Using Interactive Response Systems in Economics: utility and factors influencing students’ attitudes

dc.contributor.authorBares López, Lydiaes_ES
dc.contributor.authorFernández Pérez, Ana Mªes_ES
dc.contributor.authorFerrándiz León, Estheres_ES
dc.contributor.authorFlores Varo, Mª Estheres_ES
dc.contributor.authorLeón Rodríguez, Mª Doloreses_ES
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-18T11:39:55Z
dc.date.available2017-04-18T11:39:55Z
dc.date.issued2017-04-10
dc.date.updated2017-04-18T10:45:49Z
dc.description.abstract[EN] The European Higher Education Area (EHEA) involves changing traditional methods to promote innovative teaching experiences. This paper has two main aims: a) to show evidence of the use of Interactive Response Systems (IRS) to identify gaps in the understanding of the course contents and b) to investigate factors influencing students’ attitudes towards the use of IRS. The experience was developed through a collective tutoring session in the subject of Economics using IRS. Economics is a first-year subject in the Degree of Business Administration and Management offered by the University of Cadiz, which includes contents of Microeconomics and Macroeconomics and uses economic models to explain the function of the economy and the behaviour of economic agents. Results show that IRS technique allows detecting gaps in learning and comprehension. From our econometric estimations, we also identify two strongly significant variables affecting students’ attitudes towards IRS: gender and received explanations regarding the use of IRS. Variables such as first enrolment in the subject and the number of hours devoted to studying have a positive and significant effect on the attitude to IRS, but at a lower level of significance (from 5% to 10%).en_EN
dc.description.accrualMethodSWORDes_ES
dc.description.bibliographicCitationBares López, L.; Fernández Pérez, AM.; Ferrándiz León, E.; Flores Varo, ME.; León Rodríguez, MD. (2017). Using Interactive Response Systems in Economics: utility and factors influencing students’ attitudes. Multidisciplinary Journal for Education, Social and Technological Sciences. 4(1):16-36. https://doi.org/10.4995/muse.2017.5476es_ES
dc.description.issue1
dc.description.referencesAnthis, K. (2011). Is It the Clicker, or Is It the Question? Untangling the Effects of Student Response System Use. Teaching of Psychology, 38(3), 189-193. doi:10.1177/0098628311411895es_ES
dc.description.referencesButler, J. A. (1992). Use of teaching methods within the lecture format. Medical Teacher, 14(1), 11-25. doi:10.3109/01421599209044010es_ES
dc.description.referencesCamacho-Mi-ano, M. D. M. and del Campo, C. (2014). Useful interactive teaching tool for learning: clickers in higher education. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-18.es_ES
dc.description.referencesCabrer, B., Sancho, A. and Serrano, G. (2001). Microeconometría y Decisión. Pirámide, Madrid.es_ES
dc.description.referencesCaldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the Large Classroom: Current Research and Best-Practice Tips. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 6(1), 9-20. doi:10.1187/cbe.06-12-0205es_ES
dc.description.referencesCarnaghan, C., & Webb, A. (2007). Investigating the Effects of Group Response Systems on Student Satisfaction, Learning, and Engagement in Accounting Education. Issues in Accounting Education, 22(3), 391-409. doi:10.2308/iace.2007.22.3.391es_ES
dc.description.referencesDallaire, D. H. (2011). Effective Use of Personal Response «Clicker» Systems in Psychology Courses. Teaching of Psychology, 38(3), 199-204. doi:10.1177/0098628311411898es_ES
dc.description.referencesEmenike, M. E., & Holme, T. A. (2012). Classroom Response Systems Have Not «Crossed the Chasm»: Estimating Numbers of Chemistry Faculty Who Use Clickers. Journal of Chemical Education, 89(4), 465-469. doi:10.1021/ed200207pes_ES
dc.description.referencesFallon, M., & Forrest, S. L. (2011). High-Tech Versus Low-Tech Instructional Strategies. Teaching of Psychology, 38(3), 194-198. doi:10.1177/0098628311411896es_ES
dc.description.referencesFies, C., & Marshall, J. (2006). Classroom Response Systems: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 101-109. doi:10.1007/s10956-006-0360-1es_ES
dc.description.referencesGebru, M. T., Phelps, A. J., & Wulfsberg, G. (2012). Effect of clickers versus online homework on students’ long-term retention of general chemistry course material. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 13(3), 325-329. doi:10.1039/c2rp20033ces_ES
dc.description.referencesGül, H., Gül, S. S., Kaya, E., & Alican, A. (2010). Main trends in the world of higher education, internationalization and institutional autonomy. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1878-1884. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.417es_ES
dc.description.referencesHan, J. H., & Finkelstein, A. (2013). Understanding the effects of professors’ pedagogical development with Clicker Assessment and Feedback technologies and the impact on students’ engagement and learning in higher education. Computers & Education, 65, 64-76. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.002es_ES
dc.description.referencesKay, R., & Knaack, L. (2009). Exploring the Use of Audience Response Systems in Secondary School Science Classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(5), 382-392. doi:10.1007/s10956-009-9153-7es_ES
dc.description.referencesKennedy, 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(4), 260-268. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00133.xes_ES
dc.description.referencesKing, S. O., & Robinson, C. L. (2009). ‘Pretty Lights’ and Maths! Increasing student engagement and enhancing learning through the use of electronic voting systems. Computers & Education, 53(1), 189-199. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.012es_ES
dc.description.referencesLasry, N. (2008). Clickers or Flashcards: Is There Really a Difference? The Physics Teacher, 46(4), 242-244. doi:10.1119/1.2895678es_ES
dc.description.referencesLiu,T., Liang, J., Wang, H., Chan, T. and Wei, L. (2003). Embedding Educlick in Classroom to Enhance Interaction. In Lee, K., Mitchell, K. (eds.) Proceedings International Conference Computers in Education (ICCE), 117-125. Hong Kong (China).es_ES
