Email this article 
IEngage: Using Technology to Enhance Students’ Engagement in a Large Classroom
Abstract
This paper aims to answer how we can increase students’ engagement in a large class. We hypothesised that the use of KeyPad, an interactive student response system, can lead to enhanced student engagement in a large classroom. We tested a model of classroom technology integration enhancing the students’ engagement among first year undergraduate students (n=131). This study provides evidence of significant effect of positive attitude and social pressure on the intent to use KeyPads. In turn, the intent to use KeyPads leads to the actual use of KeyPads which is directly associated with the level of student engagement. In addition, we find evidence for the relationship between extraversion and level of engagement such that compared to extrovert students, introvert students felt more engaged.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
Boling, E. C. (2008). Learning from teachers' conceptions of technology integration: What do blogs, instant messages, and 3D chat rooms have to do with it? Research in the Teaching of English, 43(1), 74-100. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40171818
Carini, R., Kuh, G. D., & Klein, S. P. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 1-32. doi: 10.1007/s11162-005-8150-9
Chapman, E. (2003). Alternative approaches to assessing student engagement rates. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 8(13). Retrieved from http://PAREonline.net
Chompu-Inwai, R., & Doolen, T. (2008). The impact of mobile wireless technology on student attitudes in higher education classrooms. International Journal of Engineering Education, 24(1), 14-22. Retrieved from http://stu.westga.edu/~bthibau1/MEDT%208484-%20Baylen/Good1.pdf
Coates, H. (2010). Development of the Australasian survey of student engagement (AUSSE). Higher Education, 60, 1-17. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-009-9281-2
Coles, C. (2009). The role of new technology in improving engagement among law students in higher education. Journal of Information, Law and Technology, 3, 1-6. Retrieved from http://go.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/2009_3/coles
Colvin, C. A., & Goh, A. (2005) Validation of the Technology Acceptance Model for police. Journal of Criminal Justice, 33, 89–95. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2004.10.009
Cordano, M., & Frieze, I. H. (2000). Pollution reduction preferences of U.S. environmental managers: Applying Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 627-641. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1556358
Crosling, G., Thomas, L., & Heagney, M. (2008). Improving student retention in higher education: the role of teaching and learning. London: Routledge.
Dishaw, M. T., & Strong, D. M. (1999) Extending the Technology Acceptance Model with task-technology fit constructs, Information and Management, 36(1), 9-21. doi: 10.1016/S0378-7206(98)00101-3
Hashemzadeh, N., & Wilson, L. (2007). Teaching with the lights out: What do we really know about the impact of technology intensive instruction? College Student Journal, 41(3), 601-612.
Krause, K., & Coates, H. (2008). Students’ engagement in first-year university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 493-505.
Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540-563. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25144692
Nelson Laird, T. F., & Kuh, G. D. (2005). Student experiences with information technology and their relationship to other aspects of student engagement. Research in Higher Education, 46(2), 211-233. doi: 10.1007/s 11162-004-1600-y
Petropoulakis, L., & Flood, F. (2008). Interactive student engagement using wireless handheld devices. International Journal of Engineering Education, 24(1), 46-55. Retrieved from http://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/19790
Ross, J., & Zeisler, A. (2005). Determining your TCO: Introduction to the revised K12 Total Cost of Ownership Calculator. Presentation at the annual Florida Educational Technology Conference (FETC), Orlando, FL, January 26-29, 2005. AEL.
Salemi, M. K. (2009). Clickenomics: Using a classroom response system to increase student engagement in a large-enrolment Principles of Economics course. Journal of Economic Education, (Fall), 385-404.
Skinner, E., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behaviour and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571-581.
SoundOut. (2007). 10 ways to kill student engagement. Promoting student voice in schools, 3-4. Retrieved from https://search.informit.com.au/fullText;dn=265358811492181;res=IELHSS
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995) Decomposition and crossover effects in the theory of planned behavior: A study of consumer adoption intentions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12, 137-55. doi: 10.1016/0167-8116(94)00019-K
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F.D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.
Venkatesh, V., & Zhang, X. (2010). Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology: U.S. Vs. China. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 13(5), 5-27.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5204/jld.v9i3.292
Article Metrics
Metrics powered by PLOS ALM
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.