Response Systems ◽  
Large Classes ◽  
Response System ◽  
Response Systems ◽  
Student Grades

<span>The audience response system - technology that allows immediate compilation and display of a group's multiple choice input - is being shown effective in the classroom both in engaging students and providing real time, formative assessment of comprehension. This paper looks at its further potential as an alternative for summative assessment, replacing conventional examinations and testing as a basis for student grades. After brief discussion as to practical benefits of doing so and a review of ARS - hardware, software, and studies of its impact on learning - we develop and report outcomes of two distinct trials utilising ARS for both formative and summative assessment. Results indicate synergies in combining the two forms of assessment, though student attitudes are found to be particularly sensitive to the instructor's approach to design.</span>

The Audience Response System

2006 ◽  
pp. 222-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vivienne O’Connor ◽  
Michele Groves ◽  
Sandy Minck
Keyword(s):  
Medical Education ◽  
Medical Students ◽  
First Year ◽  
Audience Response System ◽  
Audience Response ◽  
Audience Response Systems ◽  
Educational Benefits ◽  
Graduate Entry ◽  
Response System ◽  
Response Systems

There are general, educational benefits of audience response systems (ARS), although relatively little application (or evaluation) in medical education. We briefly review changes in medical education worldwide over the last two decades, highlighting areas in which new tools, such as ARS, are valuable. We evaluated an ARS for more than 300 first-year, graduate-entry medical students, used in four 2-hour educational sessions, summarising the benefits and limitations of the system.

scholarly journals Fun and Engagement in Lecture Halls through Social Gamification

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 117
Author(s):  
Sebastian Mader ◽  
François Bry
Keyword(s):  
Audience Response System ◽  
Audience Response ◽  
Extended Version ◽  
Audience Response Systems ◽  
Traditional Lecture ◽  
Large Classes ◽  
Response System ◽  
Teaching Format ◽  
Technological Tools ◽  
Response Systems

The traditional lecture is a teaching format which offers students few opportunities for engagement turning them into passive listeners of the lecturers’ presentations what negatively impacts on their learning. With audience response systems, that is technology supporting classroom quizzes, breaks which reactivate the students can be introduced into the lecturers’ presentations. This article reports on an audience response system coupled with a social gamification of quizzes based on teams: Each student is assigned to a team and the students’ answers to quizzes contribute to their team’s success. An immediate overview of team participation updated in real-time during the quiz and updated team standings after the quiz displayed for everyone to see motivate students to participate in the quizzes. The contribution of this article is threefold: First, a team-based social gamification of quizzes aimed at boosting participation in quizzes and attendance at lectures, second, original technological tools supporting the proposed team-based social gamification, and third, a first evaluation demonstrating its effectiveness in a small course and a second evaluation suggesting that for use in large classes teams have to be built in a specific way. This article is an extended version of an article presented at ICL 2018 which provides a deeper representation of related work, a more extensive description of the team component, an additional evaluation, and implications for the use of the team-based social gamification in large classes.

scholarly journals The Impact of an Audience Response System on a Summative Assessment, a Controlled Field Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thorsten Schmidt ◽  
Anastasia Gazou ◽  
Angelika Riess ◽  
Olaf Riess ◽  
Kathrin Grundmann-Hauser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Crossover Study ◽  
Summative Assessment ◽  
Audience Response System ◽  
Audience Response ◽  
Audience Response Systems ◽  
Response System ◽  
Learning Success ◽  
Response Systems ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: Audience response systems allow to activate the audience and to receive a direct feedback of participants during lectures. Modern systems do not require any proprietary hardware anymore. Students can directly respond on their smartphone. Several studies reported about a high level of satisfaction of students when audience response systems are used, however their impact on learning success is still unclear.Methods: In order to evaluate the impact of an audience response system on the learning success we implemented the audience response system eduVote into a seminar series and performed a controlled crossover study on its impact on assessments. 154 students in nine groups were taught the same content. In five groups, eduVote was integrated for the first topic while four groups were taught this topic without the audience response systems. For a second topic, the groups were switched: Those groups who were taught before using eduVote were now taught without the audience response system and vice versa. We then analyzed the impact of the audience response system on the students’ performance in a summative assessment and specifically focused on questions dealing with the topic, for which the audience response system was used during teaching. We further assessed the students’ perception on the use of eduVote using questionnaires.Results: In our controlled crossover study we could not confirm an impact of the audience response system eduVote on long-term persistence i.e. the students’ performance in the summative assessment. Our evaluation revealed that students assessed the use of eduVote very positively, felt stronger engaged and better motivated to deal with the respective topics and would prefer their integration into additional courses as well. In particular we identified, that “shy students” profit from the use of an audience response system during teaching.Conclusions: Audience response systems motivate and activate students and increase their engagement during classes. However, their impact on long-term persistence and summative assessments may be limited. Audience response systems, however, specifically allow activating students which cannot be reached by the traditional way of asking questions without such an anonymous tool.

scholarly journals The Impact of an Audience Response System on a summative Assessment, a controlled Field Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thorsten Schmidt ◽  
Anastasia Gazou ◽  
Angelika Riess ◽  
Olaf Riess ◽  
Kathrin Grundmann-Hauser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Crossover Study ◽  
Summative Assessment ◽  
Audience Response System ◽  
Audience Response ◽  
Audience Response Systems ◽  
Response System ◽  
Learning Success ◽  
Response Systems ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Audience response systems allow to activate the audience and to receive a direct feedback of participants during lectures. Modern systems do not require any proprietary hardware anymore. Students can directly respond on their smartphone. Several studies reported about a high level of satisfaction of students when audience response systems are used, however their impact on learning success is still unclear. Methods In order to evaluate the impact of an audience response system on the learning success we implemented the audience response system eduVote into a seminar series and performed a controlled crossover study on its impact on assessments. 154 students in nine groups were taught the same content. In four groups, eduVote was integrated for the first topic while five groups were taught this topic without the audience response systems. For a second topic, the groups were switched: Those groups who were taught before using eduVote were now taught without the audience response system and vice versa. We then analysed the impact of the audience response system on the students’ performance in a summative assessment and specifically focused on questions dealing with the topic, for which the audience response system was used during teaching. We further assessed the students’ perception on the use of eduVote using questionnaires. Results In our controlled crossover study we could not confirm an impact of the audience response system eduVote on long-term persistence i.e. the students’ performance in the summative assessment. Our evaluation revealed that students assessed the use of eduVote very positively, felt stronger engaged and better motivated to deal with the respective topics and would prefer their integration into additional courses as well. In particular we identified that students who feel uncomfortable with answering questions in front of others profit from the use of an audience response system during teaching. Conclusions Audience response systems motivate and activate students and increase their engagement during classes. However, their impact on long-term persistence and summative assessments may be limited. Audience response systems, however, specifically allow activating students which cannot be reached by the traditional way of asking questions without such an anonymous tool.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document