Effectiveness of student response systems in terms of learning environment, attitudes and achievement

Abstract

In order to investigate the effectiveness of using Student Response Systems (SRS) among grade 7 and 8 science students in New York, the How Do You Feel About This Class? (HDYFATC) questionnaire was administered to 1,097 students (532 students did use SRS and 565 students who did not use SRS). Data analyses attested to the sound factorial validity and internal consistency reliability of the HDYFATC, as well as its ability to differentiate between the perceptions of students in different classrooms. Very large differences between users and non-users of SRS, ranging from 1.17 to 2.45 standard deviations for various learning environment scales, attitudes and achievement, supported the efficacy of using SRS.

Audience Response Systems in a Korean Cultural Context : Poll Everywhere’s Effects on Student Engagement in English Courses

“…The evidence suggests that students were invited to take risks and use English to produce ideas and opinions that they may not have felt inclined to do so in other language classrooms. The findings of this research are consistent with that of other researchers from other areas of the globe (Blood & Neel, 2008;Cohn & Fraser, 2016;Damron & Mott, 2006;Gewirtz, 2012;Kappers & Culter, 2014;Sellar, 2010;Shon & Smith, 2011;Stowell & Nelson, 2007;Warnich & Gordon, 2015). What is unique, however, is that the findings of this research originated in a Korean rather than Western context.…”

“…An examination of the literature on the use of ARS's in language classrooms reveals a significant lack of data. Most studies of ARS's in the classroom have broad applications for most educational fields (Blood & Neel, 2008;Cohn & Fraser, 2016;Damron & Mott, 2006;Gewirtz, 2012;Sellar, 2010;Stowell & Nelson, 2007). Although the findings of these studies have numerous implications for the language learning classroom, few studies have dealt with the topic of ARS's inside the language learning classroom specifically (Bruff, 2009).…”

“…Cohn and Fraser (2016) found in their study that middle school students who engaged in an ARS during class saw very large differences between non-users of ARS in areas ranging from more positive attitudes, an enhanced learning environment, and heightened achievement. Their study resulted in an affirmation of the efficacy of ARS approaches in the classroom (Cohn & Fraser, 2016).…”

“…The authors deduced that the use of an ARS reduced negative academic emotions such as anxiety and shame that could prevent more introverted students from participating in lectures and tasks (Stowell & Nelson, 2007). Cohn and Fraser (2016) found in their study that middle school students who engaged in an ARS during class saw very large differences between non-users of ARS in areas ranging from more positive attitudes, an enhanced learning environment, and heightened achievement. Their study resulted in an affirmation of the efficacy of ARS approaches in the classroom (Cohn & Fraser, 2016).…”

The Influence of the Learning Environment on Learner Autonomy: A comparative Study of Polish and Yemeni EFL Undergraduate Learners

“…According to the National Core Curriculum (2004), a learning environment means "entity of psychic factors, social relations, and physical environment concerning learning and teaching" (cited in Nyman & Kaikkonen, 2013, p. 169). Cohn and Fraser (2013) reported two models of the learning environments: the first model by Lewin (1936), where the "interactions between the surrounding environment and an individual's personality determine each individual's behaviours in a given situation" (Cohn & Fraser, 2013, p. 187); and the second one by Murray (1938), which was built upon Lewin's theory when he "proposed a needs-press model in which the needs of both the individual and the press of a given situation or environment both can affect the outcome of behaviour" (Cohn & Fraser, 2013, p. 187).…”