File Download
 
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
  • Find via
 
Supplementary

Conference Paper: Engaging students with various in-class formative assessment
  • Basic View
  • Metadata View
  • XML View
TitleEngaging students with various in-class formative assessment
 
AuthorsChan, CKY
Fok, WWT
Tam, V
 
KeywordsMCQS
Clickers
Classroom response system
Formative assessment
Feedback
 
Issue Date2010
 
CitationThe 3rd International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation (ICERI2010), Madrid, Spain, 15-17 November 2010. In Proceedings of the 3rd ICERI, 2010, p. 1858-1860 [How to Cite?]
 
AbstractTraditional Engineering classes in higher education are generally perceived to have minimal student-to-student and teacher-to-student interaction. They are often delivered in a monotonous, one-way conversation, ‘rushing to cover a large content’ atmosphere where there are little or no activities designed to engage students. In-class formative assessment (graded or non-graded) and student-lecturer discussion and feedback are even less common (Cotner et al., 2008). In the recent years, a novel technological device – ‘student response system’ also known as ‘clickers’ has emerged allowing teacher to pose questions in class and obtain immediate responses anonymously from students by clicking the remote devices. The collected responses are processed and presented graphically in real-time. Some research studies that based on students’ perceptions on the use of clickers as an effective teaching and learning tool (King & Robinson, 2009; Petr, 2005) were reported. The studies asserted that clickers can provide immediate feedback and create opportunities for student engagement, especially in large lecture class (Gauci et al., 2009; MacGeorge et al., 2008; Patterson et al., 2010). These reports were based on universities set in the United States, United Kingdom and Australia. To date, only a limited number of these studies have been reported, and even less studies on teacher’s perspective on the efficacy of clickers and their pedagogical commitments. This study was designed to compare three different Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) delivery methods namely clickers, pen and paper MCQs and online elearning MCQs on the effectiveness of student engagement used as an in-class formative assessment. The results were also compared without the use of any formative assessment. Two courses in Year 2 undergraduate classes from Electrical & Electronic Engineering at the University of Hong Kong were selected to introduce to these formative assessment methods. These students were first time users and have not been exposed to clicker technology beforehand. For each assessment delivery methods, ten multiple-choice questions (MCQs) were written to assess students’ knowledge and problem solving techniques. Student perceptions on the different assessment methods were surveyed immediately at the end of the class. Teachers’ experiences and attitudes towards the different methods in relation to the learning outcomes and engagement of the students, and the pedagogy were also interviewed. In addition to the surveys and interviews, an independent observer was invited to evaluate the student and teacher’s attitudes during the activities. Overall, the majority of students appreciates and recommends in-class formative assessment particularly clickers and online elearning to be used in other courses. In the presentation, the results of these assessment delivery methods will be discussed as well as issues and concerns found by the observer using these delivery methods.
 
ISBN978-84-614-2439-9
 
DC FieldValue
dc.contributor.authorChan, CKY
 
dc.contributor.authorFok, WWT
 
dc.contributor.authorTam, V
 
dc.date.accessioned2011-08-26T14:46:13Z
 
dc.date.available2011-08-26T14:46:13Z
 
dc.date.issued2010
 
dc.description.abstractTraditional Engineering classes in higher education are generally perceived to have minimal student-to-student and teacher-to-student interaction. They are often delivered in a monotonous, one-way conversation, ‘rushing to cover a large content’ atmosphere where there are little or no activities designed to engage students. In-class formative assessment (graded or non-graded) and student-lecturer discussion and feedback are even less common (Cotner et al., 2008). In the recent years, a novel technological device – ‘student response system’ also known as ‘clickers’ has emerged allowing teacher to pose questions in class and obtain immediate responses anonymously from students by clicking the remote devices. The collected responses are processed and presented graphically in real-time. Some research studies that based on students’ perceptions on the use of clickers as an effective teaching and learning tool (King & Robinson, 2009; Petr, 2005) were reported. The studies asserted that clickers can provide immediate feedback and create opportunities for student engagement, especially in large lecture class (Gauci et al., 2009; MacGeorge et al., 2008; Patterson et al., 2010). These reports were based on universities set in the United States, United Kingdom and Australia. To date, only a limited number of these studies have been reported, and even less studies on teacher’s perspective on the efficacy of clickers and their pedagogical commitments. This study was designed to compare three different Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) delivery methods namely clickers, pen and paper MCQs and online elearning MCQs on the effectiveness of student engagement used as an in-class formative assessment. The results were also compared without the use of any formative assessment. Two courses in Year 2 undergraduate classes from Electrical & Electronic Engineering at the University of Hong Kong were selected to introduce to these formative assessment methods. These students were first time users and have not been exposed to clicker technology beforehand. For each assessment delivery methods, ten multiple-choice questions (MCQs) were written to assess students’ knowledge and problem solving techniques. Student perceptions on the different assessment methods were surveyed immediately at the end of the class. Teachers’ experiences and attitudes towards the different methods in relation to the learning outcomes and engagement of the students, and the pedagogy were also interviewed. In addition to the surveys and interviews, an independent observer was invited to evaluate the student and teacher’s attitudes during the activities. Overall, the majority of students appreciates and recommends in-class formative assessment particularly clickers and online elearning to be used in other courses. In the presentation, the results of these assessment delivery methods will be discussed as well as issues and concerns found by the observer using these delivery methods.
 
