The Use of Interactive Student Response Software in an Introductory International Relations Course

Abstract

Can web-based interactive student response systems (SRSs) improve student performance in large introductory international relations courses? Does switching from first-generation clicker-based SRSs to second-generation web-based SRSs impact student learning? To answer these questions, we draw data from multiple offerings of Introduction to International Relations between 2012 and 2018; some used no interactive software, others used first-generation clicker-based SRSs, and yet others used a second-generation web-based SRSs. Our model includes control variables such as the availability of supplemental instruction, student’s gender, class rank, and major. This article argues in favor of using web-based interactive platforms in large political science classes administered via portable electronic devices (laptops, tablets, and cell phones) as their positive impact outweighs possible distraction associated with availability of electronic devices in these classes. Our analysis finds that second-generation web-based SRSs are a consistent predictor for improved student performance in large introductory political science offerings. Nonetheless, the study suggests tampered optimism about the role that this type of SRSs can have on critical thinking and analytical skills.

Keywords:

• Student response system (SRS)
• interactive technology
• Echo360
• international relations
• large classroom pedagogy

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank Jim Masterson for his helpful comments, suggestions, and recommendations on previous drafts of this article and for his assistance with the data analysis. He also wishes to thank Gigi Escoe, Tina Meagher, and Paul Foster for the institutional support and technical assistance in introducing and administering Echo360.

Notes

1 This study was approved by the University of Cincinnati's Institutional Review Board on December 10, 2018; Study ID: 2018-3204.

2 Most notable works that challenge the use of computers and other electronic devices in the classroom include Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014); Patterson and Patterson (2016); and Carter, Greenberg, and Walker (2017).

3 Top enrollment majors include history, journalism, communication, criminal justice, and environmental studies. In the last five years, 52.5% of the students enrolled in Introduction to International Relations were males; 47.3% were females. In terms of ethnicity, 73% were white, 3% were Asian, 9.4% were African American or black, 4.6% were Hispanic, 3.2% were multiracial, 3.4% were international students, and 3.4% were of unknown ethnicity.

4 SI is an academic support model that uses peer-assisted study sessions to improve student retention and success within targeted historically difficult courses. Introduction to International Relations has one SI leader assigned who attends class meetings, holds regional office hours, and runs two supplemental review sessions every week to ensure student success. Student attendance and participation is completely optional and voluntary. The instructor has no control over these sessions.

5 Lindsay McKenzie, “The 'huh?' button: A lecture-capture platform with a "confusion alert" button is changing the way some instructors teach,” Inside Higher Ed, 5 February 2018, https://tinyurl.com/y22uwegl (accessed 02/19/2019).

6 During the period included in this study, the course used Henry Nau’s textbook, Perspectives on International Relations; Power, Institutions, and Ideas (Los Angeles: Sage/CQ Press), 3rd through 5th editions (2012–2018).

7 The essay topic, determined after an in-class drawing from list of several topics, asks students to analyze a historic event from three different perspectives to international relations—realism, liberalism, and constructivism/critical theory.

8 The data set used in this analysis along with the codebook and a syntax file is available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.7945/3rmz-xf91.

9 Two critical control variables have been excluded from the model for different reasons. First, the class size variable was excluded because it was highly correlated with the availability of SI help. Second, the combined attendance and participation score was excluded because the method of generating this indicator for the three groups of offerings using no SRS, first-generation SRSs, and Echo360 varied substantially, thus inflating significantly attendance scores for offerings using Echo360.

10 A series of diagnostics tests for multicollinearity, heteroscedasticity, and variance inflation factors were conducted to make sure that these two models do not violate key assumptions of the ordinary least squares regression.

11 The observation of a letter grade bump is based on the assumption that the undergraduate grading scale uses the four major passing grades (A, B, C, and D). Pluses (+) and minuses (−) are used as appropriate. Students are required to have at least 60% to pass the class with a D−, while those who have 93% or higher will receive an A. The difference from one letter grade to the next one (e.g., from A − to B+) is about 3%. More information is available here: https://tinyurl.com/y6jxp53r. The instructor’s detailed grading scale is explained on the syllabus available at: https://tinyurl.com/y6xorce2.

12 In order to minimize the use of portable electronic devices for nonacademic purposes, students are notified that a GA sitting in the back of the classroom would be monitoring their activities on the electronic devices and those who violate the use for academic purposes only policy will be warned and possibly dismissed from class.

13 Observations from 150-minute weekly meetings and evening classes indicate that, toward the end of the class, students in these classes are more likely than students enrolled in 55-minute classes to resort to using their electronic devices for nonacademic purposes.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Ivan Dinev Ivanov

Ivan Dinev Ivanov is Associate Professor Educator at the Department of Political Science, University of Cincinnati. His primary areas of teaching and research interests are international relations with focus on international security, interorganizational cooperation, and European and NATO politics. His book Transforming NATO: New Allies, Missions, and Capabilities was published by Lexington Books/Rowman & Littlefield, 2011, paperback 2013; Chinese edition 2014). He has also published articles and chapters dealing with European security, NATO politics, interorganizational cooperation, and teaching Southeast Asia interactively.