Using an audience response system to improve learning success in practical skills training courses in dental studies - a randomised, controlled cross-over study

European Journal of Dental Education

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 147-153

  Wenz, H J ^a   Zupanic, M ^b   Klosa, K ^a   Schneider, B ^a   Karsten, G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KIEL   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WITTEN HERDECKE   (Germany)

Author keywords

Active learning; Audience response system; Cross over design; Learning success; Randomised controlled trial

Indexed keywords

ACHIEVEMENT; ADULT; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSSOVER PROCEDURE; DENTAL EDUCATION; EDUCATION; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMAN; LEARNING; MALE; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TEACHING;

ACHIEVEMENT; ADULT; COGNITION; COMPUTER-ASSISTED INSTRUCTION; CROSS-OVER STUDIES; EDUCATION, DENTAL; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; FEEDBACK; FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMANS; LEARNING; MALE; MOTOR SKILLS;

EID: 84904389342     PISSN: 13965883     EISSN: 16000579     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/eje.12071     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Barber M, Njus D. Clicker evolution: seeking intelligent design. CBE Life Sci Educ 2007: 6: 1-8.
2. Nelson C, Hartling L, Campbell S, Oswald AE. The effects of audience response systems on learning outcomes in health professions education. A beme systematic review: Beme guide no. 21. Med Teach 2012: 34: e386-e405.
3. Caldwell JE. Clickers in the large classroom: current research and best-practice tips. CBE Life Sci Educ 2007: 6: 9-20.
4. Draper SW, Brown MI. Increasing interactivity in lectures using an electronic voting system. J Comp Assist Learn 2004: 20: 81-94.
5. Cain J, Robinson E. A primer on audience response systems: current applications and future considerations. Am J Pharm Educ 2008: 72: 77.
6. Cain J, Black EP, Rohr J. An audience response system strategy to improve student motivation, attention, and feedback. Am J Pharm Educ 2009: 73: 21.
7. Miller RG, Ashar BH, Getz KJ. Evaluation of an audience response system for the continuing education of health professionals. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2003: 23: 109-115.
8. Kennedy GE, Cutts QI. The association between students' use of an electronic voting system and their learning outcomes. J Comp Assist Learn 2005: 21: 260-268.
9. Duggan PM, Palmer E, Devitt P. Electronic voting to encourage interactive lectures: a randomised trial. BMC Med Educ 2007: 7: 25.
10. Rubio EI, Bassignani MJ, White MA, Brant WE. Effect of an audience response system on resident learning and retention of lecture material. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008: 190: W319-W322.
11. Gauci SA, Dantas AM, Williams DA, Kemm RE. Promoting student-centered active learning in lectures with a personal response system. Adv Physiol Educ 2009: 33: 60-71.
12. Doucet M, Vrins A, Harvey D. Effect of using an audience response system on learning environment, motivation and long-term retention, during case-discussions in a large group of undergraduate veterinary clinical pharmacology students. Med Teach 2009: 31: e570-e579.
13. Efstathiou N, Bailey C. Promoting active learning using audience response system in large bioscience classes. Nurse Educ Today 2012: 32: 91-95.
14. Clauson KA, Alkhateeb FM, Singh-Franco D. Concurrent use of an audience response system at a multi-campus college of pharmacy. Am J Pharm Educ 2012: 76: 6.
15. Jensen JV, Ostergaard D, Faxholt AK. Good experiences with an audience response system used in medical education. Dan Med Bull 2011: 58: A4333.
16. Eitner S, Holst S, Wichmann M, Karl M, Nkenke E, Schlegel A. Comparative study on interactive computer-aided-learning and computer-aided-testing in patient-based dental training in maxillofacial surgery. Eur J Dent Educ 2008: 12: 35-40.
17. Elashvili A, Denehy GE, Dawson DV, Cunningham MA. Evaluation of an audience response system in a preclinical operative dentistry course. J Dent Educ 2008: 72: 1296-1303.
18. Kay RH, LeSage A. A strategic assessment of audience response systems used in higher education. Australas J Educ Technol 2009: 25: 235-249.
19. Schackow TE, Chavez M, Loya L, Friedman M. Audience response system: effect on learning in family medicine residents. Fam Med 2004: 36: 496-504.
20. Rahmann A, Jacker-Guhr S, Staufenbiel I, et al. Use of elaborate feedback and an audience-response-system in dental education. GMS Z Med Ausbild 2013: 30: Doc35.
21. Pileggi R, O'Neill PN. Team-based learning using an audience response system: an innovative method of teaching diagnosis to undergraduate dental students. J Dent Educ 2008: 72: 1182-1188.
22. Fraenkel JR, Wallen EW. How to design and evaluate research in education. 7th edn, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2008.
23. Liu FC, Gettig JP, Fjortoft N. Impact of a student response system on short- and long-term learning in a drug literature evaluation course. Am J Pharm Educ 2010: 74: 6.
24. Alexander CJ, Crescini WM, Juskewitch JE, Lachman N, Pawlina W. Assessing the integration of audience response system technology in teaching of anatomical sciences. Anat Sci Educ 2009: 2: 160-166.
25. Hoyt A, McNulty JA, Gruener G, et al. An audience response system may influence student performance on anatomy examination questions. Anat Sci Educ 2010: 3: 295-299.
26. Stoddard HA, Piquette CA. A controlled study of improvements in student exam performance with the use of an audience response system during medical school lectures. Acad Med 2010: 85: S37-S40.