OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a student response system on short- and long-term learning in a required second-year pharmacy course. METHOD:Student volunteers enrolled in the course Drug Literature Evaluation were blinded and randomized to 1 of 2 groups. Group 1 attended a lecture in which the instructor used a student response system. Group 2 attended the same lecture by the same instructor an hour later, but no student response system was used. A 16-point unannounced quiz on the lecture material was administered to both groups at the end of class. Approximately 1 month later, both groups were given another unannounced quiz on the same material to test long-term student learning. RESULTS:One hundred seventy-nine (92.3%) students participated in both quizzes. Students who attended the class in which the student response system was used scored an average 1 point higher on quiz 1 than students who were assigned to the control group (10.7 vs. 9.7; p = 0.02). No significant difference was seen between the quiz 2 scores of the 2 groups (9.5 vs. 9.5; p = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: The use of a student response system can positively impact students' short-term learning; however, that positive effect did not appear to last over time. Faculty members may want to consider the use of student response systems to enhance student learning in large lecture classes.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a student response system on short- and long-term learning in a required second-year pharmacy course. METHOD: Student volunteers enrolled in the course Drug Literature Evaluation were blinded and randomized to 1 of 2 groups. Group 1 attended a lecture in which the instructor used a student response system. Group 2 attended the same lecture by the same instructor an hour later, but no student response system was used. A 16-point unannounced quiz on the lecture material was administered to both groups at the end of class. Approximately 1 month later, both groups were given another unannounced quiz on the same material to test long-term student learning. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-nine (92.3%) students participated in both quizzes. Students who attended the class in which the student response system was used scored an average 1 point higher on quiz 1 than students who were assigned to the control group (10.7 vs. 9.7; p = 0.02). No significant difference was seen between the quiz 2 scores of the 2 groups (9.5 vs. 9.5; p = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: The use of a student response system can positively impact students' short-term learning; however, that positive effect did not appear to last over time. Faculty members may want to consider the use of student response systems to enhance student learning in large lecture classes.
Keywords:
active learning; audience response system; student learning