Using a student response system in CS1 and CS2

SIGCSE'11 - Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 299-304

  Chamillard, A T ^a  

^a University of Colorado at Colorado Springs   (United States)

Author keywords

Computer science curriculum; Student engagement; Student performance; Student response system

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SCIENCE CURRICULA; COURSE ASSESSMENT; CS2 COURSE; GAME DEVELOPMENT; MULTIPLE COURSE; STUDENT ENGAGEMENT; STUDENT LEARNING; STUDENT PARTICIPATION; STUDENT PERFORMANCE; STUDENT RESPONSE SYSTEM;

COMPUTER SCIENCE; CURRICULA; EDUCATION COMPUTING; ENGINEERING EDUCATION; INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SYSTEMS; STUDENTS;

TEACHING;

EID: 79954427582     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1953163.1953253     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (18)

1. Ayu, M.A., Taylor, K., and Mantoro, T. Active learning: Engaging students in the classroom using mobile phones. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE Symposium on Industrial Electronics & Applications (ISIEA 2009), 2, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 2009, 711-715.
2. nd SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Charlotte, NC, February 2001, 159-163. (Pubitemid 32499178)
3. th Australasian Conference on Computing Education, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia, 2005, 181-186.
4. th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Houston, TX, March 2006, 219-223.
5. Esponda, M. Electronic voting on-the-fly with mobile devices. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, Madrid, Spain, 2008, 93-97.
6. Iclicker.com. 2010. i>clicker: The Decision is Simple, Retrieved November 29, 2010 from http://www.iclicker.com/dnn/
7. Kay, R.H. and LeSage, A. Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 53(3):819-827, November 2009.
8. Lantz, M.E. The use of 'Clickers' in the classroom: Teaching innovation or merely an amusing novelty? Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4):556-561, July 2010.
9. Lazar, A. Engaged learning in a computer science course. The Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 23(1):38-44, October 2007.
10. th Annual ACM SIGUCCS Conference on User Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 2006, 196-200. (Pubitemid 46729476)
11. Murphy, T. Success and failure of audience response systems in the classroom. In Proceedings of SIGUCCS 2008, Portland, Oregon, October 2008, 33-37.
12. Morgan, Robin K. Exploring the pedagogical effectiveness of clickers. InSight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching, 3:31-36, 2008.
13. th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Houston, TX, March 1-5, 2006, 474-477.
14. th Western Canadian Conference on Computer Education (WCCCE 2010), Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada, 2010.
15. Simon, B., Anderson, R. Hoyer, C., and Su, J. Preliminary experiences with a tablet PC based system to support active learning in computer science courses. In Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE 2004), Leeds, UK, 2004, 213-217. (Pubitemid 43773426)
16. Taneja, A. The influence of personal response systems on students' perceived learning outcomes and course satisfaction. The Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 25(2):5-11, December 2009.
17. Tiwari, D., Sehgal, R., Bansal, J., and Murthy, S. Clicking away the distance from education. In Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Technology for Education (T4E), July 1-3, 2010, 17-23.
18. th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, St. Louis, MO, February 2005, 116-120. (Pubitemid 40821215)