Investigating the effect of clicker use on problem-solving among adult learners: A cross-sectional survey
Abstract
Classroom response systems (clickers) have been found to engage and attract student attention and facilitate the practical application of key ideas to solve problems. This study was designed to investigate the effects of clicker use on problem-solving among adult learners. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to 60 students after giving them actual case studies for problem-solving using PowerPoint slides. An equal number of participants were assigned to each of the control (n=30) and experimental groups (n=30). Although both groups engaged in the same problem-solving tasks, the experimental group used clickers as a learning tool in the classroom. Data were analyzed using frequency, means, exploratory factor analysis, the Friedman ranking test, and linear regression analysis. The study findings revealed overall positive responses toward using clickers in the classroom. They also suggested that clickers encouraged thinking and problem-solving. It is concluded that problem-solving learning in adult education appears to be more effective when accompanied by clicker use than through conventional teaching methods.
Received: 26 September 2019
Accepted: 04 March 2020
Published online: 19 May 2020
Downloads
References
Al-Bashir, Md. Mamoon, Md. Rezaul Kabir, and Ismat Rahman. “The Value and Effectiveness of Feedback in Improving Students’ Learning and Professionalizing Teaching in Higher Education.” Journal of Education and Practice 7, no. 16 (2016): 38–41.
Andrade, Heidi, and Ying Du. “Student Responses to Criteria-Referenced Self- Assessment.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 32, no. 2 (2007): 159–181. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600801928.
Brady, Melanie, Helena Seli, and Jane Rosenthal. “‘Clickers’ and Metacognition: A Quasi-Experimental Comparative Study about Metacognitive Self-Regulation and Use of Electronic Feedback Devices.” Computers & Education 65 (2013): 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.001.
Buil, Isabel, Sara Catalán, and Eva Martínez. “Do Clickers Enhance Learning? A Control-Value Theory Approach.” Computers & Education 103 (2016): 170– 182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.10.009.
Cakiroglu, Unal, Fath Erdogdu, and Seyfullah Gokoglu. “Clickers in EFL Classrooms: Evidence from Two Different Uses.” Contemporary Educational Technology 9, no. 2 (2018): 171–185. https://doi.org/10.30935/cet.414820.
Chen, Wentao, Jinyu Zhang, and Zhonggen Yu. “Advantages and Disadvantages of Clicker Use in Education.” International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education 13, no. 1 (2017): 61–71. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijicte.2017010106.
Coderre, Sylvain P., Peter Harasym, Henry Mandin, and Gordon Fick. “The Impact of Two Multiple-Choice Question Formats on the Problem-Solving Strategies Used by Novices and Experts.” BMC Medical Education 4, no. 1 (2004): 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-4-23.
Cook, Rifka, and Susanna Calkins. “More Than Recall and Opinion: Using ‘Clickers’ to Promote Complex Thinking.” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 24, no. 2 (2019): 51–76.
Deal, Ashley. “Classroom Response Systems.” Published November 30, 2007. https://www.cmu.edu/teaching/technology/whitepapers/ClassroomResponse_Nov07.pdf. Accessed August 4, 2019.
Demikhova, Nadiia, Prykhodko Olga, Loboda Andrii, Bumeister Valentina, Smiianov Vladyslav, Smiianov Yevgen, Lukianykhin Vadym, and Demikhov Oleksii. “Using PBL and Interactive Methods in Teaching Subjects in Medical Education.” Journal of Problem Based Learning in Higher Education 4, no. 1 (2016): 81–90. https://doi.org/10.5278/ojs.jpblhe.v0i0.1227.
Foronda, Cynthia, Brent MacWilliams, and Erin McArthur. “Interprofessional Communication in Healthcare: An Integrative Review.” Nurse Education in Practice 19 (2016): 36–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2016.04.005.
Han, Jae Hoon, and Adam Finkelstein. “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 (2013): 64–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.002.
He, Xiaohua, and Anne Canty. “A Comparison of The Efficacy of Test-Driven Learning Versus Self-Assessment Learning.” Journal of Chiropractic Education 27, no. 2 (2013): 110–115. doi: https://doi.org/10.7899/jce-13-6.
Jessup, Leonard M., Terry Connolly, and Jolene Galegher. 1990. “The Effects of Anonymity on GDSS Group Process with an Idea-Generating Task.” MIS Quarterly 14 (3): 313–21. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/248893.
Ju, Hyunjung, and Ikseon Choi. “The Role of Argumentation in Hypothetico- Deductive Reasoning During Problem-Based Learning in Medical Education: A Conceptual Framework.” Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning 12, no. 1 (2018): 4. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1638.
Jug, Rachel, Xiaoyin “Sara” Jiang, and Sarah M. Bean. “Giving and Receiving Effective Feedback: A Review Article and How-to Guide.” Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine 143, no. 2 (2019): 244–250. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2018-0058-ra.
Lantz, Michael E., and Angela Stawiski. “Effectiveness of Clickers: Effect of Feedback and the Timing of Questions on Learning.” Computers in Human Behavior 31 (2014): 280–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.009.
Levesque, Aime A. “Using Clickers to Facilitate Development of Problem-Solving Skills.” CBE—Life Sciences Education 10, no. 4 (2011): 406–417. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-03-0024.
Liu, Cui, Sufen Chen, Chi Chi, Kuei-Pin Chien, Yuzhen Liu, and Te-Lien Chou. “The Effects of Clickers with Different Teaching Strategies.” Journal of Educational Computing Research 55, no. 5 (2017): 603–628. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116674213.
Meedzan, Nancy, and Kelly L. Fisher. “Clickers in Nursing Education: An Active Learning Tool in the Classroom.” Online Journal of Nursing Informatics (OJNI) 13, no. 2 (2019): 1–19.
Millor, Maite, Jon Etxano, Pedro Slon, Paula García-Barquín, Alberto Villanueva, Gorka Bastarrika, and Jesús Ciro Pueyo. “Use of Remote Response Devices: An Effective Interactive Method in the Long-Term Learning.” European Radiology 25, no. 3 (2015): 894–900. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3468-3.
Morales, Lucia. “Can the Use of Clickers or Continuous Assessment Motivate Critical Thinking? A Case Study Based on Corporate Finance Students.” Higher Learning Research Communications 1, no. 1 (2011): 33. https://doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v1i1.31.
Muth’im, Abdul. “Does Student Self-Assessment Assess as Valid and Reliable as Teacher Assessment?” Arab World English Journal 7, no. 1 (2016): 123–139. doi: https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol7no1.9.
Prince, Michael J., and Richard M. Felder. “Inductive Teaching and Learning Methods: Definitions, Comparisons, and Research Bases.” Journal of Engineering Education 95, no. 2 (2006): 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00884.x.
Russell, Janet S., Mindy McWilliams, Laura Chasen, and Jean Farley. “Using Clickers for Clinical Reasoning and Problem Solving.” Nurse Educator 36, no. 1 (2011): 13–15. https://doi.org/10.1097/nne.0b013e3182001e18.
Smith, Michelle K., Seanna L. Annis, Jennifer J. Kaplan, and Frank Drummond. “Using Peer Discussion Facilitated by Clicker Questions in an Informal Education Setting: Enhancing Farmer Learning of Science.” PLoS ONE 7, no. 10 (2012): e47564. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047564.
Smith, Michelle K., William B. Wood, Wendy K. Adams, Carl Wieman, Jennifer K. Knight, Nancy Guild, and Tin Tin Su. “Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance on in-Class Concept Questions.” Science 323, no. 5910 (2009): 122–124. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165919.
Spinello, Elio F., and Ronald Fischbach. “Using a Web-Based Simulation as a Problem-Based Learning Experience: Perceived and Actual Performance of Undergraduate Public Health Students.” Public Health Reports 123, no. 2 (2008): 78–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/00333549081230s211.
Stevens, Niall T., Hélène McDermott, Fiona Boland, Teresa Pawlikowska, and Hilary Humphreys. “A Comparative Study: Do ‘Clickers’ Increase Student Engagement in Multidisciplinary Clinical Microbiology Teaching?” BMC Medical Education 17, no. 1 (2017): 70. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-017-0906-3.
Wagner, Janet, Beth Liston, and Jackie Miller. “Developing Interprofessional Communication Skills.” Teaching and Learning in Nursing 6, no. 3 (2011): 97–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2010.12.003.
Authors are required to sign and submit a copyright transfer agreement after acceptance but before publication of their manuscript. To that effect, they receive, from the Managing Editor of Tuning Journal for Higher Education, a standard copyright assignment form designed along the following lines:
1. Authorship:
The author who signs the copyright transfer agreement must be the sole creator of the work or legally acting on behalf of and with the full agreement of all the contributing authors.
2. Copyright and Code of conduct:
a) Authors warrant that their work is original; has not been previously copyrighted or published in any form; is not under consideration for publication elsewhere; its submission and publication do not violate TJHE Ethical Guidelines for Publication and any codes (of conduct), privacy and confidentiality agreements, laws or any rights of any third party; and no publication payment by the Publisher (University of Deusto) is required.
b) Authors are solely liable for the consequences that may arise from third parties’ complaints about the submitted manuscript and its publication in Tuning Journal for Higher Education (TJHE).
c) Authors grant to the Publisher the worldwide, sub-licensable, and royalty-free right to exploit the work in all forms and media of expression, now known or developed in the future, for educational and scholarly purposes.
d) Authors retain the right to archive, present, display, distribute, develop, and republish their work (publisher's version) to progress their scientific career provided the original publication source (Tuning Journal) is acknowledged properly and in a way that does not suggest the Publisher endorses them or their use of the wortk.
e) Authors warrant that no permissions or licences of any kind will be granted that might infringe the rights granted to the Publisher.
3. Users:
Tuning Journal for Higher Education is an Open Access publication. Its content is free for full and immediate access, reading, search, download, distribution and reuse in any medium or format only for non-commercial purposes and in compliance with any applicable copyright legislation, without prior permission from the Publisher or the author(s). In any case, proper acknowledgement of the original publication source must be made and any changes to the original work must be indicated clearly and in a manner that does not suggest the author’s and or Publisher’s endorsement whatsoever. Any other use of its content in any medium or format, now known or developed in the future, requires prior written permission of the copyright holder.
1.jpg)
1.jpg)
.jpg)
1.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
