June 24, 2007
June 24, 2007
June 27, 2007
Educational Research and Methods
12.1567.1 - 12.1567.14
Using technology to enhance active learning in Biomedical Engineering. Abstract
This paper evaluates previous uses of Personal Response Systems (PRS) and the pedagogical rationale associated to the different uses. We illustrate the use of PRS systems in two different courses: Systems Physiology and Thermodynamics. We describe the motivation to use PRS as well as the pedagogical methods associated with PRS use in the courses. The main goal of the study is to evaluate the relationships between students’ use of PRS and learning outcomes. We used two measures to evaluate students’ use of the PRS system. A Response index was calculated as the percentage of questions answered. A second index, Correct Response index was calculated by dividing the number of correct answers by the number of questions attempted. Learning outcomes were assessed using exam grades and final course grade. Students’ perceptions relative to PRS use in the course were measured using a questionnaire. We found a positive and significant relationship between PRS Response index and course performance for both courses. We conclude by comparing and evaluating the differences found in the results from both courses.
National calls for reform in science education 1 recommend a shift in instructional focus to incorporate the student as an active member of the educational process. The National Academy of Engineering is also promoting new initiatives to support innovative work in engineering education 2 Ebert-Mar, Brewer & Allred 3 indicate that learning is a constructive process that requires active participation by not only the teacher but also the student. Active involvement of students in large engineering classes can become a challenge. A possible approach includes “hands-on” experiences in the lab and small interactive classrooms 3. However, small classrooms are not always possible. As a result, strategies that promote active, inquiry-based and collaborative learning in large classes are likely to have a large impact in the future of science and engineering education.
Personal response systems (PRS) are a type of Classroom Communication System (CCS) consisting of a combination of hardware and software designed to support communication and interactivity in classes. CCS, also known as electronic voting systems (EVS), have been primarily used in science courses within post-secondary education. Such systems provide immediate feedback to students and inform instructors of students’ misunderstandings. CCSs typically incorporate four features: presentation of questions using presentation software (such as MS PowerPoint), remote individual transmitters, receivers to capture individual responses, and software to compile and present results. Using the CCS, any student in the classroom is able to respond to multiple choice questions asked by the instructor.
The methods of CCS use in large university classes vary with the pedagogical rationale and educational objectives. Kennedy and Cutts 4 explored different approaches in the use of CCSs. One approach is to incorporate the technology within the standard lecture. Using this method, lecture materials are supplemented with questions posed to students at certain points during the lecture followed by feedback and some discussion on the responses. A second approach is the
Pazos, P., & Linsenmeier, R., & Olds, S. (2007, June), Using Technology To Promote Active Learning In Biomedical Engineering Paper presented at 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition, Honolulu, Hawaii. 10.18260/1-2--2025
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2007 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015