Journal of Science Education and Technology

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 101–109 | Cite as

Classroom Response Systems: A Review of the Literature

Abstract

As the frequency with which Classroom Response Systems (CRSs) are used is increasing, it becomes more and more important to define the affordances and limitations of these tools. Currently existing literature is largely either anecdotal or focuses on comparing CRS and non-CRS environments that are unequal in other aspects as well. In addition, the literature primarily describes situations in which the CRS is used to provide an individual as opposed to a group response. This article points to the need for a concerted research effort, one that rigorously explores conditions of use across diverse settings and pedagogies.

Keywords

Response systems educational technology formative assessment 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abrahamson, A. L. (1998, June 3–6). An Overview of Teaching and Learning Research with Classroom Communication Systems. Paper presented at the International Conference of the Teaching of Mathematics, Village of Pythagorion, Samos, Greece.Google Scholar
  2. Abrahamson, A. L. (1999, May 27–30, 1999). Teaching with a Classroom Communication System—What it Involves and Why it Works. Paper presented at the VII Taller Internacional “Nuevas Tendencias en la Ensenanza de la Fisica,” Benemerita Universidad Autonoma de Puebla, Puebla, Mexico.Google Scholar
  3. Barron, B. J. S. (2000). Achieving coordination in Collaborative Problem-Solving Groups. Journal of the Learning Sciences 9: 403–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beatty, I. D. (2004, February 03). Transforming Student Learning with Classroom Communication Systems. Retrieved April 9, 2004, from http://www.utexas.edu/academic/cit/services/cps/ECARCRS.pdf
  5. Benckert, S. (2001, July 1–6, 10). Context and Conversation—A Way to Create a More Gender-Inclusive Physics Education? Paper presented at the GASAT-Conference 2001, Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
  6. Boyle, J. (1999, January 8). Using Classroom Communication Systems with Large Classes. Paper presented at the Taking Advantage of Hand Held Technology and Calculator Network Workshop, University of Strathclyde, Scotland, UK.Google Scholar
  7. Boyle, J., Nicol, D., Hamilton, B., and Dempster, B. (2001, August 6–10). The Use of Classroom Feedback Systems to Enable Active Learning in Large Engineering Mechanics Classes. Paper presented at the International Conference on Engineering Education, Oslo, Norway.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, A., Campione, J. C., Reeve, R. A., Ferrara, R. A., and Palincsar, A. S. (1991). Interactive learning and individual understanding: The case of reading and mathematics. In Landsmann, L. T. (Ed.), Culture, Schooling, and Psychological Development, Ablex, Norwood, NJ, pp. 136–170.Google Scholar
  9. Bullock, D. W., LaBella, V. P., Clingan, T., Ding, Z., Stewart, G., and Thibado, P. M. (2002). Enhancing the student–instructor interaction frequency. The Physics Teacher 40: 30–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burnstein, R. A., and Lederman, L. M. (2001). Using wireless keypads in lecture classes. The Physics Teacher 39: 8–11.Google Scholar
  11. Burnstein, R. A., and Lederman, L. M. (2003). Comparison of different commercial wireless keypad systems. The Physics Teacher 41: 272–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burnstein, R. A., and Lederman, L. M. (2005). Enhanced multiple choice type questions. AAPT Announcer 34: 110–111.Google Scholar
  13. Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research 64: 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crouch, C. H., and Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics 69: 970–977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cue, N. (1998). A Universal Learning Tool for Classrooms? Paper presented at the First Quality in Teaching and Learning Conference, Hong Kong International Trade and Exhibition Center (HITEC), Hong Kong SAR, China.Google Scholar
  16. Davis, S. M. (2003). Observations in classrooms using a network of handheld devices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 19: 298–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dufresne, R. J., Gerace, W. J., Leonard, W. J., and Mestre, J. P. (2000). ASK-IT/A2L: Assessing Student Knowledge with Instructional Technology. Retrieved April 15, 2004.Google Scholar
  18. Dufresne, R. J., Wenk, L., Mestre, J. P., Gerace, W. J., and Leonard, W. J. (1996). Classtalk: A classroom communication system for active learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 7: 3–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. English, D. (2003). Audiences talk back: Response systems fill your meeting media with instant data. AV Video Multimedia Producer 25: 22–24.Google Scholar
  20. Fagen, A., Crouch, C. H., and Mazur, E. (2002). Peer instruction: Results from a range of classrooms. The Physics Teacher 40: 206–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fies, C. (2005). Classroom Response Systems: What Do They Add to An Active Learning Environment? Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Texas, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
  22. Ganger, A. C., and Jackson, M. (2003). Wireless handheld computers in the preclinical undergraduate curriculum. Medical Education Online [Serial Online] 8.Google Scholar
  23. Hafner, K. (2004, April 29, 2004). In Class, the Audience Weighs In. Retrieved April 29, 2004.Google Scholar
