Comparison of Student Success Between High-Clicker and Low-Clicker Frequency in a Large-Enrollment Introductory Biology Course

References

• Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives. Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Armbruster, P., Patel, M., Johnson, E., & Weiss, M. (2009). Active learning and student-centered pedagogy improve student attitudes and performance in Introductory Biology. Life Sciences Education, 8(3), 203–213.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bégin, C., & Osovitz, C. (2014). Optimizing course format and the use of student response systems to maximize student performance in a large introductory biology course, BSC 2011—Biological Diversity. IRB study #Pro00018037.
   Google Scholar
• Blasco-Arcas, L., Buil, I., Hernandez-Ortega, B., & Sese, F. J. (2013). Using clickers in class. The role of interactivity, active collaborative learning and engagement in learning performance. Computers and Education, 62, 102–110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports.
   Google Scholar
• Brame, C. J., & Biel, R. (2015). Test-enhanced learning: The potential for testing to promote greater learning in undergraduate science courses. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 14(2), 1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brockx, B., Spooren, P., & Mortelmans, D. (2011). Taking the grading leniency story to the edge. The influence of student, teacher, and course characteristics on student evaluations of teaching in higher education. Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability, 23(4), 289–306.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 6(1), 9–20.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Centra, J. A. (2003). Will teachers receive higher student evaluations by giving higher grades and less course work? Research in Higher Education, 44(5), 495–518.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chien, Y., Chang, Y., & Chang, C. (2016). Do we click in the right way? A meta-analytic review of clicker-integrated instruction. Educational Research Review, 17, 1–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeBourgh, G. A. (2008). Use of classroom “clickers” to promote acquisition of advanced reasoning skills. Nurse Education in Practice, 8(2), 76–87.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Deslauriers, L., McCarty, L. S., Miller, K., Callaghan, K., & Kestin, G. (2019). Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(39), 19251–19257.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eddy, S. L., Brownell, S. E., Thummaphan, P., Lan, M. C., & Wenderoth, M. P (2015). Caution, student experience may vary: Social identities impact a student’s experience in peer discussions. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 14(4), 1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• England, B. J., Brigati, J. R., & Schussler, E. E. (2017). Student anxiety in introductory biology classrooms: Perceptions about active learning and persistence in the major. PLoS ONE, 12(8), 1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eschenbach, T., Lewis, N., Nicholls, G. M., & Pallis, J. M. (2013, June 2326). The impact of clickers on your classroom and your career [Paper presentation]. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Atlanta, GA.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, S., Haak, D., & Wenderoth, M. P (2011). Increased course structure improves performance in introductory biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 10(2), 175–186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(23), 8410–8415.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gauci, S. A., Dantas, A. M., Williams, D. A., & Kemm, R. E. (2009). Promoting student-centered active learning in lectures with a personal response system. Advances in Physiology Education, 33(1), 60–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gok, T. (2011). An evaluation of student response systems from the viewpoint of instructors and students. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(4), 67–83.
   Google Scholar
• Haak, D. C., HilleRisLambers, J., Pitre, E., & Freeman, S. (2011). Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology. Science, 332(6034), 1213–1216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernick, M. (2015). Test-enhanced learning in an immunology and infectious disease medicinal chemistry/pharmacology course. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 79(7), 1–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heyborne, W. H., & Perrett, J. J. (2016). To flip or not to flip? Analysis of a flipped classroom pedagogy in a general biology course. Journal of College Science Teaching, 45(4), 31–38.
   Google Scholar
• Hodges, L. C., Anderson, E. C., Carpenter, T. S., Cui, L., Feeser, E. A., & Gierasch, T. M. (2017). Using clickers for deliberate practice in five large science courses. Journal of College Science Teaching, 47(2), 22–28.
   Google Scholar
• Hoskins, T. D., Gantz, J. D., Chaffee, B. R., Arlinghaus, K., Wiebler, J., Hughes, M., & Fernandes, J. J. (2017). Effectiveness of a lownoncost, graduate student-led intervention on study habits and performance in introductory biology. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 16(3), 1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubbard, J. K., & Hubbard, J. (2016). Clicker use in introductory biology: Impacts on exam performance. DBER Speaker Series, 102.
