Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Interactive Mobile Communication, Technologies and Learning

IMCL 2018: Mobile Technologies and Applications for the Internet of Things pp 359–367Cite as

Active Learning Strategy Using Mobile Technologies

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

  • 535 Accesses

Part of the book series: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing ((AISC,volume 909))

Abstract

Active learning strategies represent an important approach to increase student learning. One of these strategies is the use of classroom response systems, also known as clickers, for testing the knowledge that students learned in previous lectures, for checking students’ understanding during the development of solutions to technical problems, for checking their understanding of the new concepts presented in class, and for personal or anonymous student surveys. This paper describes the use of hardware clickers in two technical courses, presents their advantages, identifies their limitations, and proposes a solution to reduce or eliminate restrictions through the use of soft clickers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Slavin, R. E. (2010). Co-operative learning: What makes group-work work. In The nature of learning: Using research to inspire practice (pp. 161–178).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31–38.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Mills, J. E., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Engineering education—Is problem-based or project-based learning the answer. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 3(2), 2–16.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., et al. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. O’Mahony, T. K., Vye, N. J., Bransford, J. D., Sanders, E. A., Stevens, R., Stephens, R. D., … Soleiman, M. K. (2012). A comparison of lecture-based and challenge-based learning in a workplace setting: Course designs, patterns of interactivity, and learning outcomes. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(1), 182–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Tien, L. T., Roth, V., & Kampmeier, J. A. (2002). Implementation of a peer-led team learning instructional approach in an undergraduate organic chemistry course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 606–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning. In Reshaping the university: New relationships between research, scholarship and teaching (pp. 67–78).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Wage, K. E., Buck, J. R., Wright, C. H. G., & Welch, T. B. (2005). The signals and systems concept inventory. IEEE Transactions on Education, 48(3), 448–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Johnson, J. T. (2005). Creating learner centered classroom: Use of an audience response system in paediatric dentistry education. Journal of Dental Education, 69(3), 378–381.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Anderson, L. S., Healy, A. F., Kole, J. A., & Bourne, L. E. (2013). The clicker technique: Cultivating efficient teaching and successful learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27, 222–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bojinova, E., & Oigara, J. (2011). Teaching and learning with clickers: Are clickers good for students? Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 7, 169–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bojinova, E., & Oigara, J. (2013). Teaching and learning with clickers in higher education. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 25(2), 154–165.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kennedy, G. E., & Cutts, Q. I. (2005). The association between students’ use of an electronic voting system and their learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 260–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Caldwell, J. (2007). Clicker in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. Life Sciences Education, 6(1), 9–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Blasco-Arcas, L., Buil, I., Hernandez-Ortega, B., & Sesse, F. J. (2013). Using clickers in class. The role of interactivity, active collaborative learning and engagement in learning performance. Computers & Education, 62, 102–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Liu, C., Chen, S., Chi, C., Chien, K.-P., Liu, Y., & Chou, T.-L. (2017). The effects of clickers with different teaching strategies. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(5), 603–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Beckert, T., Fauth, E., & Olsen, K. (2009). Clicker satisfaction for students in human development: Differences for class type, prior exposure, and student talkativity. North American Journal of Psychology, 11(3), 599–611.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Barber, M., & Njus, D. (2007). Clicker evolution: Seeking intelligent design. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 6, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Katz, L., Hallam, M. C., Duvall, M. M., & Polsky, Z. (2017). Considerations for using personal Wi-Fi enabled devices as “clickers” in a large university class. Active Learning in Higher Education, 18(1), 25–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Johnson, D., & McLeod, S. (2005). Get answers: Using student response system to see students’ thinking. Learning and Leading with Technology, 32(4), 18–23.

    Google Scholar 

  22. https://www.iclicker.com/.

  23. Coca, D., & Sliško, J. (2013). Software Socrative and smartphones as tools for implementation of basic processes of active physics learning in classroom: An initial feasibility study with prospective teachers. European Journal of Physics Education, 4(2), 17–24.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Dervan, P. (2014). Increasing in-class student engagement using Socrative (an online Student Response System). The All Ireland Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (AISHE-J), 6(3), 1801–1813.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Awedh, M., Mueen, A., Zafar, B., & Manzoor, U. (2015). Using Socrative and smartphones for the support of collaborative learning. International Journal of Integrating Technology in Education (IJITE), 3(4), 17–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wash, P. (2014). Taking advantage of mobile devices: Using Socrative in the classroom. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, 3(1), 99–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Dakka, S. M. (2015). Using Socrative to enhance in-class student engagement and collaboration. International Journal on Integrating Technology in Education (IJITE), 4(3), 13–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Alemohammad, H., & Shahini, M (2013). Use of mobile devices as an interactive method in a mechatronics engineering course: A case study. In Proceedings of the ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition IMECE2013. Education and Globalization (Vol. 5), November 15–21, Can Diego, California, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lucke, T., Keyssner, U., & Dunn, P. (2013). The use of a classroom response system to more effectively flip the classroom. In 2013 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (pp. 491–495).

    Google Scholar 

  30. De Vos, M. (2018). Using electronic voting systems with ResponseWare to improve student learning and enhance the student learning experience—Final report. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267250288. Accessed 14 Aug 2018.

  31. Gong, Z., & Wallace, J. D. (2012). A comparative analysis of iPad and other M-learning technologies: Exploring students’ view of adoption, potentials, and challenges. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 13(1), 2–29.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Popescu, O., Chezan, L. C., Jovanovic, V. M., & Ayala, O. M. (2015). The use of poll everywhere in engineering technology classes to student stimulates critical thinking and motivation. In 122nd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Making Value for Society, June 14–17, Seattle, WA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Tregonning, A. M., Doherty, D. A., Hornbuckle, J., & Dickinson, J. (2012). The audience response system and knowledge gain: A prospective study. Medical Teacher, 34(4), 269–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Wu, X., & Gao, Y. (2011). Applying the extended technology acceptance model to the use of clickers in student learning: Some evidence from macroeconomics classes. American Journal of Business Education, 4(7), 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Whitehead, C., & Ray, L. (2018). Using the iClicker classroom response system to enhance student involvement and learning. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265192585. Retrieved 15 Aug 2018.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada

    Dan Centea & Moein Mehrtash

Authors
  1. Dan Centea
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Moein Mehrtash
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dan Centea .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Carinthia University of Applied Sciences, Villach, Austria

    Michael E. Auer

  2. Department of Informatics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Thrasyvoulos Tsiatsos

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Centea, D., Mehrtash, M. (2019). Active Learning Strategy Using Mobile Technologies. In: Auer, M., Tsiatsos, T. (eds) Mobile Technologies and Applications for the Internet of Things. IMCL 2018. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 909. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11434-3_39

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation