Customizable Learning Scenarios for Students’ Mobile Devices in Large University Lectures: A Next Generation Audience Response System

  • Daniel SchönEmail author
  • Melanie Klinger
  • Stephan Kopf
  • Thilo Weigold
  • Wolfgang Effelsberg
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 583)


Audience Response Systems are a common sight in today’s university lectures. They are used to increase student’s motivation, self reflection and activation during large lectures with up to hundreds of students. The wide distribution of mobile devices supports this development, as teachers no longer have to hand out special hardware clickers, but can build on a variety of mobile web applications, which are able to perform classroom activities, like quizzes, lecture feedback and brainstorming. Therefore, most systems do either support a reasonable amount of basic scenarios or are very specialized in a few less common scenarios. But teachers often want to customize an established scenario for their own needs. This could be a small variation like an additional information text to a multiple choice question up to a more complex background logic to perform live experiments. Therefore, we developed a model and wrote a prototype which enables the users to customize their established learning scenarios or even build novel ones. Our teachers are now able to design and customize their own in-class learning scenarios, fill them with their content, use them in their lectures and reflect the results with their students. But besides the technological capabilities, designing a well-founded learning scenario still needs a certain amount of time and didactic experience.


Audience response systems Clickers Quizzes Learning scenarios Peer instruction Lecture feedback. 


  1. 1.
    Kopf, S., Effelsberg, W.: New teaching and learning technologies for interactive lectures. Adv. Technol. Learn. (ATL) J. 4, 60–67 (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schön, D., Klinger, M., Kopf, S., Effelsberg, W.: MobileQuiz – a lecture survey tool using smartphones and QR tags. Int. J. Digit. Inf. Wirel. Commun. (IJDIWC) 2, 231–244 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schön, D., Klinger, M., Kopf, S., Effelsberg, W.: A model for customized in-class learning scenarios an approach to enhance audience response systems with customized logic and interactivity benefits of audience response. In: 7th International Conference on Computer Supported Education, CSEDU. SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology Publications, Lissabon (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schön, D., Yang, L., Klinger, M.: On the effects of different parameters in classroom interactivity systems on students. In: Carliner, S., Fulford, C., Ostashewski, N. (eds.) EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, pp. 721–729 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ehlers, J.P., Möbs, D., vor dem Esche, J., Blume, K., Bollwein, H., Halle, M.: Einsatz von formativen, elektronischen testsystemen in der präsenzlehre. GMS Zeitschrift fur Medizinische Ausbildung 27 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Uhari, M., Renko, M., Soini, H.: Experiences of using an interactive audience response system in lectures. BMC Med. Educ. 3, 12 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rascher, W., Ackermann, A., Knerr, I.: Interaktive kommunikationssysteme im kurrikurlaren unterricht der pädiatrie für medizinstudierende. Monatsschrift Kinderheilkunde 152, 432–437 (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tremblay, E.: Educating the mobile generation – using personal cell phones as audience response systems in post-secondary science teaching. J. Comput. Math. Sci. Teach. 29, 217–227 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen, J.C., Whittinghill, D.C., Kadlowec, J.A.: Classes that click: fast, rich feedback to enhance student learning and satisfaction. J. Eng. Educ. 99, 159–168 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dufresne, R.J., Gerace, W.J., Leonard, W.J., Mestre, J.P., Wenk, L.: Classtalk: a classroom communication system for active learning. J. Comput. High. Educ. 7, 3–47 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dawabi, P., Dietz, L., Fernandez, A., Wessner, M.: ConcertStudeo: using PDAs to support face-to-face learning. In: Wasson, B., Baggetun, R., Hoppe, U., Ludvigsen, S. (eds.) International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning 2003 - Community Events, Bergen, Norway, pp. 235–237 (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Scheele, N., Wessels, A., Effelsberg, W., Hofer, M., Fries, S.: Experiences with interactive lectures: considerations from the perspective of educational psychology and computer science. In: Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning: Learning 2005: The Next 10 Years! CSCL 2005, pp. 547–556. International Society of the Learning Sciences (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Murphy, T., Fletcher, K., Haston, A.: Supporting clickers on campus and the faculty who use them. In: Proceedings of the 38th Annual ACM SIGUCCS Fall Conference: Navigation and Discovery, SIGUCCS 2010, pp. 79–84. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kay, R.H., LeSage, A.: Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: a review of the literature. Comput. Educ. 53, 819–827 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vinaja, R.: The use of lecture videos, ebooks, and clickers in computer courses. J. Comput. Sci. Coll. 30, 23–32 (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Teel, S., Schweitzer, D., Fulton, S.: Braingame: a web-based student response system. J. Comput. Sci. Coll. 28, 40–47 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Llamas-Nistal, M., Caeiro-Rodriguez, M., Gonzalez-Tato, J.: Web-based audience response system using the educational platform called bea. In: 2012 International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE), pp. 1–6 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jagar, M., Petrovic, J., Pale, P.: Auress: the audience response system. In: 2012 Proceedings ELMAR, pp. 171–174 (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jackowska-Strumillo, L., Nowakowski, J., Strumillo, P., Tomczak, P.: Interactive question based learning methodology and clickers: fundamentals of computer science course case study. In: 2013 The 6th International Conference on Human System Interaction (HSI), pp. 439–442 (2013)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kundisch, D., Herrmann, P., Whittaker, M., Beutner, M., Fels, G., Magenheim, J., Sievers, M., Zoyke, A.: Desining a web-based application to support peer instruction for very large groups. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems, pp. 1–12. AIS Electronic Library, Orlando (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schön, D., Klinger, M., Kopf, S., Effelsberg, W.: Homequiz: blending paper sheets with mobile self-assessment tests. In: Herrington, J., Couros, A., Irvine, V. (eds.) Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2013, pp. 1446–1454. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Victoria (2013)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chabi, M., Ibrahim, S.: The impact of proper use of learning system on students’ performance – case study of using mymathlab. In: 6th International Conference on Computer Supported Learning, pp. 551–554 (2014)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Seemann, E.: Teaching mathematics in online courses - an interactive feedback and assessment tool. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer Supported Education, pp. 415–420. SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology Publications (2014)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Veeramachaneni, K., Dernoncourt, F.: MOOCdb: Developing data standards for mooc data science. In: AIED 2013 Workshops, pp. 1–8 (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Schön
    • 1
    Email author
  • Melanie Klinger
    • 1
  • Stephan Kopf
    • 1
  • Thilo Weigold
    • 1
  • Wolfgang Effelsberg
    • 1
  1. 1.University of MannheimMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations