Effect of personal response systems on student perception and academic performance in courses in a health sciences curriculum

American Journal of Physiology - Advances in Physiology Education

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 280-289

  FitzPatrick, Kathleen A ^a   Finn, Kevin E ^a   Campisi, Jay ^a  

^a MERRIMACK COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Clickers

Indexed keywords

EID: 80054846842     PISSN: 10434046     EISSN: 15221229     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1152/advan.00036.2011     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Benchmarks For Science Literacy: Project 2061. Washington, DC: AAAS, 1993.
2. Association of American Colleges and Universities. College Learning for the New Global Century. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2007.
3. Beatty I. Transforming student learning with classroom communication systems. Educause Center Appl Res Res Bull v2004: 1-13, 2004.
4. Bransford JD, Brown A, Cocking RR. (editors) How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, DC: National Academies, 1999.
5. Bruff D. Teaching with Classroom Response Systems: Creating Active Learning Environments. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass, 2009.
6. Bunce DM, VandenPlas JR, Havanki KL. Comparing the effectiveness on student achievement of a student response system versus online WebCT quizzes. J Chem Educ 83: 488-493, 2006.
7. Caldwell JE. Clickers in the large classroom: current research and best-practice tips. CBE Life Sci Educ 6: 9-20, 2007.
8. Campisi J, Finn KE. Does active learning improve students' knowledge of and attitudes toward research methods? J Coll Sci Teach 40: 38-45, 2011.
9. Cliff W, Freeman S, Hansen PA, Kibble J, Peat M, Wenderoth MP. Is formative assessment an effective way to improve learning? A symposium at Experimental Biology 2008. Adv Physiol Educ 32: 337-338, 2008.
10. Crossgrove K, Curran KL. Using clickers in non-majors- and majorslevel biology courses: student opinion, learning, and long-term retention of course material. CBE Life Sci Educ 7: 146-154, 2008.
11. Crouch CH, Mazur E. Peer instruction: ten years of experience and results. Am J Phys 69: 970-977, 2001.
12. Draper S. Ensuring Effective Use of PRS. Results of the Evaluation of the Use of PRS in Glasgow University. October 2001-June 2002 (online). http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/_steve/evs/papers/eval.pdf [13 June 2011].
13. Dufresne RJ, Gerace WJ, Mestre J, Leonard WJ. ASKIT/A2L: Assessing Student Knowledge with Instructional Technology. Technical Report (online). http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED468196.pdf.
14. Fies C, Marshall J. Classroom response systems: a review of the literature. J Sci Educ Technol 15: 101-109, 2006.
15. FitzPatrick KA, Campisi J. A multiyear approach to student-driven investigations in exercise physiology. Adv Physiol Educ 33: 349-355, 2009.
16. Gauci SA, Dantas AM, Williams DA, Kemm R. Promoting studentcentered active learning in lectures with a personal response system. Adv Physiol Educ 33: 60-71, 2009.
17. Hake RR. Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: a sixthousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. Am J Phys 66: 64-74, 1998.
18. Halloran L. A comparison of two methods of teaching: computer managed instruction and keypad questions versus traditional classroom lecture. Comput Nurs 13: 285-288, 1995.
19. Hunter A, Rulfs J, Caron JM, Buckholt MA. Using a classroom response system for real-time data display and analysis in introductory biology labs. J Coll Sci Teach 40: 19-25, 2010.
20. Judson E, Sawada D. Learning from past and present: electronic response systems in college lecture halls. J Comp Math Sci Educ 21: 167-181, 2002.
21. Knight JK, Wood WB. Teaching more by lecturing less. Cell Biol Educ 4: 298-310, 2005.
22. Koenig K. Building acceptance for pedagogical reform through widescale implementation of clickers. J Coll Sci Teach 39: 46-50, 2010.
23. MacArthur JR, Jones LL. A review of literature reports of clickers applicable to college chemistry classrooms. Chem Educ Res Pract 9: 187-195, 2008.
24. Marieb EN, Hoehn K. Anatomy and Physiology. San Francisco, CA: Pearson Benjamin Cummings, 2008.
25. Milner-Bolotin M, Antimorova T, Petrov A. Clickers beyond the first-year science classroom. J Coll Sci Teach 40: 14-18, 2010.
26. National Research Council. Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Math, Engineering and Technology. Executive Summary. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science, 1999.
27. National Research Council. Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academies, 2003.
28. National Research Council. BIO 2010. Transforming Undergraduate Education for Future Research Biologists. Washington, DC: National Academies, 2003.
29. National Science Foundation. Shaping the Future. Washington, DC: NSF Directorate for Education and Human Resources, 1996, NSF 96-139.
30. Pascal CB. Formative assessment in physiology teaching using a wireless classroom communication system. Adv Physiol Educ 26: 299-308, 2002.
31. Patry M. Clickers in large classes: from student perceptions towards an understanding of best practices. Int J Scholar Teach Learn 3: 1-11, 2009.
32. Porter AG, Tousman S. Evaluating the effect of interactive audience response systems on the perceived learning experience of nursing students. J Nursing Educ 49: 523-527, 2010.
33. Roschelle J, Penuel W, Abrahamson L. Classroom Response and Communication Systems: Research Review and Theory (online). http://www.ubiqcomputing.org/CATAALYST_AERA_Proposal.pdf [13 June 2011].
34. Sevian H, Robinson WE. Clickers promote learning in all kinds of classes-small and large, graduate and undergraduate, lecture and lab. J Coll Sci Teach 40: 14-18, 2011.
35. Seymour E, Wiese DJ, Hunter AB, Daffinrud S. Creating a Better Mousetrap: On-Line Student Assessment of Their Learning Gains. San Francisco, CA: National Meetings of American Chemical Society Symposium, 2000.
36. Skinner S. On clickers, questions, and learning. J Coll Sci Teach 38: 20-23, 2009.
37. Student Assessment of Their Learning Gains. Student Assessment of Their Learning Gains Homepage (online). http://www.salgsite.org [13 June 2011].
38. Trees AR, Jackson MH. The learning environment in clicker classrooms: student processes of learning and involvement in large university level courses using student response systems. Learn Media Technol 32: 21-40, 2007.
39. Wolter BHK, Lundeberg MA, Kang H, Herreid CF. Students' perceptions of using personal response systems ("clickers") with case studies in science. J Coll Sci Teach 40: 14-19, 2011.