Make Words Click! Learning English Vocabulary with clickers: users’ perceptions

References

• Abrahamson, L. (2006). A brief history of networked classrooms: Effects, cases, pedagogy, and implications. In D. Banks (Ed.), Audience response systems in higher education (pp. 1–25). Information Science Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Agbatogun, A. (2014). Developing learners’ second language communicative competence through active learning: Clickers or communicative approach? Educational Technology & Society, 17(2), 257–269.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blasco-Arcas, L., Buil, I., Hernandez-Ortega, B., & Sese, F. (2013). Using clickers in class. The role of interactivity, active collaborative learning and engagement in learning performance. Computers & Education, 62, 102–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruff, D. (2009). Teaching with classroom response systems: Creating active learning environments. Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Caldwell, J. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. CBE Life Sci Educ, 6(1), 9–20. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.06-12-0205
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cardoso, W. (2011). Learning a foreign language with a learner response system: The student’s perspective. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24, 393–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.567354
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardoso, W. (2013). Learner response systems in second language teaching. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1–7). Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Chapelle, C. (2004). Technology and second language learning: Expanding methods and agendas. System, 32(4), 593–601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.09.014
   Google Scholar
• Chevalier, J. (2011). Teachers’ perception of handheld response systems as a tool for formative assessment in high school classrooms (Publication No. 3481408) [Doctoral dissertation]. Walden University.
   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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, R. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53, 445–459. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543053004445
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Cutrim Schmid, E. (2007). Enhancing performance knowledge and self-esteem in classroom language learning: The potential of the ACTIVote system component of interactive whiteboard technology. System, 35, 119–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.01.001
   Google Scholar
• Cutrim Schmid, E. (2008). Using a voting system in conjunction with interactive whiteboard technology to enhance learning in the English language classroom. Computers & Education, 50(1), 338–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Draper, S., & Brown, M. (2004). Increasing interactivity in lectures using an electronic voting system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(2), 81–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00074.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Fredricks, J., Blumenfeld, P., & Paris, A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuller, J., & Dawson, K. (2017). Student response systems for formative assessment: Literature-based strategies and findings from a middle school implementation. Contemporary Educational Technology, 8(4), 370–389. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6206
   Google Scholar
• Hake, R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics text data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. [Database] https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hung, H. (2017). Clickers in the flipped classroom: Bring your own device (BYOD) to promote student learning. Interactive Learning Environments, (25)(8), 983–995. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2016.1240090
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunsu, N., Adesope, O., & Bayly, D. (2016). A meta-analysis of the effects of audience response systems (clicker-based technologies) on cognition and affect. Computers & Education, 94, 102–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Judson, E., & Sawada, D. (2002). Learning from past and present: Electronic response systems in college lecture halls. Journal of Computers in Mathematics & Science Teaching, 21, 167–181.
   Google Scholar
• Kaleta, R., & Joosten, T. (2007). Student response systems: A University of Wisconsin study of clickers (Research Bulletin, 6). EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research.
   Google Scholar
• Kay, R., & LeSage, A. (2009). Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: A review of the literature. Computer & Education, 53(3), 819–827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lantz, M. (2010). The use of ‘Clickers’ in the classroom: Teaching innovation or merely an amusing novelty? Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 556–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.02.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• MacGeorge, E., Homan, S., Dunning, J., Elmore, D., Bodie, G., Evans, E., & Geddes, B. (2008). The influence of learning characteristics on evaluation of audience response technology. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 19, 125–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03033425
   Google Scholar
• Marlow, D. (2010). Engaging syntax: Using a personal response system to encourage grammatical thought. American Speech, 85(2), 225–237. https://doi.org/10.1215/00031283-2010-012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user’s manual. Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• McDonough, K., & Foote, J. (2015). The impact of individual and shared clicker use on students’ collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 86, 236–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.08.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milholland, E. (2015). A multiple case study of instructors utilizing classroom response systems (CRS) to achieve pedagogical goals. [Doctoral dissertation]. Colorado State University.
   Google Scholar
• Nation, I., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Oigara, J., & Keengwe, J. (2013). Students’ perceptions of clickers as an instructional tool to promote active learning. Education and Information Technologies, 18(1), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-011-9173-9
   Google Scholar
• Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sénécal, A.-M., & Cardoso, W. (2021). A world of differences: The role of individual differences in L2 vocabulary learning with clickers. In C. Brudermann, M. Grosbois, C. Sarré, N. Zoghlami, L. Bradley, & S. Thouësny (Eds.), Call & professionalization – short papers from EUROCALL 2021. Research-publishing.net.
   Google Scholar
• Sénécal, A.-M., Mezzaluna, V., & Cardoso, W. (2018). Make words click! Leaning English vocabulary with clickers. In P. Taalas, J. Jalkanen, L. Bradley, & S. Thouësny (Eds.), Future-proof CALL: Language learning as exploration and encounters – Short papers from EUROCALL 2018 (pp. 290–295). Research-publishing.net.
   Google Scholar
• Serafini, E. (2013). Learner perceptions of clickers as a source of feedback in the classroom. In K. McDonough, & A. Mackey (Eds.), Second language interaction in diverse educational contexts (pp. 209–224). John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Song, D., Oh, E., & Glazewski, K. (2017). Student-generated questioning activity in second language courses using a customized personal response system: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(6), 1425–1449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9520-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thornbury, S. (2002). How to teach vocabulary. Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, A. (2015). The wear out effect of a game-based student response system. Computers & Education, 82, 217–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar