Premium
Interactive audience response systems in oral and maxillofacial radiology undergraduate lectures
Author(s) -
OliveiraSantos Christiano,
Tirapelli Camila,
Rodrigues Clarissa Teles,
Domaneschi Carina,
Caldeira Monteiro Solange Aparecida
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
european journal of dental education
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.583
H-Index - 41
eISSN - 1600-0579
pISSN - 1396-5883
DOI - 10.1111/eje.12258
Subject(s) - unanimity , significant difference , medicine , relevance (law) , psychology , medical education , mathematics education , dentistry , political science , law
Objectives To evaluate the impact of audience response systems ( ARS ) on student participation ( SP ) during Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology ( OMR ) undergraduate lectures and on final examination scores ( FES ). Furthermore, an analysis of unanimity assessed the influence of ARS on students’ responses. Students’ perceptions were also assessed. Methods A controlled crossover study was designed. Four lectures covering topics of OMR were each taught with ARS and without ARS (i.e. hand‐raising method). SP and FES were compared between ARS and HR groups. Unanimity of answers was analyzed for both groups. Questionnaires assessed students’ impressions about ARS . Results Mean SP of ARS and HR groups were 97.6% and 47.3%, respectively, and this difference was statistically significant ( P <.05). Mean FES for the ARS group (77%) was slightly higher than HR group (75.1%), however, not statistically significant. There was positive correlation between SP and FES . With ARS , only 5.7% of the questions were unanimous, whilst 51.4% were unanimous with HR method. Most students reported that the use of ARS had positive influence on their attention (92%), participation (96%), classmates’ participation (82.7%), interest (74.7%), and learning (86.7%). For the five‐point scale ratings of the relevance of ARS features, anonymity had an average 3.6, whilst other items received an average 4.6 or higher. Conclusions ARS significantly increased participation in OMR lectures; however, an increase in FES could not be associated with ARS by itself. Not taking into consideration which method was used to answer questions posed during lectures, higher participation correlated with higher scores. ARS is well‐accepted and students believe that these devices positively influence their performance. Among the recognized advantages of ARS , anonymity was considered the least relevant.