A systematic review of audience response systems for teaching and learning in higher education: The student experience

Abstract

Eight databases were used to locate research articles examining the use of audience response systems (ARS) for large group teaching in higher education settings which focussed upon the student experience. Qualitative and mixed methods articles were screened according to selection criteria. Of the twenty selected studies, an analysis of the papers helped identify six interconnected themes: 1) engagement 2) interaction 3) anonymity 4) questioning 5) instant feedback and 6) technological benefits and limitations. The themes reveal the complexity of student learning experiences using ARS which, when presented as a model, contributes to current understanding and offers a framework of pedagogical conditions to consider when designing and implementing learning experiences when using ARS.

COVID-19 Crisis: Exploring Community of Inquiry in Online Learning for Sub-Degree Students

“…Clearly, the growing speed of data transfer and connectivity generates higher opportunities for interfacing within the learning and teaching spaces. Extensive connectivity via Bluetooth, infrared, and WiFi fosters the adoption of mobile devices like laptops, mobile phones, and tablets (Wood and Shirazi, 2020). If adequate network speeds and advanced mobile devices are available, teachers can respond and support discussions that explicate ideas and encourage learning.…”

“…Indeed, high network speed supports important pedagogical characteristics (e.g., online submission, automatic notification, asynchronous and synchronous interaction, online discussion forum, and various kinds of instant feedback, to name but a few; Yu and Wu, 2011). Wood and Shirazi (2020) stated that the majority of students expressed that network speed and different communication formats foster discussion with their classmates. Nevertheless, network speed facilitates social presence to perform group cohesion, open communication, and effective communication.…”

“…It is somehow paradoxical that the traditional way of learning and teaching in higher education comprises a lecture-style arrangement, including a massive number of students sitting in lecture theaters with minimal interaction with their teachers and peers. Such nonparticipating and transmission-based experiences seem to be failing to fulfill the expectations of students (Wood and Shirazi, 2020), particularly in Hong Kong, where the conditions seem to be ideal for more interactive, technology-based approaches. Hong Kong is known for having a superb infrastructure, which meets the needs of its population and contributes to the efficiency and growth of the economy.…”

“…In addition, students can participate in managing the content and progress of their learning (Lee, 2008). Wood and Shirazi (2020) addressed that the control of the learning environment is gradually changed from the teacher to the learner. However, the teacher is expected to provide well-structured learning materials and subject design to improve student participation and ensure relevance.…”

Maintaining Academic Performance and Student Satisfaction during the Remote Transition of a Nursing Obstetrics Course to Online Instruction

“…Faculty also used an electronic audience response system (EARS), which allow students to be polled on specific questions in real-time and can be used synchronously or asynchronously and in either face-to-face or remote formats. Studies of EARS in higher education suggest these tools can enhance student engagement, create beneficial anonymity for answers, and provide instant feedback (Wood & Shirazi, 2020). Integrations through the LMS conference software allowed faculty to add multiple-choice or true/false questions for students to answer anonymously.…”