The audience response system: a modality for course evaluation

Turban, Joseph W.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03348.x

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Audience Response Systems (ARS) have been used in education for many years in undergraduate [3,4,5,6,7] and medical school [8,9,10,11] and post graduate training [12,13,14,15]. A device, commonly referred to as a clicker, typically has a numeric keypad, which allows participants to respond anonymously in real time to a multiple choice slide, often as part of a PowerPoint presentation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Students Prefer Audience Response System for Lecture Evaluation

Turban

2011

Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Student evaluation of courses is an important component of overall course evaluation. The extent of student participation in the evaluation may be related to the ease of the evaluation process. The standard evaluation format is a paper form. This study examines medical students preference of utilizing Audience Response System compared to a paper method. Methods: Following several medical school lectures, students were queried if they preferred Audience Response System versus a paper method, and if they would prefer using Audience Response System more for future course evaluations. Results: 391 students were queried. Overall response rate was 94%. Using a five point Likert scale, 299 out of 361 (82%) responded they agreed, or strongly agreed with the statement “We should use ARS more. . .” When asked which format they preferred to use for evaluation, 299/367 (81%) responded Audience Response System, 31 (8%) preferred paper, and 37 (10%) were not sure, or had no opinion (chi squared = 378.936, df2, p<0.0001). Conclusion: The medical students surveyed showed a strong preference for utilizing Audience Response System as a course evaluation modality, and desired its continued use in medical school. Audience Response System should be pursued as a lecture evaluation modality, and its use in medical school education should be encouraged

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Students Prefer Audience Response System for Lecture Evaluation

Turban

2011

Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The audience was asked to answer these feedback questions before leaving the session. Similar to prior studies, 3 we hypothesized that conducting the feedback survey in this manner would increase compliance with evaluation completion.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 73%

Role of an Audience Response System in Didactic Attendance and Assessment

Stoneking¹,

Grall²,

Min³

et al. 2014

Journal of Graduate Medical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The Residency Review Committee for Emergency Medicine mandates conference participation, but tracking attendance is difficult and fraught with errors. Feedback on didactic sessions, if not collected in real time, is challenging to obtain. Objective We assessed whether an audience response system (ARS) would (1) encourage residents to arrive on time for lectures, and (2) increase anonymous real-time audience feedback. Methods The ARS (Poll Everywhere) provided date/time-stamped responses to polls from residents, including a question to verify attendance and questions to gather immediate, anonymous postconference evaluations. Fisher exact test was used to calculate proportions. Results The proportion of residents who completed evaluations prior to the institution of the ARS was 8.75, and it was 59.42 after (P < .001). The proportion of faculty who completed evaluations prior to using the ARS was 6.12, and it was 85.71 after (P < .001). The proportion of residents who reported they had attended the conference session was 55 for the 3 weeks prior to initiating the ARS, decreasing to 46.67 for the 3 weeks during which the ARS was used to take attendance (P = .46). The proportion of faculty who reported attending the conference was 5.56 for the 3 weeks prior to ARS initiation, decreasing to 4.44 for the 3 weeks while using the ARS (P = .81). Conclusions Audience response systems are an effective way to verify attendance and tardiness, eliminating the subjective effect of attendance takers' leniency and increasing completion of evaluations for didactic sessions.

show abstract

“…In support of this, a recent study comparing the effectiveness of ARSs with traditional hand raising in a classroom environment showed significant increases in student participation when using an ARS [10]. In addition, in an effort to improve end-of-semester course evaluation response rates, Turban et al [12] used an ARS and significantly improved rates from 55% with paper-based forms to 91% with ARS. Thus, the familiarity of the communication medium (ie, their own device) coupled with the anonymity and interactivity of the ARS may increase the likelihood that the youth will engage with an ARS-administered survey.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Audience Response Systems and Missingness Trends: Using Interactive Polling Systems to Gather Sensitive Health Information From Youth

Toscos¹,

Drouin²,

Flanagan³

et al. 2019

JMIR Form Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The widespread availability and cost-effectiveness of new-wave software-based audience response systems (ARSs) have expanded the possibilities of collecting health data from hard-to-reach populations, including youth. However, with all survey methods, biases in the data may exist because of participant nonresponse. Objective The aims of this study were to (1) examine the extent to which an ARS could be used to gather health information from youths within a large-group school setting and (2) examine individual- and survey-level response biases stemming from this Web-based data collection method. Methods We used an ARS to deliver a mental health survey to 3418 youths in 4 high schools in the Midwestern United States. The survey contained demographic questions, depression, anxiety, and suicidality screeners, and questions about their use of offline resources (eg, parents, peers, and counselors) and Web-based resources (ie, telemental health technologies) when they faced stressful life situations. We then examined the response rates for each survey item, focusing on the individual- and survey-level characteristics that related to nonresponse. Results Overall, 25.39% (868/3418) of youths answered all 38 survey questions; however, missingness analyses showed that there were some survey structure factors that led to higher rates of nonresponse (eg, questions at the end of survey, sensitive questions, and questions for which precise answers were difficult to provide). There were also some personal characteristics that were associated with nonresponse (eg, not identifying as either male or female, nonwhite ethnicity, and higher levels of depression). Specifically, a multivariate model showed that male students and students who reported their gender as other had significantly higher numbers of missed items compared with female students ( B =.30 and B =.47, respectively, P <.001). Similarly, nonwhite race ( B =.39, P <.001) and higher depression scores ( B =.39, P <.001) were positively related to the number of missing survey responses. Conclusions Although our methodology-focused study showed that it is possible to gather sensitive mental health data from youths in large groups using ARSs, we also suggest that these nonresponse patterns need to be considered and controlled for when using ARSs for gathering population health data.

show abstract

The audience response system: a modality for course evaluation

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Students Prefer Audience Response System for Lecture Evaluation

Students Prefer Audience Response System for Lecture Evaluation

Role of an Audience Response System in Didactic Attendance and Assessment

Audience Response Systems and Missingness Trends: Using Interactive Polling Systems to Gather Sensitive Health Information From Youth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About