You are here:

Implementation of a University Standard for Personal Response Systems
Article

, , Kutztown University of PA, United States

AACE Review (formerly AACE Journal) Volume 17, Number 1, ISSN 1065-6901 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

Increasing student interaction in the classroom is an area of interest for many faculty members. Personal Response Systems (PRS), also known as classroom clickers, may aid in this goal. In this article, we describe Kutztown University's pilot PRS program. Included are the criteria we used to select a PRS vendor, our approach in designing and delivering the Kutztown PRS program, and the preliminary results of our year-long pilot.

Citation

Jefferson, W. & Spiegel, D. (2009). Implementation of a University Standard for Personal Response Systems. AACE Review (formerly AACE Journal), 17(1), 1-9. Waynesville, NC USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved July 2, 2022 from .

© 2009 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Advantage Business Media. (2005, March). IR system serves as teacher’s aid [Editorial]. R & D Magazine. Retrieved December 2, 2007, from http://www.rdmag.com/ ShowPR.aspx?PUBCODE=014&ACCT=1400000100&ISSUE=0503&RELTYPE=P R&ORIGRELTYPE=EMT&PRODCODE=00000000&PRODLETT=M
  2. Barrett, M., Bornsen, S., Erickson, S., Markey, V., & Spiering, K. (2005). The personal response system as a teaching aid. Communication Teacher, 19(3), 89-92.
  3. Brewer, C. (2004). Near real-time assessment of student learning and understanding in biology courses. Bioscience, 54(11), 1034-1039.
  4. Broida, J. (2007). Classroom use of a personal response system: What clickers can do for your students. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  5. Freeman, M., & Blaney, P. (2005, July). Promoting interactive in-class learning environments: A comparison of an electronic system with a traditional alternative. Paper presented at the 11th Australasian Teaching Economics Conference, Sydney, Australia.
  6. Hake, R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousandstudent survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 64-74.
  7. Murphy, B., & Smark, C. (2006). Convergence of learning experiences for first year tertiary commerce students—Are personal response systems the meeting point? The Journal of American Academy of Business, 10(1), 186-190.
  8. O’Hanlon, C. (2007). Press ‘2’ for not guilty. T.H.E. Journal, 34(5), 52-53. Ribbens, E. (2007, November/December). Why I like personal response systems. Journal of College Science Teaching, (pp. 60-62).
  9. Skiba, D. (2006). Got large lecture hall classes? Use clickers. Nursing Education Perspectives, 27(5), 278-280.
  10. Trotter, A. (2005). Technology turns test-prep into clicking experience. Education Week,

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read