Using a personal response system as an in-class assessment tool in the teaching of basic college chemistry

Abstract

<p>Since the introduction of personal response systems (PRS) (also referred to as "clickers") nearly a decade ago, their use has been extensively adopted on college campuses, and they are particularly popular with lecturers of large classes. Available evidence supports that PRS offers a promising avenue for future developments in pedagogy, although findings on the advantages of its effective use related to improving or enhancing student learning remain inconclusive. This study examines the degree to which students perceive that using PRS in class as an assessment tool effects their understanding of course content, engagement in classroom learning, and test preparation. Multiple, student-performance evaluation data was used to explore correlations between student perceptions of PRS and their actual learning outcomes. This paper presents the learning experiences of 151 undergraduate students taking basic chemistry classes and incorporating PRS as an in-class assessment tool at the National Chung Hsing University in Taiwan. While the research revealed positive student perceived benefits and effectiveness of PRS use, it also indicated the need for further studies to discover what specific contribution PRS can make to certain learning outcomes of a large chemistry class in higher education.</p><br />

The effect of using personal response system on 6th grade students' achievement and attitudes towards science and technology

“…In this regard, the usage of PRS in the course is a critical component in satisfying these requirements. In line with prior research, in this study, students found PRS to be simple and enjoyable to use, and they believed it improved their learning, class engagement, and overall classroom learning effectiveness (Chen & Lan, 2013). Consistent with previous studies, this study demonstrated that students found PRS to be enjoyable and straightforward to use and that it increased their learning, class engagement, and overall classroom learning effectiveness (Akkuş, Özkan & Çakır, 2021;Arthur & Owusu, 2020;Baltaci-Goktalay, 2016;Chen & Lan, 2013).…”

Reflections on the Use of a Personal Response System (PRS) for Summative Assessment in an Undergraduate Taught Module

“…98.5% of students reported that the system was easy to use and 92.5% perceived that the use of the system helped their learning (Lorimer and Hilliard, 2007). Other studies have reported similar findings (Jefferson and Spiegel, 2009;Chen and Lan, 2013). Despite many studies exploring the use of PRS for formative feedback, there is little information on the use on the use of PRS for summative assessment.…”

Validation of a questionnaire on the use of Interactive Response System in Higher Education

“…In relation to the items of the IRS-ITLP, they were written after an extensive bibliographic review on the three factors highlighted above ( 21 , 46 - 47 ) . Despite of the absence of experts on this field, this process provides validity to the questionnaire items.…”

“…Concerning the classroom environment factor, IRS increases attendance ( 21 ) and student participation ( 22 - 25 ) , resulting in a higher level of involvement during classes in comparison to the traditional methodology ( 23 , 26 - 27 ) . Within the learning factor, some studies establish that frequent and positive interaction makes classes more dynamic when using IRS ( 13 , 28 - 29 ) , promoting active learning ( 30 - 32 ) .…”