Technology has been touted as an effective method to improve teaching and learning; yet, few researchers have examined the use of technology in traditional lecture-based instruction to improve student engagement or provide feedback about student learning to the instructor. The exploratory study described in this article examined the use of group response technology (GRT) to gather student responses during instruction in a preservice special education course. Classroom observation data indicated no differences in engagement between preservice teachers who used GRT and those who used hand-written journals; however, the use of GRT provided the instructor with real-time data about student learning. These data challenged the instructor's conceptions of lecture-based instruction, causing increased attention to and heightened knowledge of student learning, which, in turn, resulted in changes in instructional practices. The potential of GRT use for increasing the effectiveness of instruction in higher education and modeling effective instructional practices for teacher preparation are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenD. E.DuchB. J., & GrohS. E. (1996). The power of problem-based learning in teaching introductory science courses. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 68, 43–52.
2.
AnsonC. M. & BeachR. (1995). Journal in the classroom: Writing to learn. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.
3.
BaneC. L. (1925). The lecture vs. the class-discussion method of college teaching. School and Society, 21, 300–302.
4.
BarkerP. (1997). Tools to support electronic lectures. Educational Technology Review, 8, 16–20.
5.
BarnettB. G., & BrillA. D. (1989). Building reflection into administrative training programs. Paper presented at the convention of the University Council for Educational Administration, Cincinnati, OH.
6.
BellmanB. L. (1992). Computer communications and learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 51, 55–63.
7.
BonwellC. C. (1996). Enhancing the lecture: Revitalizing a traditional format. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 67, 31–44.
8.
BrandtR. (1992). On research on teaching: A conversation with Lee Shulman. Educational Leadership, 49 (7), 14–19.
9.
BrophyJ. (1992). Probing the subtleties of subject-matter teaching. Educational Leadership, 49 (7), 4–8.
10.
BrophyJ., & GoodT. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In WittrockM. C. (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328–375). New York: Macmillan.
11.
BrownellG., & BrownellN. (1991). Designing tomorrow: Preparing teachers as change agents for the classroom of the future. Computers in the Schools, 8, 147–149.
12.
ChristensonS. L.YsseldykeJ. E., & ThurlowM. L. (1989). Critical instructional factors for students with mild handicaps: An integrative review. Remedial and Special Education, 10 (5), 21–31.
13.
CrainL. A. (1994). Effects of instructional media on immediate and long term recall. InterpersonalComputing and Technology, 2 (2), 19–27.
14.
DavenportE., & McKimG. (1995). Groupware. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST), 30, 115–159.
DufresneR. J.GeraceW. J.LeonardW. J.MestreJ. P., & WenkL. (1996). Classtalk: A classroom communication system for active learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 7 (2), 3–47.
17.
DunkinM. J. (with BarnesJ.). (1986). Research on teaching in higher education. In WittrockM. C. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd ed., pp. 754–777). New York: Macmillan.
18.
DupagneM., & KrendlK. A. (1992). Teachers' attitudes toward computers: A review of the literature. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 24 (3), 249–271.
19.
EisnerJ., & CarterT. (1989). University faculty teaching activities in an electronic curriculum. Educational Technology, 29 (4), 17–22.
20.
EllisC. A.GibbsS. J., & ReinG. L. (1991). Groupware: Some issues and experiences. Communications of the ACM, 34 (1), 38–58.
21.
EmigC. A. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication, 28 (2) 122–128.
22.
EnglertC. S.TarrantK. L., & MariageT. V. (1992). Defining and redefining instructional practice in special education: Perspectives on good teaching. Teacher Education and Special Education, 15(2), 62–86.
23.
FeldmanK. A., & PaulsenM. B. (1994). Teaching and learning in the college classroom (ASHE Reader Series). Needham Heights, MA: Ginn Press.
24.
FoegenA., & HargraveC. P. (1997). Discourse: Groupware for interactive classroom communication [Review of the computer groupware Discourse]. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 13 (2), 30–32.
25.
FoegenA.HoweK. B.DenoS. L., & RobinsonS. L. (1998). Enhancing the potential of distance education: A case study involving groupware. Teacher Education and Special Education, 21, 132–149.
26.
FoegenA.MarstonD.RobinsonS. R., & DenoS. L. (1993). Project Inclusion student observation system: Description, materials, procedures, and training exercises. Unpublished manual.
27.
FraaseH. (1991). Groupware for the Macintosh: A complete guide to collaborative computing.Homewood, ILBusiness One Computing.
28.
FrederickP. J. (1987). Student involvement: Active learning in large classes. In WeimerM. G. (Ed.), Teaching large classes well. New directions for teaching and learning, No. 32. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Winter, 1987.
29.
FulwilerT. (Ed.) (1987). The journal book. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, a division of Heineman.
30.
GoldmanE., & BarronL. (1990). Using hypermedia to improve the preparation of elementary teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 41, 21–31.
31.
GreenwoodC. R. (1996). Research on the practices and behavior of effective teachers at the Juniper Gardens Children's Project: Implications for the education of diverse learners. In SpeeceD. L. & KeoghB. K. (Eds.), Research on classroom ecologies: Implications for inclusion of students with learning disabilities (pp. 39–67). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
32.
GreenwoodC. R.DelquadriJ. C., & HallR. V. (1984). Opportunity to respond and student academic performance. In HewardW.HeronT.HillD., & Trap-PorterJ. (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education (pp. 58–88). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
33.
GreenwoodC. R.DelquadriJ. C.StanleyS. O.SassoG.WhortonD. & ShulteD. (1981). Allocating opportunity to learn as a basis for academic remediation: A developing model for teaching. Monograph in Behavior Disorders (Summer), 22–33.
34.
HargraveC. P. (1993). Computer simulations, reflective journals, peer group interactions, and conceptual change about electricity with preservice teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University.
35.
HarriganK. (1995). The SPECIAL system: Self-Paced education with compressed interactive audio learning. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 27, 361–370.
36.
HarringtonH. L., & Quinn-LeeringK. (1996). Computer conferencing and moral discourse. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 4, 49–68.
37.
HaydenM.GerstenR., & CarnineD. (1992). Using computer networking to increase active teaching in general education math classes containing students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 11, 167–177.
38.
HirtD. E. (1994). Student journals: Are they beneficial in lecture courses?Chemical Engineering Education, 29, 62–64.
39.
International Society for Technology and Education (ISTE) Accreditation Committee. (1996). Curriculum guidelines for accreditation of educational computing and technology literacy and leadership programs. Eugene, OR: Author.
40.
JessupL. M.EgbertJ. L., & ConnollyT. (1995–1996). Understanding computer-supported group work: The effects of interaction frequency on group process and outcome. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28, 190–208.
41.
JessupL. M., & TansikD. A. (1991). Decision making in an automated environment: The effects of anonymity and proximity with a group decision support system. Decision Sciences, 22, 266–279.
42.
JohnsonD.JohnsonR., & SmithK. A. (1991). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
43.
KarayanS. S., & CroweJ. A. (1997). Student perceptions of electronic discussion groups. T.H.E. Journal, 24 (9), 69–71.
44.
KottkampR. B. (1990). Means for facilitating reflection. Education and Urban Society, 22 (2), 182–203.
45.
KrippendorffK. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
46.
KulikJ. A., & KulikC-L. C. (1979). College teaching. In PetersonP. L. & WalbergH. J. (Eds.), Research on teaching: Concepts, findings, and implications (pp. 70–93). Berkeley, CA: McCutcheon.
47.
LennonJ., & MaurerH. (1994). Lecturing technology: A future with hypermedia. Educational Technology, 34 (4), 5–14.
48.
MarcaD., & BockG. (1992). Groupware: Software for computer-supported cooperative work. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
49.
McKeachieW. J. (1990). Research on college teaching: The historical background. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 189–200.
50.
MeyersC., & JonesT. B. (1993). Promoting active learning: Strategies for the college classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
51.
OdellL. (1980). The process of writing and the process of learning. College Composition and Commutation, 30, 42–50.
52.
Office of Technology Assessment. (1995). Teachers and technology: Making the connection. (Report No. OTA-EHR-616). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
53.
ReidJ. E. (1998). Incorporating audio in a digital lecture: Multimedia production considerations. Syllabus, 11 (5), 54–55.
54.
ResnickL. B. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
55.
RiethH., & EvertsonC. (1988). Variables related to the effective instruction of difficult-to-teach children. Focus on Exceptional Children, 20 (5), 1–8.
56.
RobinsonS. L. (1994). Classroom technology for the human touch: A mini case study using DISCOURSE™. Curriculum/Technology Quarterly, 4 (1), 1–4.
57.
RosenshineB., & StevensR. (1986). Teaching functions. In WittrockM. C. (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd ed., pp. 376–391). New York: Macmillan.
58.
SakaT., & ShigiC. (1996). Groupware: Improving group communication and information dissemination. T.H.E. Journal, 24 (4), 101–105.
59.
ThompsonA.SchmidtD., & HadjiyianniE. (1995). A three year program to infuse technology throughout a teacher education program. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 3, 13–24.
60.
TjadenB. J., & MartinC. D. (1995). Learning effects of CAI on college students. Computers & Education, 24, 271–277.
61.
Van GorpM. J. (1998). Computer-mediated communication in preservice teacher education: Surveying research, identifying problems, and considering needs. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 14 (2), 8–14.
62.
WoodwardJ.CarnineD.GerstenR., & MooreL. (1987). Using computer networking for feedback. Journal of Special Education Technology, 8 (4), 28–35.
