Increasing interactivity in lectures using an electronic voting system

By S. Draper, Margaret I. Brown. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 2004

597 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5558b84b84e904e81e9e36074b85224af1377a12

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Using short message service to encourage interactivity in the classroom (2006, methodology): “The use of the in-class tool to sense students’ understanding, indicates the possibility of using the tool for contingent teaching, as explored by Draper and Brown (2004).”
Clickers in college classrooms: Fostering learning with questioning methods in large lecture classes (2009, background): “…in the classroom has focused less on learning outcomes and more on self-reports of how helpful the students found the remote controls or how much they enjoyed using them (Beekes, 2006; Draper & Brown, 2004; Duncan, 2005; Hatch, Jensen, & Moore, 2005; Latessa & Mouw, 2005; Wit, 2003; Zahorik, 1996).”
The undergraduate experience of blended e-learning: a review of UK literature and practice (2006, methodology): “Technology has also been used, in quite a different way, to improve communication in the classroom through the use of electronic voting systems (also known as personal or audience response systems) (Banks, 2006; Draper and Brown, 2004; Judson and Sawada, 2002; Simpson and Oliver, 2002).”
Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Personal Response System in the Classroom (2009, background): “Several studies have investigated how using clickers in the classroom affects student participation and reactions to the lecture (Beekes, 2006; Draper & Brown, 2004; Kennedy & Cutts, 2005; Stowell & Nelson, 2007; Trees & Jackson, 2007; Wit, 2003; Wood, 2004; Yourstone, Kraye, & Albaum, 2008).”
Using clickers in class. The role of interactivity, active collaborative learning and engagement in learning performance (2013, background): “In sum, both types of interaction involve students actively in the classroom (Sims, 2003), provide information feedback to both parties and ultimately improve learning performance (Draper & Brown, 2004; Higgins, Hartley, & Skelton, 2002; Trees & Jackson, 2007).”
A Review of Literature Reports of Clickers Applicable to College Chemistry Classrooms (2008, background): “In two of these studies (Draper and Brown, 2004; Trees and Jackson, 2007) the use of clickers was analyzed in both science and humanities courses, but there was no indication of a difference in student attitudes between disciplines of use.”
INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT An Audience Response System Strategy to Improve Student Motivation, Attention, and Feedback (2009, methodology): “Posing periodic questions via an ARS changes the typical lecture routine by shifting focus from the instructor and providing a brief break in content presentation, compelling students to interact with the material and provide formative feedback to both instructor and students.(16) In this study, the”
Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: A review of the literature (2009, methodology): “Furthermore, some students feel that ARS-based discussion distracts them from the concepts being presented in a lesson (Draper & Brown, 2004) or view class discussion as intimidating and a source of anxiety (Nicol & Boyle, 2003).”