AUDIENCE RESPONSE TECHNOLOGY (ART) has been widely adopted on college campuses, and prior research indicates that, on average, it receives positive evaluations from students. However, research has not yet examined how characteristics of students as learners influence their responses to ART. The current study examined aptitude for learning, objective learning (i.e., class performance), subjective learning (i.e., self-perceived learning), and conceptualizations of the learning process as influences on students' evaluation of ART. Students who had used ART over the course of a semester in one of three large lecture classes ( N =703) completed surveys assessing their learning characteristics, perceptions of ART influence on their attendance, motivation, and learning, liking for ART, and evaluations of the course and instructor. Controlling for course and instructor evaluations, aptitude and objective learning were weakly but negatively associated with evaluations of ART and subjective learning was positively associated with evaluations of ART. Further, different conceptualizations of learning have distinctive associations with ART evaluations. Discussion focuses on the implications of these findings for instructors' use of ART.
In the past few years, audience response technology (ART) has been widely adopted on college campuses, and is especially popular among instructors of large lecture classes. Claims regarding ART’s benefits to students have received only limited empirical evaluation, and prior studies exhibit methodological limitations. The current study provides a multi-dimensional evaluation, utilizing a newly-developed measure, the Audience Response Technology Questionnaire (ART-Q). Data were provided at three points during a semester by undergraduate students ( n = 854) who used ART in three large lecture university courses. Results indicate moderately positive evaluations of ART on some dimensions (e.g., ease of use, impact on attendance), with less positive evaluations on others (e.g., influence on preparation for class). These evaluations showed some variability across time of semester and course, but were not substantially affected by gender, ethnicity, or year in school. Findings are discussed with respect to the need for future research on instructors’ techniques for using ART and their influence on student perceptions and outcomes.