Finding flow: unpacking the capacity of in-lecture question activities to engage online students

References

• Addison, S., Wright, A., & Milner, R. (2009). Using clickers to improve student engagement and performance in an introductory biochemistry class. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 37(2), 84–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20264
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahasoan, A. N., Ayuandiani, W., Mukhram, M., & Rahmat, A. (2020). Effectiveness of online learning in pandemic COVID-19. International Journal of Science, Technology & Management, 1(2), 100–106. https://doi.org/10.46729/ijstm.v1i2.30
   Google Scholar
• Banks, D. (2006). Audience response systems in higher education: Applications and cases. Information Science Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59140-947-2
   Google Scholar
• Bates, A. W., & Sangra, A. (2011). Managing technology in higher education: Strategies for transforming teaching and learning. John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Beldarrain, Y. (2007). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2), 139–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910600789498
   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 & Education, 62, 102–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. 1991 ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports. ERIC.
   Google Scholar
• Buil, I., Catalán, S., & Martínez, E. (2016). Do clickers enhance learning? A control-value theory approach. Computers & Education, 103, 170–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.10.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buil, I., Catalán, S., & Martínez, E. (2019). The influence of flow on learning outcomes: An empirical study on the use of clickers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 428–439. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12561
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castleberry, A., & Nolen, A. (2018). Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: Is it as easy as it sounds? Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 10(6), 807–815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2018.03.019
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clauson, K. A., Alkhateeb, F. M., & Singh-Franco, D. (2012). Concurrent use of an audience response system at a multi-campus college of pharmacy. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 76(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe7616
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cochran, J. D., Campbell, S. M., Baker, H. M., & Leeds, E. M. (2014). The role of student characteristics in predicting retention in online courses. Research in Higher Education, 55(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-013-9305-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Compton, M., & Allen, J. (2018). Student Response Systems: A rationale for their use and a comparison of some cloud based tools. Compass: Journal of Learning and Teaching, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.21100/compass.v11i1.696
   Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety. Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row.
   Google Scholar
• Daniel, T., & Tivener, K. (2016). Effects of sharing clickers in an active learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 260–268. http://jise.org/Volume20/n2/JISEv20n2p187.html
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Koff, J. P. (2021). Utilizing teaching technologies for higher education in a post‐COVID‐19 environment. Natural Sciences Education, 50(1), e20032. https://doi.org/10.1002/nse2.20032
   Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2003). The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Dommett, E. J., Gardner, B., & van Tilburg, W. (2019). Staff and student views of lecture capture: A qualitative study. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0153-2
   Google Scholar
• Dos Santos, W. O., Bittencourt, I. I., Isotani, S., Dermeval, D., Marques, L. B., & Silveira, I. F. (2018). Flow theory to promote learning in educational systems: Is it really relevant? Revista Brasileira de Informática na Educação, 26(2), 29. https://doi.org/10.5753/RBIE.2018.26.02.29
   Google Scholar
• Driscoll, A., Jicha, K., Hunt, A. N., Tichavsky, L., & Thompson, G. (2012). online courses deliver in class results? A comparison of student performance and satisfaction in an online versus a face-to face introductory sociology course. Teaching Sociology, 40(4), 312–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055x12446624
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esteban-Millat, I., Martínez-López, F. J., Huertas-García, R., Meseguer, A., & Rodríguez-Ardura, I. (2014). Modelling students’ flow experiences in an online learning environment. Computers & Education, 71, 111–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faiola, A., Newlon, C., Pfaff, M., & Smyslova, O. (2013). Correlating the effects of flow and telepresence in virtual worlds: Enhancing our understanding of user behavior in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1113–1121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gikas, J., & Grant, M. M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones & social media. The Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamari, J., Shernoff, D. J., Rowe, E., Coller, B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (2016). Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 170–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hao, Q., Barnes, B., & Jing, M. (2021). Quantifying the effects of active learning environments: Separating physical learning classrooms from pedagogical approaches. Learning Environments Research, 24(1), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-020-09320-3
   Google Scholar
• Hara, N. (2000). Student distress in a web-based distance education course. Information, Communication & Society, 3(4), 557–579. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180010002297
   Google Scholar
• Holmes, G., & Abington-Cooper, M. (2000). Pedagogy vs. andragogy: A false dichotomy? Pedagogy, 26(2). https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v26i2.a.8
   Google Scholar
• Johns, R., & McNamara, J. (2014). Career development in higher education through group mentoring: A case study of desirable attributes and perceptions of a current programme. Australian Journal of Career Development, 23(2), 79–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/1038416214528883
   Google Scholar
• Kay, R., & Kletskin, I. (2012). Evaluating the use of problem-based video podcasts to teach mathematics in higher education. Computers & Education, 59(2), 619–627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2013). Examining some assumptions and limitations of research on the effects of emerging technologies for teaching and learning in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4), 536–543. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12049
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: The importance of interaction between research participants. Sociology of Health & Illness, 16(1), 103–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.ep11347023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laaser, W., & Toloza, E. A. (2017). The changing role of the educational video in higher distance education. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(2), 264–276. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i2.3067
