A comparison of MCQ assessment delivery methods for student engagement and interaction used as an in-class formative assessment

International Journal of Electrical Engineering and Education

Volumn 48, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 323-337

  Chan, Cecilia Ka Yuk ^a   Tam, Vincent W L ^a   Li, Chi Ying Vanessa ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Classroom response system; Clickers; Formative assessment; Interaction; Learning management system; MCQ; Student engagement

Indexed keywords

EDUCATION; ENGINEERING EDUCATION;

CLASSROOM RESPONSE SYSTEMS; CLICKERS; FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT; INTERACTION; LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM; STUDENT ENGAGEMENT;

STUDENTS;

EID: 84055190700     PISSN: 00207209     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7227/IJEEE.48.3.9     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. J. B. Biggs, 'Approaches to the enhancement of tertiary teaching', Higher Education Research and Development, 8 (1989), 7-25.
2. M. Freeman and J. McKenzie, 'Aligning peers assessment with peer learning for large classes: The case for an online self and peer assessment system', in D. Boud, R. Cohen and J. Sampson (Eds), Peer Learning in Higher Education: Learning from and with each other (Kogan Page, London, 2001).
3. R. A. Burns, 'Information impact and factors affecting recall', Paper presented at Annual National Conference on Teaching Excellence and Conference of Administrators, Austin TX (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 258 639) (1985).
4. C. Elliot, 'Using a personal response system in economics teaching', Int. Rev. Econ. Educ. 1(1) (2003), 80-86.
5. D. Nicol, 'E-assessment by design: Using multiple-choice tests to good effect', J. Further and Higher Education, 31(1) (2007), 53-64.
6. K. Scouller, 'The infl uence of assessment method on students' learning approaches: Multiple choice question examination versus assignment essay', Higher Education, 35(4) (1998), 453-472.
7. S. W. Draper, 'Catalytic assessment: understanding how MCQs and EVS can foster deep learning', Br. J. Educ. Technol., 40(2) (2009), 285-293.
8. T. Govindasamy, 'Successful implementation of e-learning: Pedagogical considerations', The Internet and Higher Education, 4(3-4) (2001), 287-299. (Pubitemid 33736111)
9. J. Bull and M. Danson, Blueprint for Computer-assisted Assessment (Routledge, London, 2004).
10. J. Sztipanovits, G. Biswas, K. Frampton, A. Gokhale, L. Howard, G. Karsai, T. J. Koo, X. Koutsoukos and D. C. Schmidt, 'Introducing embedded software and systems education and advanced learning technology in an engineering curriculum', ACM Trans. Embed. Comput. Syst., 4(3) (2005), 549-568.
11. Y. Wei and J. Johnes, 'Internet tools in teaching quantitative economics: Why gaps between potential and reality?', J. Further and Higher Education, 29(2) (2005), 125-141.
12. K. Crossgrove and K. L. Curran, 'Using clickers in nonmajors- and majors-level biology courses: Student opinion, learning, and long-term retention of course material', CBE Life Sci. Educ., 7(1) (2008), 146-154. (Pubitemid 351872994)
13. B. K. McFarlin, 'Hybrid lecture-online format increases student grades in an undergraduate exercise physiology course at a large urban university', Adv. Physiol. Educ., 32 (2008), 86-91.
14. I. Haq and J. Dacre, 'Computer-assisted learning in undergraduate and postgraduate rheumatology education', Rheumatology, 42(2) (2003), 367-370. (Pubitemid 36305627)
15. D. W. Aesche and G. R. Parslow, 'Use of questions from the medical biochemistry question bank with the "q" instruction package', Biochem. Educ., 16(1) (1988), 24-28.
16. M. D. Buckley-Sharp and F. T. C. Harris, 'The banking of multiple-choice questions', Med. Educ., 4(1) (1970), 42-52.
17. B. Issac and S. M. Jacob, 'Effects of online MCQ tests on student learning, in: M. Iskander, V. Kapila and M. A. Karim (Eds), Technological Developments in Education and Automation (Springer, Dordrecht, 2010), pp.403-408.
18. K. Sanders, J. Hill, J. Meyer, G.Fyfe, S. Fyfe, M. Ziman and N. Koehler, 'Gender and engagement in automated online test feedback in fi rst year human biology', in Proc. ASCILITE, ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning, Singapore, 2007, available at http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/ singapore07/procs/sanders-poster.pdf.
19. R. E. Mayer, A. Stull, K. Deleeuw, K. Almeroth, B. Bimber, D. Chun, M. Bulger, J. Campbell, A. Knight and H. Zhang, 'Clickers in college classrooms: Fostering learning with questioning methods in large lecture classes', Contemporary Educ. Psychol., 34(1) (2009), 51-57.
20. J. Berry, 'Technology support in nursing education: Clickers in the classroom', Nursing Educ. Perspectives, 30(5) (2009), 295.
21. S. Gauci, A. Dantas, D. Williams and R. Kemm, 'Promoting student-centered active learning in lectures with a personal response system', Adv. Physiol. Educ., 33(1) (2009), 60-71.
22. E. Macgeorge, S. Homan, J. Dunning, D. Elmore, G. Bodie, E. Evans, S. Khichadia, S. Lichti, B. Feng and B. Geddes, 'Student evaluation of audience response technology in large lecture classes', Educ. Technol. Research and Development, 56(2) (2008), 125-145.
23. A. M.Rashad, A. A. Youssif, R. A. Abdel-Ghafar and A. E. Labib, 'E-assessment tool: A course assessment tool integrated into knowledge assessment', in M. Iskander (Ed.), Innovative Techniques in Instruction Technology, e-Learning, e-Assessment, and Education (Springer, Dordrecht, 2008), pp.7-12.
24. K. Woelk, 'Optimizing the use of personal response devices (clickers) in large-enrolment introductory courses', J. Chem. Educ., 85(10) (2008), 1400.
25. C. J. Alexander, W. M. Crescini, J. E. Juskewitch, N. Lachman and W. Pawlina, 'Assessing the integration of audience response system technology in teaching of anatomical sciences', Anatomical Sci.Educ., 2(4) (2009), 160-166.
26. M. Martyn, 'Clickers in the classroom: An active learning approach', Educause Quarterly, 30(2) (2007), 71-74.
27. T. Joosten, M. Mccallister, T. Stone and S. M. Zvacek, 'Managing the adoption of clickers: Experiences of several universities', Educause, Dallas, TX, 9-12 October, 2006.
28. R. Kaleta and T. Joosten, 'Student reponse system: A University of Wisconsin system study of clickers', ECAR Res. Bull., 10 (2007), 1-12.
29. J. Twetten, M. K. Smith, J. Julius and B. L. Murphy, 'Successful clicker standardization', Educause Quarterly, 30(4) (2007), 63-67.
30. S. O. King and C. L. Robinson, ' ''Pretty lights" and maths! Increasing student engagement and enhancing learning through the use of electronic voting systems', Comput. Educ., 53(1) (2009), 189-199.
31. D. Petr, 'Experience with a multiple-choice audience response system in an engineering classroom', in Proc. 35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, 19-22 October, 2005, Indianapolis, IN (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 2005).
32. C. B. Paschal, 'Formative assessment in physiology teaching using a wireless classroom communication system', Adv. Physiology Educ., 26(4) (2002), pp.299-308.
33. S. A. Yourstone, H. S. Kraye and Albaum, 'Classroom questioning with immediate electronic response: Do clickers improve learning?', Decision Sci. J. Innovative Educ., 6(1) (2008), 75-88.
34. L. C. Koh, 'Academic staff perspectives of formative assessment in nurse education', Nurse Education in Practice, 10 (2010), 205-209.
35. A. R. Trees and M. H. Jackson, '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(1) (2007), 21-40.
36. P. Duggan, E. Palmer and P. Devitt, 'Electronic voting to encourage interactive lectures: A randomised trial', BMC Medical Education, 7(1) (2007), 25.
37. K. A. Smith, 'Continuing to build engineering education research capabilities', IEEE Trans. Educ., 49(1) (2006), 1-3. (Pubitemid 43264168)
38. L. C. McDermott, 'Research in physics education', APS News, Education Outreach, 7(1) (1998), 8.
39. L. Johnson, R. Smith and S. Stone, The 2010 Horizon Report (The New Media Consortium, Austin, TX, 2010).