Vibrant student voices: Exploring effects of the use of clickers in large college courses

Learning, Media and Technology

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 329-341

  Hoekstra, Angel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

Clicker; Student attitudes; Student response system

Indexed keywords

EID: 57649166901     PISSN: 17439884     EISSN: 17439892     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17439880802497081     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Anderson, C.W. 1987. Strategic teaching in science. In Strategic teaching and learning: Cognitive instruction in the content areas, ed. B.F. Jones, 73-91. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
2. Boud, D. 1981. Developing autonomy in student learning. London: Kogan Page.
3. Brooke, C.P. 1999. Feelings from the back row: Negotiating sensitive issues in large classes. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 77: 23-33.
4. Coffey, A., and P. Atkinson. 1996. Making sense of qualitative data. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
5. Cooper, J.L., and P. Robinson. 2000. The argument for making large classes seem small. In New directions for teaching and learning: Energizing the large classroom, ed. J.L. Cooper and P. Robinson, 5-16. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
6. Duncan, D. 2005. Clickers in the classroom: How to enhance science teaching using classroom response systems. San Francisco, CA: Pearson Education.
7. Garside, C. 1996. Look who's talking: A comparison of lecture and group discussion teaching strategies in developing critical thinking skills. Communication Education 45: 212-27.
8. Gleason, M. 1986. Better communication in large courses. College Teaching 34: 20-4.
9. Mazur, E. 1997. Peer instruction: A user's manual. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
10. McKeachie, W.J. 2002. McKeachie's teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
11. Naples, N.A. 2003. Feminism and method: Ethnography, discourse analysis, and activist research. New York: Routledge.
12. Penuel, W.R., L. Abrahamson, and J. Roschelle. 2007. A sociocultural interpretation of the effects of audience response systems in higher education. In Audience response systems in higher education: Applications and cases, ed. D.A. Banks, 187-208. Hershey, PA: Information Science.
13. Rice, R.E., and U. Bunz. 2006. Evaluating a wireless course feedback system: The role of demographics, expertise, fluency, competency, and usage. Studies in Media. & Information Literacy Education 6: 1-10.
14. Smith, K.A. 2000. Going deeper: Formal small-group learning in large classes. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 81: 25-46.
15. Stowell, J.R., and J.M. Nelson. 2007. Benefits of electronic audience response systems on student participation, learning, and emotion. Teaching of Psychology 34: 253-58.
16. Trees, A., and M. Jackson. 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 32, 21-40.