Using Interactive Response Systems in Economics: utility and factors influencing students’ attitudes
The European Higher Education Area (EHEA) involves changing traditional methods to promote innovative teaching experiences. This paper has two main aims: a) to show evidence of the use of Interactive Response Systems (IRS) to identify gaps in the understanding of the course contents and b) to investigate factors influencing students’ attitudes towards the use of IRS. The experience was developed through a collective tutoring session in the subject of Economics using IRS. Economics is a first-year subject in the Degree of Business Administration and Management offered by the University of Cadiz, which includes contents of Microeconomics and Macroeconomics and uses economic models to explain the function of the economy and the behaviour of economic agents. Results show that IRS technique allows detecting gaps in learning and comprehension. From our econometric estimations, we also identify two strongly significant variables affecting students’ attitudes towards IRS: gender and received explanations regarding the use of IRS. Variables such as first enrolment in the subject and the number of hours devoted to studying have a positive and significant effect on the attitude to IRS, but at a lower level of significance (from 5% to 10%).
Anthis, K. (2011). Is It the Clicker, or Is It the Question? Untangling the Effects of Student Response System Use. Teaching of Psychology, 38(3), 189-193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628311411895
Butler, J. A. (1992). Use of Teaching Methods within the Lecture Format. Medical Teacher, 14(1), 11-25. https://doi.org/10.3109/01421599209044010
Camacho-Mi-ano, M. D. M. and del Campo, C. (2014). Useful interactive teaching tool for learning: clickers in higher education. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-18.
Cabrer, B., Sancho, A. and Serrano, G. (2001). Microeconometría y Decisión. Pirámide, Madrid.
Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the Large Classroom: Current Research and Best-practice Tips. Life Sciences Education, 6(1), 9-20. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.06-12-0205
Carnaghan, C. and Webb, A. (2007). Investigating the Effects of Group Response Systems on Student Satisfaction, Learning and Engagement in Acounting Education. Issues in Accounting Education, 22 (3), 391-409. https://doi.org/10.2308/iace.2007.22.3.391
Dallaire, D. H. (2011). Effective Use of Personal Response "Clicker" Systems in Psychology Courses. Teaching of Psychology, 38(3), 199-204. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628311411898
Emenike, M. E. and Holme, T. A. (2012). Classroom Response Systems Have Not "Crossed the Chasm": Estimating Numbers of Chemistry Faculty Who Use Clickers. Journal of Chemical Education, 89, 465-469. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed200207p
Fallon, M. and Forrest, S. L. (2011). High-Tech Versus Low-Tech Instructional Strategies: A Comparison of Clickers and Handheld Response Cards. Teaching of Psychology, 38(3), 194-198. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628311411896
Fies, C. and Marshall, J. (2006). Classroom Response Systems: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 101-109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-006-0360-1
Gebru, M. T., Phelps, A. J. and Wulfsberg, G. (2012). Effect of Clickers Versus Online Homework on Students´ Long-term Retention of General Chemistry Course Material. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13, 325-329. https://doi.org/10.1039/C2RP20033C
Gül, H., Gül, S. S., Kaya, E. and Alican, A. (2010). Main Trends in the World of Higher Education, Internationalization and Institutional Autonomy. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1878-1884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.417
Han, J. H. and Finkelstein, A. (2013). Understanding the effects of professors' pedagogical development with Clicker Assessment and Feedback technologies and the impact on students' engagement and learning in higher education. Computers & Education, 65, 64-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.002
Hughes, C., Roche, A. M., Bywood, P. and Trifonoff, A. (2011). Audience-response Devices (Clickers): A Discussion Paper on their Potential Contribution to Alcohol Education in Schools. Health Education Journal, 72 (1), 47-55.
Kay, R. and Knaack, L. (2009). Exploring the Use of Audience Response Systems in Secondary School Science Classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18 (5), 382-392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9153-7
Kennedy, G. and Cutts, Q. (2005). The Association between Students' Use of Electronic Voting Systems and their Learning Outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(4), 260-268. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00133.x
King, S. O. and Robinson, C. L. (2009). `Pretty Lights´ and Maths! Increasing Student Engagement and Enhancing Learning through the Use of Electronic Voting Systems. Computers & Education, 53, 189-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.012
Lasry, N. (2008). Clickers or Flashcards: Is there really a Difference?. The Physics Teacher, 46, 242-244. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2895678
Liu,T., Liang, J., Wang, H., Chan, T. and Wei, L. (2003). Embedding Educlick in Classroom to Enhance Interaction. In Lee, K., Mitchell, K. (eds.) Proceedings International Conference Computers in Education (ICCE), 117-125. Hong Kong (China).
Ludvigsen, K., Krumsvik, R. and Furnes, B. (2015). Creating formative feedback spaces in large lectures. Computers & Education, 88, 48-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.002
MacGeorge, E. L., Homan, S. R., Dunning, J. B. (Jr), Elmore, D., Bodie, G. D., Evans, E., Khichadia, S., Lichti, S. M., Feng, B. and Geddes, B. (2008). Student Evaluation of Audience Response Technology in Large Lecture Classes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 125-145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9053-6
Morling, B., McAuliffe, M., Cohen, L. and DiLorenzo, T. M. (2008). Efficacy of "Clickers" in Large, Introductory Psychology Classes. Teaching of Psychology, 35, 45-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/009862830803500112
Moss, K. and Crowley, M. (2011). Effective learning in science: The use of personal response systems with a wide range of audiences. Computers & Education, 56(1), 36-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.021
Palmer, E. J., Devitt, P. G., De Young, N. and Morris, D. (2005). Assessment of an Electronic Voting System within the tutorial setting: A randomised controlled trial. BMC Medical Education, 5:24. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-5-24
Poirier, C. R. and Feldman, R. S. (2008). Promoting Active Learning using Individual Response Technology in Large Introductory Psychology Courses. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 194-196. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280701498665
Schackow, T., Milton, C., Loya, L. and Friedman, M. (2004). Audience Response Systems: Effect on Learning in Family Medicine Residents. Family Medicine, 36, 496-504.
Siau, K.; Sheng, H. and Fui-Hoon Nah, F. (2006). Use of a Classroom Respond System to Enhance Classroom Interactivity. IEEE Transactions on Education, 49(3), 398-403. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2006.879802
Stowell, J. R. and Nelson, J. M. (2007). Benefits of Electronic Audience Response Systems on Student Participation, Learning and Emotion. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 253-258. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280701700391
Van Dijk, L. A., Van den Berg, G. C. and Van Keulen, H. (2001). Interactive Lectures in Engineering Education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 26(1), 15-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043790123124
White, P., Syncox, D. and Alters, B. (2011). Clicking for grades? Really? Investigating the use of clickers for awarding grade-points in post-secondary education. Interactive Learning Environments, 19(5), 551-561. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494821003612638
Wooldridge, J.M. (2003). Introductory econometrics, a modern approach. Second ed. South-Western College Publishing, Cincinnati, OH.
Metrics powered by PLOS ALM
This journal is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NonDerivs 4.0 Internacional License.
Universitat Politècnica de València
e-ISSN: 2341-2593 https://dx.doi.org/10.4995/muse