   Google Scholar
• Hunsu, N. J., Adesope, O., & Bayly, D. J. (2016). A meta-analysis of the effects of audience response systems (clicker-based technologies) on cognition and affect. Computers and Education, 94, 102–119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger III, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science, 319(5865), 966–968.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, C., Chen, S., Chi, C., Chien, K., Liu, Y, & Chou, T. (2016). The effects of clickers with different teaching strategies. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(5), 603–628.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Machemer, P. L., & Crawford, P. (2007). Student perceptions of active learning in a large cross-disciplinary classroom. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8(1), 9–30.
   Google Scholar
• Marbach-Ad, G., Rietschel, C. H., Saluja, N., Carleton, K. L., & Haag, E. S. (2016). The use of group activities in introductory biology supports learning gains and uniquely benefits high-achieving students. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 17(3), 360–369.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marin, N. E. (2013). The impact of a Classroom Performance System on learning gains in a biology course for science majors. FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 869.
   Google Scholar
• Mayer, R. E., Stull, A., DeLeeuw, K., Almeroth, K., Bimber, B., Chun, D., Bulger, M., Campbell, J., Knight, A., & Zhang, H. (2009). Clickers in college classrooms: Fostering learning with questioning methods in large lecture classes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 51–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Momsen, J. L., Long, T. M., Wyse, S. A., & Ebert-May, D. (2010). Just the facts? Introductory undergraduate biology courses focus on low-level cognitive skills. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 9(4), 435–440.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prevost, L. B. & Lemons, P. P. (2016). Step by step: Biology undergraduates’ problem-solving procedures during multiple-choice assessment. CBE— Life Sciences Education, 15, 1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roush, C., & Song, L. (2013). The impact of using clickers technology on classroom instruction: Students’ and teachers’ perspectives. Canadian Journal of Action Research, 14(1), 21–37.
   Google Scholar
• Sebesta, A. J. & Speth, E. B. (2017). How should I study for the exam? Self-regulated learning strategies and achievement in Introductory biology. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 16, 1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seidel, S. B., & Tanner, K. D. (2013). “What if students revolt?” Considering student resistance: Origins, options, and opportunities for investigation. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 12(4), 586–595.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, M. K., Wood, W B., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C., Knight, J. K., Guild, N., & Su, T. T. (2009). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science, 323(5910), 122–124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, M. K., Trujillo, C., & Su, T. T. (2011). The benefits of using clickers in small-enrollment seminar-style biology courses. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 10(1), 14–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevens, N. T., Mcdermott, H., Boland, F., Pawlikowska, T., & Humphreys, H. (2017). A comparative study: Do “clickers” increase student engagement in multidisciplinary clinical microbiology teaching? BMC Medical Education, 17(70), 1–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stroebe, W. (2016). Why good teaching evaluations may reward bad teaching: On grade inflation and other unintended consequences of student evaluations. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(6), 800–816.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanner, K. D. (2012). Promoting student metacognition. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 11(2), 113–120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trees, A. R., & Jackson, M. H. (2007). The learning environment in clicker classrooms: Student processes of learning and involvement in large university-level courses using student response systems. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(1), 21–40.
   Google Scholar
• Uttl, B., White, C. A., & Gonzalez, D. W. (2017). Meta-analysis of faculty’s teaching effectiveness: Student evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are not related. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 54(2017), 22–42.
   Google Scholar
• Welsh, A. J. (2012). Exploring undergraduates’ perceptions of the use of active learning techniques in science lectures. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(2), 80–87.
   Google Scholar
• Wittrock, M. C. (1989). Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24(4), 345–376.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yourstone, S. A., Kraye, H. S., & Albaum, G. (2008). Classroom questioning with immediate electronic response: Do clickers improve learning? Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 6(1), 75–88.
   Google Scholar