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liao, L. F. (2006). A flow theory perspective on learner motivation and behavior in distance education. Distance Education, 27(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910600653215
   Google Scholar
• Lokuge Dona, K., Gregory, J., & Pechenkina, E. (2017). Lecture-recording technology in higher education: Exploring lecturer and student views across the disciplines [lecture-recording; Echo360; educational technology; university; engagement; teaching]. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(4), 122–133. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3068
   Google Scholar
• Mahmood, S. (2021). Instructional strategies for online teaching in COVID‐19 pandemic. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 3(1), 199–203. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.218
   Google Scholar
• Martyn, M. (2007). Clickers in the classroom: An active learning approach. Educause Quarterly, 30(2), 71. https://er.educause.edu/-/media/files/article-downloads/eqm0729.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Mayer, R. E. (2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 226–232. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miles, N. G., & Soares da Costa, T. P. (2016). Acceptance of clickers in a large multimodal biochemistry class as determined by student evaluations of teaching: Are they just an annoying distraction for distance students? Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 44(1), 99–108. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20917
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minhas, P. S., Ghosh, A., & Swanzy, L. (2012). The effects of passive and active learning on student preference and performance in an undergraduate basic science course. Anatomical Sciences Education, 5(4), 200–207. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1274
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan, R. K. (2008). Exploring the pedagogical effectiveness of clickers. InSight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching, 3, 31–36. https://doi.org/10.46504/03200804mo
   Google Scholar
• Murillo-Zamorano, L. R., López Sánchez, J. Á., Godoy-Caballero, A. L., & Bueno Muñoz, C. (2021). Gamification and active learning in higher education: Is it possible to match digital society, academia and students’ interests? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00249-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the ‘laws’ of statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(5), 625–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®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
• Pakpour, N., Souto, I., & Schaffer, P. (2021). Increasing engagement during online learning through the use of interactive slides. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 22(2). https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00117-21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pan, D., Tan, G. S., Ragupathi, K., Booluck, K., Roop, R., & Ip, Y. K. (2009). Profiling teacher/teaching using descriptors derived from qualitative feedback: Formative and summative applications. Research in Higher Education, 50(1), 73–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9109-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patry, M. (2009). Clickers in large classes: From student perceptions towards an understanding of best practices. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 17. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2009.030217
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluations and research methods. Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Pearce, J. (2005). Engaging the learner: How can the flow experience support e-learning? In Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, Vancouver, Canada. https://people.eng.unimelb.edu.au/jonmp/pubs/Elearn2005.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Pechenkina, E., & Aeschliman, C. (2017). What do students want? Making sense of student preferences in technology-enhanced learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 8(1), 26–39. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6185
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, C. C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning. Journal of Education for Business, 84(2), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.84.2.101-109
   Google Scholar
• Rodríguez‐Ardura, I., & Meseguer‐Artola, A. (2017). Flow in e‐learning: What drives it and why it matters. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(4), 899–915. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12480
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serhan, D. (2020). Transitioning from face-to-face to remote learning: Students’ attitudes and perceptions of using Zoom during COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 4(4), 335–342. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.v4i4.148
   Google Scholar
• Shapiro, A. M., Sims-Knight, J., O’Rielly, G. V., Capaldo, P., Pedlow, T., Gordon, L., & Monteiro, K. (2017). Clickers can promote fact retention but impede conceptual understanding: The effect of the interaction between clicker use and pedagogy on learning. Computers & Education, 111, 44–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin, N. (2006). Online learner’s ‘flow’ experience: An empirical study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(5), 705–720. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00641.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone, C., & O’Shea, S. (2019). Older, online and first: Recommendations for retention and success. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1), 57–69. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3913
   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. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439880601141179
   Google Scholar
• Walker, R. J., Spangler, B. R., Lloyd, E. P., Walker, B. L., Wessels, P. M., & Summerville, A. (2018). Comparing active learning techniques: The effect of clickers and discussion groups on student perceptions and performance. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3337
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, A., Birch, E., & Hancock, P. (2012). The impact of online lecture recordings on student performance. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(2). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.869
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woo, K., Gosper, M., McNeill, M., Preston, G., Green, D., & Phillips, R. (2008). Web-based lecture technologies: Blurring the boundaries between face-to-face and distance learning. Research in Learning Technology, 16(2), 81–93. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v16i2.10887
   Google Scholar
• Yatigammana, K., & Wijayarathna, G. (2021). Students’ Perceptions of Online Lecture Delivery Modes: Higher Education During Covid-19 Pandemic and Beyond. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 16(21), 58. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v16i21.25305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar