Student Evaluation of Clickers in a Combined Dental and Dental Hygiene Periodontology Course

Abstract

The purpose of this report is to describe the general use of clickers as an active learning tool and how they were used in teaching a combined periodontology course for second-year dental and junior dental hygiene students. A survey was used to capture student perceptions following completion of the course. Speciic domains were active learning, improved performance, and expectations. The survey response rate was 94.5 percent (121/128). Descriptive analyses showed that, in the domain of active learning, 102 (84.3 percent) agreed/strongly agreed that the use of clickers made the lectures more interactive; sixty-six (54.5 percent) agreed/strongly agreed that the clickers made them focus; and ninety-two (76 percent) agreed/strongly agreed that the clickers encouraged active participation. In the domain regarding improved performance, sixty-three (52 percent) agreed/ strongly agreed that the review sessions utilizing clickers helped them prepare for tests. In the domain of expectations, ninetythree (76.9 percent) had a better idea of what to expect on the examination due to the use of clickers, and seventy-three (60.3 percent) thought that the clickers should be used in future semesters for this class. In addition, faculty members appreciated the greater participation afforded through the use of clickers to obtain a better understanding of the students' grasp of course content. Learning theory suggests that students must actively engage in the learning process in order for meaningful learning in the form of critical thinking and problem-solving to take place. In this study, students conirmed that the use of clicker technology encouraged their active participation in a periodontology course.

Student evaluation of clickers in a dental pathology course

“…Seventy-four percent of the students found the use of the clickers system to be dynamic, 72% considered it to be a participative procedure, and 60% found the technology to be motivating. These results are consistent with those of other authors ( 14 ) in relation to the teaching of periodontics and dental hygiene. Similar findings have also been published in the teaching of pediatric dental care ( 18 ).…”

“…Some authors report the use of clickers in different educational areas, both in and outside the university setting ( 12 , 13 ), and in dental schools too ( 14 - 20 ).…”

Interactive audience response systems in oral and maxillofacial radiology undergraduate lectures

“…Questionnaires revealed that students tend to have a very positive attitude towards ARS use in OMR lectures. These results are very similar to those observed by previous studies . In the present study, student participation was significantly higher with ARS.…”

“…Responses selected by each student are transmitted to a receiver connected to a computer, and results can be immediately displayed on screen . Major advantages of ARS found in the literature include high acceptance and enthusiasm from students, anonymity of responses, instant feedback that help monitor students’ understanding, little need for training and technical support . Few disadvantages of ARS use have been reported, which include instructor anxiety related to technology failure, possible distraction caused by the equipment, instructor time to learn to use the technology and preparation time, and cost to students or school .…”

Effectiveness of an audience response system on orthodontic knowledge retention of undergraduate dental students – a randomised control trial

“…Student opinion relating to the use of ARS within dentistry is equally positive. Dental students strongly agreed that the use of ARS made lectures more interactive, and these students stated that they would like ARS to be used in the rest of the lecture programme ( Satheesh, 2013 ). Despite reports on the benefits of using ARS within higher education, the use of ARS within undergraduate orthodontic teaching is limited.…”