Evaluating the Effectiveness of Electronic Response Systems in Technology-Oriented Classes

Electronic Response Systems such as Kahoot, Poll
Everywhere, and Google Classroom are gaining a lot of popularity
when surveying audiences in events, meetings, and classroom. The
reason is mainly because of the ease of use and the convenience these
tools bring since they provide mobile applications with a simple user
interface. In this paper, we present a case study on the effectiveness
of using Electronic Response Systems on student participation and
learning experience in a classroom. We use a polling application
for class exercises in two different technology-oriented classes. We
evaluate the effectiveness of the usage of the polling applications
through statistical analysis of the students performance in these two
classes and compare them to the performances of students who
took the same classes without using the polling application for class
participation. Our results show an increase in the performances of the
students who used the Electronic Response System when compared
to those who did not by an average of 11%.

Authors:

• Ahmad Salman

Keywords:

• Interactive learning
• classroom technology
• electronic response systems
• polling applications
• learning evaluation.

References:

[1] D. Lebow. Constructivist values for instructional systems design: Five
principles toward a new mindset. ETR&D, 41:4–16, 1993.
[2] W. R. Klemm. What good is learning if you don’t remember it? The
Journal of Effective Teaching, 7(1):61–73, 2007.
[3] A. W. Chickering and Z. F. Gamson. Development and adaptations of
the seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. New
Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1999(80):75–81, 2002.
[4] W. M. Boyd. Repeating questions in prose learning. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 64:31–38, 1973.
[5] R. W. Kulhavy. Feedback in written instruction. Review of Educational
Research, 53:211–232, 1977.
[6] D. A. Karp and W. C. Yoels. The college classroom: Some observations
on the meanings of student participation. Sociology and Social Research,
60:421–439, 1976.
[7] E. Stones. Students’ attitudes to the size of teaching groups. Educational
Review, 21(2):98–108, 1970.
[8] J. Schacter and C. Fagnano. Does computer technology improve student
learning and achievement? How, when, and under what conditions?
Journal of Educational Computing Research, 20(4):329–343, 1999.
[9] K. Hinde and A. Hunt. Using the personal response system to enhance
student learning: Some evidence from teaching economics. In D. Banks,
editor, Audience response systems in higher education: Applications and
cases. Information Science Publishing, Hershey, PA, 2006.
[10] D. Duncan. Clickers: A new teaching aid with exceptional promise.
Astronomy Education Review, 5:1–24, 2006.
[11] R. R. Hake. Interactive-engagement vs. traditional methods: A
six-thousandstudent survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics
courses. American Journal of Physics, 66:64–74, 1998.
[12] Poll Everywhere Support, https://www.polleverywhere.com/ ,2019
[13] James Madison University Course Catalog, shorturl.at/fKMQV ,2019