2008
DOI: 10.18785/jetde.0101.08
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Student Response Systems in Higher Education: Moving Beyond Linear Teaching and Surface Learning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
40
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 67 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
2
40
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These concepts of higher learning are consistent with those advocated by Chickering & Gamson (1987) and Bloom & Krathwohl (1956), and revisited in Anderson & Krathwohl (2001), Dangel & Wang (2008), ITS Education Asia (2014), Collins (2014), and Facione (2015). The authors are not aware of an instrument that examines problem-solving with its sub-components of research skills, critical thinking skills, and creative idea generation skills, as is being proposed here.…”
Section: Instrument Developmentsupporting
confidence: 83%
“…These concepts of higher learning are consistent with those advocated by Chickering & Gamson (1987) and Bloom & Krathwohl (1956), and revisited in Anderson & Krathwohl (2001), Dangel & Wang (2008), ITS Education Asia (2014), Collins (2014), and Facione (2015). The authors are not aware of an instrument that examines problem-solving with its sub-components of research skills, critical thinking skills, and creative idea generation skills, as is being proposed here.…”
Section: Instrument Developmentsupporting
confidence: 83%
“…For example, it is possible to devise multiple-choice questions in which learners must calculate or logically deduce the answer (Dangel & Wang, 2008); however, there is no inherent social construction of knowledge. Learners individually determine their responses and, unless the instructor engages the learners in a process to discuss their individual responses together, knowledge is not socially constructed.…”
Section: Cheong Bruno and Cheongmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many researchers argue that they allow for anonymous participation and add a game approach to the classroom environment (Martyn, 2007); they can be used successfully in a small classroom as well as in a large one (Gilbert, 2005); they can turn multiplechoice questions into effective tools for engaging all students during class, students are more invested in participating in discussion and are more likely to have generated some ideas to share in that discussion (Bruff, 2009). Mobile voting tools can advance profound learning when teaching strategies center on higherlevel thinking skills (Dangel & Wang, 2008) and help design formative assessment activities (Rubner, 2012).…”
Section: Mobile Testing and Voting Tools In Educational Contexts: A Bmentioning
confidence: 99%