Individual response technology to promote active learning within the caring sciences: An experimental research study

One major challenge in delivering lectures to large and diverse classes is the maintenance of a high standard of lecturing in order to engage students and increase their participation and involvement. The lecturer's assignment is to arrange and prepare the lecture before teaching, hence enablin...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Nurse education today 2016-01, Vol.36, p.202-206
Hauptverfasser: Hedén, Lena, Ahlstrom, Linda
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:One major challenge in delivering lectures to large and diverse classes is the maintenance of a high standard of lecturing in order to engage students and increase their participation and involvement. The lecturer's assignment is to arrange and prepare the lecture before teaching, hence enabling students' enhanced learning. Individual response technology could encourage students' active learning and activate higher cognitive levels. The aim of this study was to evaluate individual response technology as a complement during lectures for students in higher education, in terms of the students' experiences of participation, engagement, and active learning. Also of interest was whether this technology can be considered a supportive technical system. Data were collected through a questionnaire where levels of each condition were reported on a numeric rating scale (0–10) at baseline and after the introduction of individual response technology. To get a broader perspective, two types of lectures (pediatric and statistical) were included, giving a total of four assessment times. The participants comprised 59 students in Bachelor of Nursing program at a Swedish metropolitan university. Overall, when individual response technology was used, students reported increased experience of engagement (n=82, mean 6.1 vs. n=65, mean 7.3, p
ISSN:0260-6917
1532-2793
1532-2793
DOI:10.1016/j.nedt.2015.10.010