Using Audience Response Systems To Encourage Student Engagement And Reflection On Ethical Orientation And Behavior

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to use an audience response system (ARS) to engage students in classroom discussions concerning sensitive and controversial topics (e.g., business ethics), assess students ethical orientation and conduct in unethical behaviors, and encourage reflection on their personal level of ethicality. Students used ARS devices to respond anonymously to questions regarding specific business-related ethical scenarios in a Principles of Marketing class. Students were asked six questions regarding their own conduct in certain behaviors and one question to evaluate their self-reported level of ethicality before the lecture/discussion and then again after the lecture/discussion. Nearly ninety-two percent of the students (n=65) reported that they believed they were an ethical person at the beginning of the lecture/discussion and only seventy-three percent of the students (n=52) reported that they believed they were an ethical person at the end of the lecture/discussion. The study showed that an ARS can be used to engage students in classroom discussion that results in significant student reflection on the topic.

The benefits and challenges of large-scale deployment of electronic voting systems: University student views from across different subject groups

“…Despite the call from Kay and LeSage (2009) to broaden the EVS research to non-STEM areas, reports on use of EVS outside of these subjects remain few, with the exceptions of Business Marketing (e.g. Micheletto, 2011;Muncy and Eastman, 2012), Law (e.g. Easton, 2009;Steventon, Panesar, and Wood;2012), and English (e.g.…”

“…While the aforementioned papers confirm some of the benefits and challenges identified earlier, they do not contribute any new subject-specific outcomes nor do they describe any new ways of using EVS, in comparison to the STEM subjects. Related to the latter, an exception is the study by Micheletto (2011), which reports on the use of EVS in discussions on sensitive and controversial topics such as business ethics, and suggests that the anonymity of EVS has enabled the collection of confidential data regarding self-reported behaviors and facilitated significant student reflection on perceived ethicality.…”

Using Technology To Support Discussions on Sensitive Topics

“…Students learn by being involved and they learn best and acquire skills when they are engaged (Astin, 1985;Department of Education, Science and Training, 2010). They also learn more effectively and retain information better when they are actively engaged with topics, issues and/or problems compared to passive, lecture-based instruction (Micheletto, 2011). Positive results from student engagement have been associated with better student retention (Kuh, Cruce, Shoup, Kinzie, & Gonyea, 2008), higher academic performance (Pascarella, Seifert, & Blaich, 2010), high-quality learning outcomes (Krause & Coates, 2008), and higher student satisfaction (Radloff & Coates, 2013).…”

“…Technology can be used to support group activity in online simulations and role-plays in which students can participate in the discussion of sensitive topics on an anonymous basis. Online anonymity can build confidence as students know their own answers are not individually tracked; their mistakes are made incognito and can result in higher participation rates, thus encouraging interaction and group learning (Connolly, Jessup, & Valacich, 1990;Micheletto, 2011;Tiene, 2000). However, the overall benefits (besides the advantage of online anonymity) of using online simulation and role-play remain inconclusive.…”

Using Mentimeter to enhance learning and teaching in a large class

“…These two principles can be implemented via Mentimeter by involving the students in structured exercises and co-operation, and letting them know what they have learnt and where they need to improve. Many lecturers such as Micheletto (2011) have attributed the lack of student engagement to the obstacle to achieving learning outcomes. However, this lack of student engagement can be eliminated by the proper use of Mentimeter (Hill and Fielden, 2017).…”