2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.07.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The use of learner response systems in the classroom enhances teachers' judgment accuracy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
0
14
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…At the intermediate level, technology integration helps realizing more efficient teaching methods and serves to augment traditional teaching methods (e.g., using a livesynchronized collaborative digital whiteboard). At the highest level, the use of technology may allow teachers to redefine or transform current teaching methods which would not be possible without technology integration, such as providing multi-media information (Moreno & Mayer, 2007;Renkl & Scheiter, 2017) or adaptive support (e.g., Lachner, Burkhart, & Nückles, 2017;Ma, Adesope, Nesbit, & Liu, 2014;Zhu & Urhahne, 2018). Nevertheless, such models only focus on the types of technology use and ignore the potential impact on learning processes (Hamilton et al, 2016) and more precisely the impact on teaching quality (Backfisch et al, 2020).…”
Section: Technology Integration Into Classroom Practicementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…At the intermediate level, technology integration helps realizing more efficient teaching methods and serves to augment traditional teaching methods (e.g., using a livesynchronized collaborative digital whiteboard). At the highest level, the use of technology may allow teachers to redefine or transform current teaching methods which would not be possible without technology integration, such as providing multi-media information (Moreno & Mayer, 2007;Renkl & Scheiter, 2017) or adaptive support (e.g., Lachner, Burkhart, & Nückles, 2017;Ma, Adesope, Nesbit, & Liu, 2014;Zhu & Urhahne, 2018). Nevertheless, such models only focus on the types of technology use and ignore the potential impact on learning processes (Hamilton et al, 2016) and more precisely the impact on teaching quality (Backfisch et al, 2020).…”
Section: Technology Integration Into Classroom Practicementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Researchers as well as politicians attribute educational technologies to have great potential in contributing to the quality of teaching and thus to the learning of students (Chauhan, 2017;Mayer, 2019;OECD, 2015;Zhu & Urhahne, 2018). However, research shows that teachers tend to rarely use technologies and to exploit only to a limited extent the distinct potential technologies offer (Fraillon, Ainley, Schulz, Friedman, & Duckworth, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although CBA tools, such as Clickers, Kahoot and RecaP, are used widely in schools the research evidence on their impact is mixed (Zhu and Urhahne 2018;Lasry 2008). Both the ad hoc nature with which they are deployed in classrooms and the limitations of their affordance capabilities as tools rather than systems are undoubtedly constraining factors.…”
Section: Computer-based Assessment (Cba)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…В рассмотренных нами публикациях в качестве факторов, обусловленных свойствами личности учителя, указывается мотивация учителя как к организации учебной деятельности, так и к оцениванию [26]. К профессиональным характеристикам были отнесены уровень профессионализма учителя [31,38]; профессиональные знания [26,41]; представления об оценочной деятельности [26]; умения осуществлять мониторинг и диагностику [36,39]; опыт профессиональной деятельности [41]. Ситуативные факторы указывают на состояние учителя непосредственно во время ситуации оценки: исследователи относят к этой группе состояние стресса [26], эмоциональное напряжение [26].…”
Section: результаты исследованияunclassified