Re-engineering challenging and abstract topics using Kahoot!, a student response system.
The pervasive nature of digital technologies and students’ habitual use of them brings opportunities for their assimilation in the classroom environment. The Student Response System (SRS), Kahoot!, which allows students to provide answers to multiple-choice questions instantly was introduced in the research methods course. The motivation for using such technology was to reinforce the key concepts, often very abstract, consolidate students’ learning, provide them with real-life feedback, and help them to grow in their knowledge and confidence of the subject matter. This case study, based on a small scale exploratory research sample, showcases the benefits of incorporating SRS in the research methods tutorials, supported by student feedback, which include better conceptual understanding and increased motivation resulting in the transition from surface to deep learning.
Bandura, A. (1986) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Boyle, J. T. & Nicol, D. J. (2003) ‘Using classroom communication systems to support interaction and discussion in large class settings’, Association for Learning Technology Journal, 3: 11, 43-57.
Brenner, T. (2015) The use of Mobile Devices in the College Classroom. [Online]. Available at: http://bokcenter.harvard.edu/blog/use-mobile-devices-college-classroom Harvard University: The Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning [Accessed 16/10/17].
Brenton, S. (2009) ‘E-learning- an introduction’ in Fry, H., Ketteridge, S. and Marshall, S. (eds.), A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education, Oxford: Routledge, 85-98.
Bush, G. (2006) ‘Learning about learning: from theories to trends’, Teacher Librarian, 34: 2, 14-19.
Caldwell, J. E. (2007) ‘Clickers in the large classroom: current research and best-practice tips’,CBE - Life Sciences Education, 6, 9-20.
Cooper, D.R. and Schindler, P.S. (
Crouch, A. H. & Mazur, E. (2001) ‘Peer instruction: ten years of experience and results’, American Journal of Physics, 69: 9, 970-977.
Draper, S. W. & Brown, M. I. (2004) ‘Increasing interactivity in lectures using an electronic voting system’, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 81-94.
Gagne, R., Briggs, L. and Wager, W. (1992), Principles of Instructional Design (4th Ed.), Fort Worth, TX: HBJ College Publishers.
Hedgcock, W. H., & Rouwenhorst, R. M. (2014) ‘Clicking their way to success: using student response systems as a tool for feedback’, Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, 22: 2, 16-25.
Lai, K-W. & Hong, K-S. (2015) ‘Technology use and learning characteristics of students in higher education: Do generational differences exist’, British Journal of Educational Technology, 46: 4, 725-738.
Love, E.G., Love, D.W., & Northcraft, G.B. (2010) ‘Is the End in Sight? Student Regulation of In-Class and Extra-Credit Effort in Response to Performance Feedback’, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9: 1, 81-97.
Martin, F., Klein, J. & Sullivan, H. (2007), ‘The Impact of Instructional Elements in Computer-Based Instruction’, British Journal of Educational Technology, 38: 4, 623 - 636.
Masikunas, G., Panayiotidis, A. & Burke, L. (2007) ‘The use of electronic voting systems in lectures within business and marketing: a case study of their impact on student learning’, Research in Learning Technology, 15: 1, 3-20.
Mayer, R. (2005) The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nielsen, K. L., Hansen, G., & Stav, J. B. (2013) ‘Teaching with student response systems (SRS): teacher-centric aspects that can negatively affect students’ experience of using SRS’, Research in Learning Technology, 21, 1-13.
Prensky, M. (2001) ‘Digital natives, digital immigrants’. On the Horizon, 9: 5, 1–2.
Rao, S. P. & DiCarlo, S. E. (2000) ‘Peer instruction improves performance on quizzes’, Advances in Physiology Education, 24, 51-55.
Rice, R. E. & Bunz, U. (2006) ‘Evaluating a wireless course feedback system: the role of demographics, expertise, fluency, competence, and usage’, Studies in Media and Information Literacy Education, 6: 3, 1-32.
Viberg, O. & Grönlund, Å. (2017) ‘Understanding students’ learning practices: challenges for design and integration of mobile technology into distance education’, Learning, Media and Technology, 42:3, 357-377.
Weegar, M.A. and Pacis, D. (2012) ‘A Comparison of Two Theories of Learning-Behaviorism and Constructivism as applied to Face-to-Face and Online Learning’. In Proceedings E-Leader Conference, Manila.
- There are currently no refbacks.