Audience response systems: Insipid contrivances or inspiring tools?

Audience Response Systems in Higher Education: Applications and Cases

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 26-39

  Judson, Eugene ^a   Sawada, Daiyo ^b  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 67650255252     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59140-947-2.ch002     Document Type: Chapter

References (26)

1. Abrahamson, A. L. (1998). An overview of teaching and learning research with classroom communication systems. Paper presented at the International Conference of the Teaching of Mathematics, Village of Pythagorean, Samos, Greece. Retrieved February 17, 2005, from http://www.bedu.com/Publications/Samos.html
2. Abrahamson, A. L. (1999). Teaching with classroom communication system: What it involves and why it works. Paper presented at International Workshop, New Trends in Physics Teaching, Puebla, Mexico. Retrieved February 17, 2005, from http://www.bedu.com/Publications/PueblaFinal2.html
3. Bapst, J. J. (1971). The effect of systematic student response upon teaching behavior (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED060651). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle.
4. Bennett, S. (2004). Evaluation of electronic student response technology in a general education oceanography course. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of Geological Society of America, Denver, CO.
5. Bessler, W. C. (1969). The effectiveness of an electronic student response system in teaching biology to the non-major utilizing nine grouppaced, linear programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ball State University, Muncie, IN
6. Bessler, W. C., & Nisbet, J. J. (1971). The use of an electronic response system in teaching biology. Science Education, 3, 275-284.
7. Boardman, D. E. (1968). The use of immediate response systems in junior college. Unpublished master's thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.
8. Brocklebank, J. (2000January 5). Who wants to be a millionaire format for engineering students. Daily Mail, 16. Retrieved February 17, 2005, from http://celt.ust.hk/ideas/prs/exp_share.htm
9. Brown, J. D. (1972). An evaluation of the Spitz student response system in teaching a course in logical and mathematical concepts. Journal of Experimental Education, 40(3), 12-20.
10. Casanova, J. (1971). An instructional experiment in organic chemistry, the use of a student response system. Journal of Chemical Education, 48(7), 453-455.
11. Chu, Y. (1972). Study and evaluation of the student response system in undergraduate instruction at Skidmore College (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED076135). Report prepared for the National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA.
12. Cue, N. (1998). A universal learning tool for classrooms? Proceedings of the First Quality in Teaching and Learning Conference, Hong Kong International Trade and Exhibition Center. Retrieved on February 17, 2005, from http://celt.ust.hk/ideas/prs/pdf/Nelsoncue.pdf
13. Draper, S. W., & Brown, M. I. (2004). Increasing interactivity in lectures using an electronic voting system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 81-94.
14. Engelder, T. (2004). The effect of introducing electronic student response technology on classroom participation: Trends in longitudinal data gathered while teach ing physical geology at Penn State. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of Geological Society of America, Denver, CO.
15. Fitch, J. L. (2004). Student feedback in the college classroom: A technology solution. Educational Technology Research & Development, 52(1), 71-81.
16. Fraser, S. (2000, January 2). University imports game show technology. Scotland on Sunday, 9. Retrieved February 17, 2005, from http://celt.ust.hk/ideas/prs/exp_share.htm
17. Froehlich, H. P. (1963). What about classroom communicators? Audio Visual Communication Review, 11, 19-26. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of Geological Society of America, Denver, CO.
18. Garg, D. P. (1975). Experiments with a computerized response system: A favorable experience (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED111355). Paper presented at the Conference on Computers in the Undergraduate Curricula, Fort Worth, TX.
19. Greer, L. (2004). Does electronic student response technology work in a small liberal arts classroom? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of Geological Society of America, Denver, CO.
20. Judson, E., & Sawada, D. (2002). Learning from past and present: Electronic response systems in college lecture halls. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 21(2), 167-181.
21. Kansas State University (2003). Moon concept inventory. Retrieved February 17, 2005, from http://www.phys.ksu.edu/perg/www/pdf/moon.pdf
22. Littauer, R. (1972). Instructional implications of a low-cost electronic student response system. Educational Technology: Teacher and Technology Supplement, 12(10), 69-71.
23. Meltzer, D.E., & Manivannan, K. (2002). Transforming the lecture-hall environment: The fully interactive physics lecture. American Journal of Physics, 70, 639-654.
24. Poulis, J., Massen, C., Robens, E., & Gilbert, M. (1997). Physics lecturing with audience paced feedback. Retrieved November 15, 2005, from http://www.bedu.com/publications/physlectapf.pdf
25. Stein, J. (Ed.). (1980). The Random House College Dictionary. New York: Random House.
26. Van Horn, S. R. (2004). Using a personal response system to promote and assess peer learning during lecture: Advantages and disadvantages. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of Geological Society of America, Denver, CO.