  24. Hall, S. R., Waitz, I., Brodeur, D. R., Soderholm, D. H., and Nasr, R. (2002, November 6–9). Adoption of Active Learning in a Lecture-based Engineering Class. Paper presented at the 32nd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  25. Hallett, V. (2005, October, 17). Teaching with Tech: Podcasts, back channels, and bookless libraries come to campus. U.S. News and World Report 55–58.Google Scholar
  26. Horowitz, H. M. (1988). Student Response Systems: Interactivity in a Classroom Environment. Retrieved October 22, 2004, from http://www.qwizdom.com/software/interactivity_in_classrooms.pdf
  27. Mazur, E. (1997). Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.Google Scholar
  28. Mestre, J. P., Gerace, W. J., Dufresne, R. J., and Leonard, W. J. (1996). Promoting Active Learning in Large Classes Using a Classroom Communication System. Paper presented at the International Conference on Undergraduate Physics Education, College Park, MD.Google Scholar
  29. Mestre, J. P., Gerace, W. J., Dufresne, R. J., and Leonard, W. J. (1997). Promoting Active Learning in Large Classes Using a Classroom Communication System. Paper presented at the International Conference on Undergraduate Physics Education (ICUPE), College Park, MD.Google Scholar
  30. Miller, R. G., Ashar, B. H., and Getz, K. J. (2003). Evaluation of an audience response system for the continuing education of health professionals. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions 23: 109–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Motani, M., and Garg, H. K. (2002, August 18-21). Instantaneous Feedback in an Interactive Classroom. Paper presented at the International Conference on Engineering Education, Manchester, UK.Google Scholar
  32. Naismith, L., Lonsdale, P., Vavoula, G., and Sharples, M. (2004). Literature Review in Mobile Technologies and Learning, NESTA (National Endowment for Science Technology and the Arts), Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
  33. Nicol, D. J., and Boyle, J. T. (2003). Peer instruction versus class-wide discussion in large classes: A comparison of two interaction methods in the wired classroom. Studies in Higher Education 28: 458–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Paschal, C. B. (2002). Formative assessment in physiology teaching using a wireless classroom communication system. Advances in Physiology Education 26: 299–308.Google Scholar
  35. Penuel, W. R., Roschelle, J., Crawford, V., Shechtman, N., and Abrahamson, A. L. (2004). CATAALYST Workshop Report: Advancing Research on the Transformative Potential of Interactive Pedagogies and Classroom Networks. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International (Stanford Research Institute) and Better Education Foundation.Google Scholar
  36. Poulis, J., Massen, C., Robens, E., and Gilbert, M. (1998). Physics lecturing with audience-paced feedback. American Journal of Physics 66: 439–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Reay, N. W., Bao, L., Pengfei, L., Warnakulasooriya, R., and Baugh, G. (2005). Toward an effective use of voting machines in physics lectures. American Journal of Physics 73: 554–558.Google Scholar
  38. Robertson, L. J. (2000). Twelve tips for using a computerised interactive audience response system. Medical Teacher 22: 237–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Roschelle, J., Abrahamson, L. A., and Penuel, W. R. (2004a, April 16). DRAFT Integrating Classroom Network Technology and Learning Theory to Improve Classroom Science Learning: A Literature Synthesis. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  40. Roschelle, J., and Pea, R. (2002). A walk on the WILD side: How wireless handhelds may change computer-supported collaborative learning. International Journal of Cognition and Technology 1: 145–168.Google Scholar
  41. Roschelle, J., Penuel, W. R., and Abrahamson, A. L. (2004b). Classroom Response and Communication Systems: Research Review and Theory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  42. Roschelle, J., Penuel, W. R., and Abrahamson, A. L. (2004c). The networked classroom. Educational Leadership 61: 50–54.Google Scholar
  43. Stroup, W. M., Ares, N., and Lesh, R. A. (2006). Diversity by design: The what, why and how of generativity in next-generation classroom networks. In R. A. Lesh, E. Hamilton, and J. J. kaput (Eds.), Foundations of the Future: Twenty-first century models and modeling. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  44. Stroup, W. M., Ares, N. M., and Hurford, A. C. (2005). A dialectic analysis of generativity: Issues of network supported design in mathematics and science. Journal of Mathematical Thinking and Learning 7(3): 181–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stroup, W. M., Ares, N., and Hurford, A. (2004, October). A taxonomy of generative activity design supported by next-generation classroom networks. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of Psychology in Mathematics Education North America.Google Scholar
  46. Stroup, W. M., Kaput, J. J., Ares, N. M., Wilensky, U., Hegedus, S., Roschelle, J., et al. (2002). The Nature and Future of Classroom Connectivity: The Dialectics of Mathematics in the Social Space. Paper presented at the 24th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Athens, GA.Google Scholar
  47. Tannen, D. (2004). Conversational styles. In Bloom, L. Z., White, E. M., and Borrowman, S. (Eds.), Inquiry: Questioning, Reading, Writing, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, pp. 203–208.Google Scholar
  48. Woods, H. A., and Chiu, C. (2003). Wireless Response Technology in College Classrooms. Retrieved August 18, 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of TexasSan AntonioUSA
  2. 2.The University of TexasAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations