Email this article Classroom Response Systems: Inclusion, Attainment and Active Learning
Abstract
The ‘clickers project’ is a University-wide project, designed to provide an inclusive facility for technology-enhanced learning to staff and students.
Every level 4 student received a free clicker device. Students were asked to register their clicker using the University’s virtual learning environment (VLE) in order to investigate student engagement with in-class quizzes using clickers. Participation in the clicker registration process was recorded and evaluated as an indication of engagement with classroom technologies.
Overall, significant differences in progression and participation in the registration process were observed with respect to ethnicity, gender and non-continuation rates for full-time, first degree entrants. In an accompanying survey, students who were less confident in their in-class responses were more likely to resist working with peers or to give-up more quickly when tackling difficult questions.
This paper presents three key elements of the project: First, Kingston University’s inclusive approach in promoting classroom technology, second, analysis of engagement with the clicker registration process, and finally student perceptions of the use of classroom technologies. The objective is to show how classroom technologies can be seen as inclusive tools for feedback, capable of providing early signs of gaps in attainment among learners.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Agnihotri, L. and Ott, A. (2014) Building a Student At-Risk Model: An End-to-End Perspective From User to Data Scientist, In Educational Data Mining 2014.
Anthis, K. (2011) Is It the Clicker, or Is It the Question? Untangling the Effects of Student Response System Use, Teaching of Psychology, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 189–193. doi:10.1177/0098628311411895
Arnold, K.E. & Pistilli, M.D. (2012) Course signals at Purdue: Using learning analytics to increase student success. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (pp. 267-270). ACM.
Anthis, K. (2011) Is It the Clicker, or Is It the Question? Untangling the Effects of Student Response System Use, Teaching of Psychology, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 189–193. doi:10.1177/0098628311411895
Arnold, K.E. & Pistilli, M.D. (2012) Course signals at Purdue: Using learning analytics to increase student success, In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (pp. 267-270). ACM.
Caldwell, J.E. (2007) Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips, CBE Life Sciences Education, vol. 6, no. 1, pp.9–20. doi:10.1187/cbe.06-12-0205.
Cubric, M. & Jefferies, A. (2015) The benefits and challenges of large-scale deployment of electronic voting systems: University student views from across different subject groups, Computers & Education, 87, pp.98-11'1. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.004.
Denholm-Price, J.C.W., Orwell, S. & Soan, P. (2015) First year engagement using clickers. In: CETL-MSOR Conference 2015: Sustaining Excellence, Sep 2015, London, U.K.
Gordon, N.A. (2016) Issues in retention and attainment in Computer Science. York: Higher Education Academy. [online] Available at: https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/issues-retention-and-attainment-computer-science [Accessed 21 Feb. 2019]
Graham, C.R., Tripp, T.R., Seawright, L. & Joeckel, G. (2007) Empowering or compelling reluctant participators using audience response systems, Active Learning in Higher Education, vol. 8, no. 3, pp.233–258. doi:10.1177/1469787407081885
Jefferies, A. (2011) Introducing and using electronic voting systems in a large scale project with undergraduate students: Reflecting on the challenges and successes, in S Greener & A Rospiglio (eds), Proceedings of 10th European Conference for E-Learning. Academic Conferences Ltd., pp. 319-325, 10th European Conf on e-Learning, Brighton, United Kingdom, 10-11 November.
Kay, R.H. & LeSage, A. (2009) Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 53(3), 819-827. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.05.001
Liu, C.-C., Chung, C.W., Chen, N.-S., & Liu, B.-J. (2009). Analysis of peer interaction in learning activities with personal handhelds and shared displays. Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 127–142.
Mayer, R.E., Stull, A., DeLeeuw, K., Almeroth, K., Bimber, B., Chun, D., Bulger, M., Campbell, J., Knight, A. & Zhang, H. (2009) Clickers in college classrooms: Fostering learning with questioning methods in large lecture classes, Contemporary Educational Psychology, vol. 34, no. 1, pp.51–57.
McDuff, N. & Hughes, A. (2017) Delivering an inclusive higher education: an inclusive curriculum framework from concept to review. In HEA Conference, generation TEF – Teaching in the spotlight.
Mountford-Zimdars, A., Sanders, J., Moore, J., Sabri, D., Jones, S. & Higham, L. (2017) What can universities do to support all their students to progress successfully throughout their time at university? Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 21(2-3), pp.101-110.
Prather, E.E. & Brissenden, G. (2009) Clickers as data gathering tools and students’ attitudes, motivations, and beliefs on their use in this application, Astronomy Education Review, vol. 8, no. 1.
Potgieter, M., Ackermann, M. & Fletcher, L. (2010) Inaccuracy of self-evaluation as additional variable for prediction of students at risk of failing first-year chemistry, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 11 (1), pp. 17-24. doi: 10.1039/C001042c
Slavin, R.E. & Madden, N.A. (1989) What works for students at risk: A research synthesis, Educational Leadership, 46 (5), pp. 4-13.
Surgenor, P.W.G. (2010) Luddites and learning theories: Lessons from a flawed clicker project, In Proceedings of the International Conference on Engaging Pedagogy, pp. 1-15.
Trees, A.R. & Jackson, M.H. (2007) The learning environment in clicker classrooms: student processes of learning and involvement in large university-level courses using student response systems, Learning, Media and Technology, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 21-40. doi:10.1080/17439880601141179
Williams, N., Hussain, H., Manojkumar, P. & Thapa, A. (2016) An evaluation of a STEM summer undergraduate research internship scheme: student-perceived learning gains. New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, vol. 11. doi:10.29311/ndtos.v0i11.581
DOI: https://doi.org/10.29311/ndtps.v0i15.3467
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
New Directions in the Teaching of Natural Sciences
eISSN: 2753-4138