dc.description.otherThe 3rd International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation (ICERI2010), Madrid, Spain, 15-17 November 2010. In Proceedings of the 3rd ICERI, 2010, p. 1858-1860
 
dc.identifier.citationThe 3rd International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation (ICERI2010), Madrid, Spain, 15-17 November 2010. In Proceedings of the 3rd ICERI, 2010, p. 1858-1860 [How to Cite?]
 
dc.identifier.epage1860
 
dc.identifier.hkuros189379
 
dc.identifier.isbn978-84-614-2439-9
 
dc.identifier.openurl
 
dc.identifier.spage1858
 
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/138367
 
dc.languageeng
 
dc.relation.ispartofproceedings of the International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation, ICERI2010
 
dc.subjectMCQS
 
dc.subjectClickers
 
dc.subjectClassroom response system
 
dc.subjectFormative assessment
 
dc.subjectFeedback
 
dc.titleEngaging students with various in-class formative assessment
 
dc.typeConference_Paper
 
<?xml encoding="utf-8" version="1.0"?>
<item><contributor.author>Chan, CKY</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Fok, WWT</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Tam, V</contributor.author>
<date.accessioned>2011-08-26T14:46:13Z</date.accessioned>
<date.available>2011-08-26T14:46:13Z</date.available>
<date.issued>2010</date.issued>
<identifier.citation>The 3rd International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation (ICERI2010), Madrid, Spain, 15-17 November 2010. In Proceedings of the 3rd ICERI, 2010, p. 1858-1860</identifier.citation>
<identifier.isbn>978-84-614-2439-9</identifier.isbn>
<identifier.uri>http://hdl.handle.net/10722/138367</identifier.uri>
<description.abstract>Traditional Engineering classes in higher education are generally perceived to have minimal student-to-student and teacher-to-student interaction. They are often delivered in a monotonous, one-way conversation, &#8216;rushing to cover a large content&#8217; atmosphere where there are little or no activities designed to engage students. In-class formative assessment (graded or non-graded) and student-lecturer discussion and feedback are even less common (Cotner et al., 2008). In the recent years, a novel technological device &#8211; &#8216;student response system&#8217; also known as &#8216;clickers&#8217; has emerged allowing teacher to pose questions in class and obtain immediate responses anonymously from students by clicking the remote devices. The collected responses are processed and presented graphically in real-time. Some research studies that based on students&#8217; perceptions on the use of clickers as an effective teaching and learning tool (King &amp; Robinson, 2009; Petr, 2005) were reported. The studies asserted that clickers can provide immediate feedback and create opportunities for student engagement, especially in large lecture class (Gauci et al., 2009; MacGeorge et al., 2008; Patterson et al., 2010). These reports were based on universities set in the United States, United Kingdom and Australia. To date, only a limited number of these studies have been reported, and even less studies on teacher&#8217;s perspective on the efficacy of clickers and their pedagogical commitments. This study was designed to compare three different Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) delivery methods namely clickers, pen and paper MCQs and online elearning MCQs on the effectiveness of student engagement used as an in-class formative assessment. The results were also compared without the use of any formative assessment. Two courses in Year 2 undergraduate classes from Electrical &amp; Electronic Engineering at the University of Hong Kong were selected to introduce to these formative assessment methods. These students were first time users and have not been exposed to clicker technology beforehand. For each assessment delivery methods, ten multiple-choice questions (MCQs) were written to assess students&#8217; knowledge and problem solving techniques. Student perceptions on the different assessment methods were surveyed immediately at the end of the class. Teachers&#8217; experiences and attitudes towards the different methods in relation to the learning outcomes and engagement of the students, and the pedagogy were also interviewed. In addition to the surveys and interviews, an independent observer was invited to evaluate the student and teacher&#8217;s attitudes during the activities. Overall, the majority of students appreciates and recommends in-class formative assessment particularly clickers and online elearning to be used in other courses. In the presentation, the results of these assessment delivery methods will be discussed as well as issues and concerns found by the observer using these delivery methods.</description.abstract>
<language>eng</language>
<relation.ispartof>proceedings of the International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation, ICERI2010</relation.ispartof>
<subject>MCQS</subject>
<subject>Clickers</subject>
<subject>Classroom response system</subject>
<subject>Formative assessment</subject>
<subject>Feedback</subject>
<title>Engaging students with various in-class formative assessment</title>
<type>Conference_Paper</type>
<identifier.openurl>http://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&amp;issn=978-84-614-2439-9&amp;volume=&amp;spage=1858&amp;epage=1860&amp;date=2010&amp;atitle=Engaging+students+with+various+in-class+formative+assessment</identifier.openurl>
<identifier.hkuros>189379</identifier.hkuros>
<identifier.spage>1858</identifier.spage>
<identifier.epage>1860</identifier.epage>
<description.other>The 3rd International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation (ICERI2010), Madrid, Spain, 15-17 November 2010. In Proceedings of the 3rd ICERI, 2010, p. 1858-1860</description.other>
</item>