dc.description.referencesLudvigsen, K., Krumsvik, R., & Furnes, B. (2015). Creating formative feedback spaces in large lectures. Computers & Education, 88, 48-63. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.002es_ES
dc.description.referencesMacGeorge, E. L., Homan, S. R., Dunning, J. B., Elmore, D., Bodie, G. D., Evans, E., … Geddes, B. (2007). Student evaluation of audience response technology in large lecture classes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(2), 125-145. doi:10.1007/s11423-007-9053-6es_ES
dc.description.referencesMorling, B., McAuliffe, M., Cohen, L., & DiLorenzo, T. M. (2008). Efficacy of Personal Response Systems («Clickers») in Large, Introductory Psychology Classes. Teaching of Psychology, 35(1), 45-50. doi:10.1177/009862830803500112es_ES
dc.description.referencesMoss, K., & Crowley, M. (2011). Effective learning in science: The use of personal response systems with a wide range of audiences. Computers & Education, 56(1), 36-43. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.021es_ES
dc.description.referencesPalmer, E. J., Devitt, P. G., De Young, N. J., & Morris, D. (2005). Assessment of an electronic voting system within the tutorial setting: A randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN54535861]. BMC Medical Education, 5(1). doi:10.1186/1472-6920-5-24es_ES
dc.description.referencesPoirier, C. R., & Feldman, R. S. (2007). Promoting Active Learning Using Individual Response Technology in Large Introductory Psychology Classes. Teaching of Psychology, 34(3), 194-196. doi:10.1080/00986280701498665es_ES
dc.description.referencesSchackow, T., Milton, C., Loya, L. and Friedman, M. (2004). Audience Response Systems: Effect on Learning in Family Medicine Residents. Family Medicine, 36, 496-504.es_ES
dc.description.referencesSiau, K., Sheng, H., & Nah, F. F.-H. (2006). Use of a Classroom Response System to Enhance Classroom Interactivity. IEEE Transactions on Education, 49(3), 398-403. doi:10.1109/te.2006.879802es_ES
dc.description.referencesStowell, J. R., & Nelson, J. M. (2007). Benefits of Electronic Audience Response Systems on Student Participation, Learning, and Emotion. Teaching of Psychology, 34(4), 253-258. doi:10.1080/00986280701700391es_ES
dc.description.referencesVan Dijk, L. A., Van Der Berg, G. C., & Van Keulen, H. (2001). Interactive lectures in engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 26(1), 15-28. doi:10.1080/03043790123124es_ES
dc.description.referencesWhite, P., Syncox, D., & Alters, B. (2011). Clicking for grades? Really? Investigating the use of clickers for awarding grade-points in post-secondary education. Interactive Learning Environments, 19(5), 551-561. doi:10.1080/10494821003612638es_ES
dc.description.referencesWooldridge, J.M. (2003). Introductory econometrics, a modern approach. Second ed. South-Western College Publishing, Cincinnati, OH.es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpfin36es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpinicio16es_ES
dc.description.volume4
dc.identifier.doi10.4995/muse.2017.5476
dc.identifier.issn2341-2593
dc.identifier.urihttps://riunet.upv.es/handle/10251/79737
dc.languageIngléses_ES
dc.publisherUniversitat Politècnica de València
dc.relation.ispartofMultidisciplinary Journal for Education, Social and Technological Sciences
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://doi.org/10.4995/muse.2017.5476es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1177/0098628311411895es_ES
dc.relation.references10.3109/01421599209044010es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1187/cbe.06-12-0205es_ES
dc.relation.references10.2308/iace.2007.22.3.391es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1177/0098628311411898es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1021/ed200207pes_ES
dc.relation.references10.1177/0098628311411896es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1007/s10956-006-0360-1es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1039/C2RP20033Ces_ES
dc.relation.references10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.417es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.002es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1007/s10956-009-9153-7es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00133.xes_ES
dc.relation.references10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.012es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1119/1.2895678es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.002es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1007/s11423-007-9053-6es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1177/009862830803500112es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.021es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1186/1472-6920-5-24es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1080/00986280701498665es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1109/TE.2006.879802es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1080/00986280701700391es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1080/03043790123124es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1080/10494821003612638es_ES
dc.rightsReconocimiento - No comercial - Sin obra derivada (by-nc-nd)es_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsAbiertoes_ES
dc.subjectTeaching innovationes_ES
dc.subjectNew technologieses_ES
dc.subjectInteractive Response Systems (IRS)es_ES
dc.titleUsing Interactive Response Systems in Economics: utility and factors influencing students’ attitudeses_ES
dc.typeArtículoes_ES
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiones_ES
dspace.entity.typePublication
upv.uuid80b4eaf4-e93c-4e61-aee2-784b8cb53c35es_ES

Archivos

Bloque original

Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
Cargando...
Miniatura
Nombre:
5476-26489-1-PB.pdf
Tamaño:
391.57 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Bloque de licencias

Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
Cargando...
Miniatura
Nombre:
license.txt
Tamaño:
359 B
Formato:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Descripción: