IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i22p14957-d970372.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Using “Student Response Systems (SRS)” on Faculty Performance and Student Interaction in the Classroom

Author

Listed:
  • Omar Altwijri

    (Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2460, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
    Department of Biomedical Technology, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2460, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia)

  • Elham Alsadoon

    (Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2460, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
    Curriculum and Instruction Department, College of Education, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2460, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia)

  • Ahmad Abdul-Wahhab Shahba

    (Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2460, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
    Kayyali Research Chair for Pharmaceutical Industries, Department of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2460, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia)

  • Walid Soufan

    (Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2460, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
    Plant Production Department, College of Food and Agriculture Sciences, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2460, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia)

  • Saud Alkathiri

    (Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2460, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
    Curriculum and Instruction Department, College of Education, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2460, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia)

Abstract

Enhancing faculty performance and student interaction during the lecture is essential to achieve sustainable learning development. The current study aims to evaluate the effect of using “Student response systems (SRS)” on faculty performance and student interaction in the classroom. The faculty members at King Saud University were encouraged to join a university-scale educational project that involve utilizing SRSs within their classes. From Fall 2016 to Fall 2019, a total of 371 faculty members and 19,746 students were enrolled in the current study. By the end of each semester, faculty and student satisfaction surveys were distributed to evaluate their perceptions of using SRS in the class. The faculty members’ and students’ response rates were 75.7% and 38.1%, respectively, and represented 18 different colleges from different disciplines within the university. Furthermore, the study covered a wide range of study levels for bachelor’s degrees ranging from levels 1–10. The study demographics showed that 60% of the total participating faculty members and 64% of students were females. Interestingly, the majority of participating faculty members (40%) and students (44%) belong to health colleges. Among the most beneficial effects of using SRSs, is that it increased the interaction, focus, and participation of students in the lecture and stimulated their desire to attend and prepare for the lecture. It also helped the faculty members to improve their teaching strategies and enabled them to know the weaknesses or strengths of students, which in turn led to the improvement of the entire educational process. The majority of faculty members as well as the students recommend applying it in other courses and future semesters. These findings were generally consistent over the whole studied seven semesters. SRSs offer a potential tool to improve faculty teaching practices, enhance student engagement, and achieve sustainable learning development among different disciplines.

Suggested Citation

  • Omar Altwijri & Elham Alsadoon & Ahmad Abdul-Wahhab Shahba & Walid Soufan & Saud Alkathiri, 2022. "The Effect of Using “Student Response Systems (SRS)” on Faculty Performance and Student Interaction in the Classroom," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-20, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:14957-:d:970372
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/14957/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/14957/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael K. Salemi, 2009. "Clickenomics: Using a Classroom Response System to Increase Student Engagement in a Large-Enrollment Principles of Economics Course," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 385-404, October.
    2. Liu, Donald J. & Walker, J.D. & Bauer, Theresa A. & Zhao, Meng, 2007. "Facilitating Classroom Economics Experiments with an Emerging Technology: The Case of Clickers," 2007 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, 2007, Portland, Oregon 9873, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Alan Green, 2016. "Significant returns in engagement and performance with a free teaching app," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(1), pages 1-10, January.
    4. Ahmad A. Shahba & Zaid Alashban & Ibrahim Sales & Abdelrahman Y. Sherif & Osman Yusuf, 2022. "Development and Evaluation of Interactive Flipped e-Learning (iFEEL) for Pharmacy Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-19, March.
    5. Sucharita Ghosh & Francesco Renna, 2009. "Using Electronic Response Systems in Economics Classes," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 354-365, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Martha L. Olney, 2016. "Explaining "In the Aggregate" Concepts with Clickers," Journal of Economics Teaching, Journal of Economics Teaching, vol. 1(2), pages 71-90, December.
    2. Ameeta Jain & Alan Farley, 2012. "Mobile Phone-Based Audience Response System and Student Engagement in Large-Group Teaching," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 31(4), pages 428-439, December.
    3. Alcalde, Pilar & Nagel, Juan, 2015. "Does active learning improve student performance? A randomized experiment in a Chilean university," MPRA Paper 68994, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Jennifer Imazeki, 2014. "Bring-Your-Own-Device: Turning Cell Phones into Forces for Good," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(3), pages 240-250, September.
    5. Fritz Dresselhaus & Jessika A. Bohlmann & Roula Inglesi-Lotz, 2015. "Assessing the impact of just-in-time methodology, in-lecture activities, and tutor-assisted post-lecture activities in the course experience of first year students in Economics at the University of Pr," Working Papers 562, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    6. Joseph Calhoun & Dirk Mateer, 2011. "Incorporating Media and Response Systems in the Economics Classroom," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 13, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Hobbs, Kelsi & Wooten, Jadrian, 2021. "Teaching Principles of Microeconomics with the Economics Media Library," Applied Economics Teaching Resources (AETR), Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 3(1), March.
    8. Tawni Hunt Ferrarini & G. Dirk Mateer, 2014. "Multimedia Technology for the Next Generation," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 29(Spring 20), pages 129-139.
    9. Green, Alan, 2024. "Are we doing homework wrong? The marginal effect of homework using spaced repetition," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    10. Gail Hoyt & Mary Kassis & David Vera & Jennifer Imazeki, 2010. "Interactive Large Enrollment Economics Courses," Chapters, in: Michael K. Salemi & William B. Walstad (ed.), Teaching Innovations in Economics, chapter 10, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Michael K. Salemi, 2010. "Developing Teacher Expertise for Economists through a Workshop Experience," Chapters, in: Michael K. Salemi & William B. Walstad (ed.), Teaching Innovations in Economics, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Stephen Buckles & Gail M. Hoyt & Jennifer Imazeki, 2011. "Making the Large-Enrollment Course Interactive and Engaging," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 10, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Johnson, Marianne & Meder, Martin E., 2024. "Twenty-three years of teaching economics with technology," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    14. Brandon J. Sheridan & Gail Hoyt & Jennifer Imazeki, 2014. "A Primer for New Teachers of Economics," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 80(3), pages 839-854, January.
    15. Ken Rebeck & Carlos Asarta, 2011. "Methods of Assessment in the College Economics Course," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 16, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Uthman Alturki & Ahmed Aldraiweesh, 2022. "Adoption of Google Meet by Postgraduate Students: The Role of Task Technology Fit and the TAM Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-22, November.
    17. Sucharita Ghosh & Francesco Renna, 2009. "Using Electronic Response Systems in Economics Classes," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 354-365, October.
    18. Mark Maier, 2011. "Interactive Lecture Demonstrations: Adapting a Physics Education Pedagogy for Use in the Economics Classroom," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Keith Brouhle, 2011. "Exploring Strategic Behavior in an Oligopoly Market Using Classroom Clickers," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(4), pages 395-404, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:14957-:d:970372. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.