A study of classroom response system clickers: Increasing student engagement and performance in a large undergraduate lecture class on architectural research

Journal of Interactive Learning Research

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 5-21

  Bachman, Leonard ^a   Bachman, Christine ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON DOWNTOWN   (United States)

Author keywords

And performance; Architecture; Classroom response system (crs); Clickers; Student engagement

Indexed keywords

EID: 79958714822     PISSN: 1093023X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Australian Council for Educational Research. ACER. Australasian Survey of Student Engagement (AUSSE). Retrieved 08/28/09 from http://www.acer. edu.au/ausse/resources.html
2. Bachman, L. R., & Bachman C. M. (2006). Student perceptions of academic workload in architectural education. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 23(4), 271-304.
3. Banks, D. A. (ed.) (2006). Audience response systems in higher education: Applications and cases. Information Science Publishing: Hershey, PA.
4. Bransford, J., Brophy, S., & Williams, S. (2000). When computer technologies meet the learning sciences: Issues and opportunities. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 2/(1), 59-84.
5. Brewer, C. (2004). Near real-time assessment of student. Science, 54(11), 1034-1039.
6. Burns, A. (2008). A practical approach to question design for classroom response systems. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2008 (pp 3293-3297). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
7. Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practiced tips. Life Science Education, 6(1), 9-20.
8. Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in Undergraduate Education. Retrieved 08/28/09 from http://learningcommons.evergreen.edu/pdf/fall1987.pdf.
9. Coleman, N. (2007). The limitations of professional education. The Role of the Humanities in Design Creativity International Conference 2007. Retrieved 08/28/09 from http://www.lincoln.ac.uk/home/conferences/human/papers/ Coleman.pdf
10. Cooper, M. (1995). Cooperative learning: An approach for large enrollment courses, Journal of Chemical Education, 72, 2, 162-64.
11. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. An introduction to the philosophy of education New York: Free Press, p. 76. EBook #852.
12. Diaz Moore, K (2001). The scientist, the social activist, the practitioner and the cleric: Pedagogical exploration towards a pedagogy of practice. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 18(1), 59-79.
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. Elliott, C. (2003). Using a personal response system in economics teaching. International Review of Economics Education, 7(1), 80-86.
15. El-Rady, J. (2006). To click or not to click: That's the question. Innovate Journal of Online Education, 2(4).
16. Hafner, K. (2004). In Class, the Audience Weighs In. The New York Times.
17. Hall, R. H, Collier, H.L., Thomas, M. L., & Hilgers, M. G. (2005). A Student Response System for increasing engagement, motivation, and learning in high enrollment lectures. Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems, 621-626. Retrieved 12/24/08 fromhttp://lite.mst.edu/documents/hall-et- al-srs-amcis-proceedings.pdf.
18. Guthrie, R. W., & Carlin, A. (2004). Waking the dead: Using interactive technology to engage passive listeners in the classroom. Proceedings of the Tenth Americas Conference on Information Systems. NewYork, NY. Retrieved 08/28/09 from http://www.mhhe.com/cps/docs/CPSWP-WakindDead082003.pdf
19. Higher Education Funding Council for England (FEFCE). (2009). Report to HEFCE on student engagement Centre for Higher Education Research and Information, The Open University. Retrieved on 8/28/09 from http://oro.open. ac.uk/15281/1/Report to HEFCE on student engagement.pdf.
20. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., & Smith, K. (1998). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Co.
21. Judson, E., & Sawada, A. (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. Retrieved 12/23/2008 from http://www.vanderbilt.edu/cft/resources/teaching-resources/technology/ crs-biblio.htm
22. Kaleta, R., & Joosten, T. (2007). Student response systems: A university of Wisconsin System study of clickers. Educause Center For Applied Research, 10. Retrieved 1/2/2009 from http://www.blog.utoronto.ca/in-the-loop/ files/ ClickersERB0710.pdf.
23. King, A. (1993). From the sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching, 41.
24. Lee, J. B., Bainum, C. K. (2006) "Do clickers depersonalize the classroom? An evaluation by shy students." Paper presented at the 86th Annual Convention of the Western Psychological Association, Palm Springs, California. Retrieved 1/3/2009 from http://www.puc.edu/ data/assets/pdf file/0011/29882/ do-clickers-depersonalize-the-classroom.pdf.
25. May, V. V. (2007). Clickers at Dartmouth College. Retrieved 12/22/2008 from www.dartmouth.edu/~dcal/resources/documents/Clickers%20at%20Dartmouth. doc.
26. Morgan, R. K. (2008). Exploring the pedagogical effectiveness of clickers. In Sight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching, 3, 31-26
27. Morling, B., McAuliffe, M., Cohen, L., & DiLorenzo, T. M. (2008). Efficacy of personal response systems ("clickers") in large, introductory psychology classes. Teaching of Psychology, 35(), 45-50.
28. National Survey of Student Engagement (2006). Engaged learning: Fostering success for all students. Annual Report. Retrieved 1/3/3009 from http://nsse. iub.edu/NSSE 2006 Annual Report/docs/NSSE 2006 Annual Report.pdf.
29. Rogers, J. W., & Cox, J. R. (2008). Integrating a single tablet PC in chemistry, engineering and physics courses. Journal of College Science Teaching, 37(3), 34-9.
30. Roschelle, J., Penuel, W. & Abrahamson, L. (2004). Classroom response and communication systems: Research review and theory. Retrieved 12/22/2008 from http://ubiqcomputing.org/CATAALYST AERA Proposal.pdf.
31. Schank, R. C, Berman, T. R., and Macpherson, K. A. (1999) Learning by doing, in C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. 2, . 161-181). Mahawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
32. Tagg, J. (2003). The learning paradigm college. Boston: Anker Publishing.
33. Trees, A. R., Jackson, M. H. (2007). The learning environment in clicker classrooms: Student processes of learning and involvement in large universitylevel courses using student response systems. Learning, Media, and Technology, 52,21-40.
34. Ward, C. R., Reeves, J. H., & Heath, B. P. (2003). Encouraging active student participation in chemistry classes with a web-based, instant feedback, student response system, CONFCHEM: Non-Traditional Teaching Methods. Retrieved 12/28/2008 from http://aa.uncw.edu/chemed7papers/srs/confchem/ confchem srs.htm
35. Zhu, E. (2007). Teaching with clickers. Center for Research on Learning and Teaching Occasional Papers, 22. Retrieved 1/3/2009 from http://www. vanderbilt.edu/cft/resources/teaching resources/technologv/crs biblio.htm.