Use of clickers vs. mobile devices for classroom polling

Computers and Education

Volumn 82, Issue , 2015, Pages 329-334

  Stowell, Jeffrey R ^a  

^a EASTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Computer mediated communication; Evaluation methodologies; Improving classroom teaching; Interactive learning environments

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION; STUDENTS; TEACHING;

COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION; EVALUATION METHODOLOGIES; EXPLORATORY STUDIES; IMPROVING CLASSROOM TEACHING; INTERACTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT; MISSING RESPONSE; MOBILE TECHNOLOGY; STUDENT RESPONSE;

MOBILE DEVICES;

EID: 84919706511     PISSN: 03601315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.12.008     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Andergassen, M., Guerra, V., Ledermüller, K., & Neumann, G. (2012). Browser-based mobile clickers: implementation and challenges. In I. A. Sánchez, & P. Isaías (Eds.), Proceedings IADIS international conference - Mobile learning (pp. 189-198). Berlin, Germany. Retrieved from http://nm.wu-wien.ac.at/research/publications/b917.pdf.
2. Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: current research and best-practice tips. CBE Life Sciences Education, 6(1), 9-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.06-12-0205.
3. Dunn, P. K., Richardson, A., Oprescu, F., & McDonald, C. (2013). Mobile-phone-based classroom response systems: students' perceptions of engagement and learning in a large undergraduate course. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 44(8), 1160-1174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2012.756548.
4. End, C. M., Worthman, S., Mathews, M. B., & Wetterau, K. (2010). Costly cell phones: the impact of cell phone rings on academic performance. Teaching of Psychology, 37(1), 55-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00986280903425912.
5. Froese, A., Carpenter, C., Inman, D., Schooley, J., Barnes, R., Brecht, P., et al. (2012). Effects of classroom cell phone use on expected and actual learning. College Student Journal, 46(2), 323-333.
6. Gordon, T., & Becker, H. (1973, October 16). Voting machine. United States. Retrieved from http://www.google.com/patents/US3766541.
7. Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Ludgate, H. (2013). NMC horizon report: 2013 higher education edition. Austin, Texas. Retrieved from http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2013-horizon-report-HE.pdf.
8. Judson, E., & Sawada, D. (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 from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/-/print/PrintArticle.aspx?id?91487242.
9. Koppen, E., Langie, G., & Bergervoet, B. (2013). Replacement of a clicker system by a mobile device audience response system. In Proceeding of the 41st SEFI Conference. Leuven, Belgium. Retrieved from http://www.kuleuven.be/communicatie/congresbureau/congres/sefi2013/eproceedings/28.pdf.
10. Kuznekoff, J. H., & Titsworth, S. (2013). The impact of mobile phone usage on student learning. Communication Education, 62(3), 233-252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2013.767917.
11. Lam, S., Wong, K., Mohan, J., Xu, D., & Lam, P. (2011). Classroom communication on mobile phones - first experiences with web-based "clicker"system. In ASCILITE-Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education Annual Conference (pp. 763-777). Retrieved from http://www.leishman-associates.com.au/ascilite2011/downloads/papers/Lam-full.pdf.
12. Reay, N. W., Li, P., & Bao, L. (2008). Testing a new voting machine question methodology. American Journal of Physics, 76(2), 171-178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.2820392.
13. Smith, A. (2013). Smartphone ownership - 2013 update. Retrieved from http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2013/PIP-Smartphone-adoption-2013-PDF.pdf.
14. Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C., Knight, J. K., Guild, N., et al. (2009). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science, 323(5910), 122-124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1165919.
15. Stowell, J. R., & Nelson, J. M. (2007). Benefits of electronic audience response systems on student participation, learning, and emotion. Teaching of Psychology, 34(4), 253-258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00986280701700391.
16. Stowell, J. R. (2014). Using technology effectively in the psychology classroom. In D. S. Dunn (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Undergraduate Psychology Education. New York: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199933815.013.021.
17. Stowell, J. R., Oldham, T., & Bennett, D. (2010). Using student response systems ("clickers") to combat conformity and shyness. Teaching of Psychology, 37(2), 135-140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00986281003626631.
18. Stowell, J. R., Tanner, J., & Tomasino, E. (2015). Harnessing mobile technology for student assessment. In Z. Yan (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mobile Phone Behavior. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
19. Sun, J. C. Y. (2014). Influence of polling technologies on student engagement: an analysis of student motivation, academic performance, and brainwave data. Computers &Education, 72, 80-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.010.
20. Tao, J., Clark, J., Gwyn, G., & Lim, D. (2010). Hand-held clickers vs. virtual clickers: what do our students think? Journal of Interactive Instruction Development, 21(4), 17-23. Retrieved from http://www.sealund.com/JIID-Vol21-No4.pdf.