Improving Student Engagement in Higher Education

through Mobile-Based Interactive Teaching Model

Using Socrative

Woan Ning Lim

Department of Computing and Information Systems
School of Science and Technology, Sunway University
Bandar Sunway, Malaysia
[email protected]

Abstract—One of the main problem in higher education researches nowadays to address the problem in low students’
teaching is low students’ levels of engagement leading to poor engagement. Students are motivated to engage in the classroom
learning performance. Broad teaching strategies, methods and when they know that they are heard by the instructor. Hence it
tools are developed over the years to address this concern. In is essential to explore new ways from traditional teaching to
recent years, with the increasing numbers of students accessing the improve the bonding between instructor and students in this
internet using mobile devices, there has been growing interest in technology-rich 21st century.
embracing the mobile technology in teaching to improve the
student participation in the classroom. This research describes the New technological innovations have often been attributed
design and implementation of a mobile-based interactive teaching with the potential to have a large impact on the field of
model with in-class and off-class components aided by Socrative education. Mobile technology has evolved rapidly with the
online audience response system to improve students’ engagement decrease in cost of ownership and enhancement in user-
in a private university in Malaysia. A total of 45 students from friendliness, resulted in the vital increase of mobile devices
undergraduate computing course had participated in this adoption rate amongst higher education students over the years.
experimental study. The activities such as polls, exercises, quizzes Majority students agreed that mobile devices will transform the
and games was used to stimulate the discussion and encourage two way they learn in the future and make learning more fun [2].
ways communication between instructor and students. Both Furthermore, the higher education environments are getting
qualitative and quantitative data comprises of students’
matured to adapt the mobile technologies with the readiness of
feedbacks, academic results, attendance records and instructor’s
WiFi coverage across the campus. These made the integration of
teaching evaluation scores are analyzed. The results show that
students were strongly positive with the use of Socrative and felt
such technology into the classroom more feasible compared to
that they were more engaged. This interactive model has early years. Engaging these ‘millennial’ generation or digital
successfully enhanced students’ learning experience and improved natives using the technologies they are familiar with their own
students’ academic performance. The outcome of this study would devices which are stapled to their daily lives is certainly
contributes to current evidence of the efficacy of using mobile welcoming. The concept of using personal mobile devices in
technology in higher education teaching. education settings for in-class interactive activity is aligned with
the new trend coined as Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) or
Keywords—interactive teaching model; student engagement; Bring Your Own Technology (BYOT) [3][4].
mobile teaching tool; mobile learning
In this research, an interactive teaching model assisted with
I. INTRODUCTION mobile technology is experimented to enhance the interactions
and feedbacks between instructor and students, with the aim to
Improving students’ engagement is a challenge faced by engage students in their learning.
many institutions in the higher education sector. Many
pedagogical researchers believe that low engagement in II. RELATED WORK
classroom will lead to negative impact in achieving the learning
outcome, hence tremendous efforts and focus have been put in In the past, before the common use of mobile technology in
this research area over the decades [1]. education, one way of gaining immediate feedback during
classroom instruction is to employ clicker, a radio frequency-
The problem with today's education is that most educators based electronic feedback devices. Clicker is a small portable
are still teaching the way they were taught in the past, as quoted device that uses infrared or radio frequency technology to
by John Dewey "if we teach today as we taught yesterday, we transmit and record students’ responses to questions. The use of
rob our children of tomorrow". The one-way communication of clickers has revealed a variety of benefits with regard to the
standard lecture and PowerPoint presentations in the old days no instantaneous feedback to both the instructor and students, the
longer effective in encourage learning. Two ways anonymity of the responses encourages the participation of
communication is the sought after approach in various education students who may otherwise be reluctant to do so [5]. Research
study showed an outstanding improvement in the agreed on the ease of use and 92% on improving the engagement
communicative competence of students with the use of clickers were reported in the research study involved sixty-five 1st year
[6]. The use of clickers has also indicated an increase in student university students where Socrative was used in getting
participation in class and the regression results showed that the students’ responses during lectures and delivering prepared
use of clickers had positive and significant impact on students’ quizzes in tutorials [10]. One significant advantage highlighted
academic performance [7][8]. However, students from a private in the report was the tool allows quieter students to interact with
college in United States disagreed or were neutral with the above instructor without the fear of making ‘public’ mistakes. There is
statement [9]. Hence, the argument of better student engagement another study indicated a statistically positive relationships
leads to the improvement of grades remains debatable. between the variables (participating, collaborate, discuss, extend
and grow as a community) and performance of students in Irbid
Recent years, majority researches are into investigating the National University after the used of Socrative [19].
usage of online audience response system in effective teaching
[10][11][12]. Most of the online audience response systems In the researches cited above, it is observed that the online
embrace the Cloud technology and are supported on any web- audience response system was mainly used to handle simple in-
enabled devices including laptops, iPads, Android tablets and class activities such as polls and quizzes, there is lack of
mobile phones which can also be installed as native application discussions on the design or establishment of any teaching
on the mobile devices. It is an easy to use tool with minimum model. Hence, this research is motivated to introduce an
setup footprint while negating some of the limitations of clickers interactive teaching model comprises of in-class and off-class
such as device purchasing costs (students can run the online tool components aided by Socrative to empirically investigate some
on their own mobile devices). An experimental study with the of the findings from the researches above. The effectiveness of
comparison of both clickers and online audience response this model in improving students’ engagement is evaluated in
system confirmed the same positive effect in student this study.
engagement, with favorable experiences on the latter, reported
by most instructors [5]. III. IMPLEMENTATION
Poll Everywhere claimed to be the first audience response The experiment was carried out in an undergraduate
tool for mobile devices [13]. It is a simple application that works programming class from March to July 2016 and involved a total
well for live audiences to response via the web, text messages, of 45 students from the Information Technology programme in
or twitter through their phones. The free plan is offered with Sunway University. In this study, the interactive teaching model
limitation of 25 responses per poll and paid plans without any was implemented in the lecture class once per week for a
restrictions. Research result revealed strong positive responses continuous of 14 weeks. Both qualitative and quantitative data
of using Poll Everywhere in a large introductory computer were collected in the research. Survey questionnaires were
science course with 291 students, as well as a small classroom conducted online anonymously to evaluate participants’
of 30 students, where mobile phones were the most popular involvement and perception, while students’ academic results,
device that students used in answering the polling, followed by attendance records and the instructor’s teaching evaluation
laptops and iPads[14][12]. Students who attended lecture scores from the experiment were extracted and compared with
enjoyed using Poll Everywhere and felt they were more past year data. The implementation platform, model design and
engaged. However, the use of this interactive pedagogy did not activities details are discussed in the following sections.
show direct positive influence in student attendance[14]. A. Platform
Socrative is another cloud based audience response system A free version of Socrative was used in this study. It
that has gained popularity amongst educators in view of the composed of two main modules, which are Socrative Student
drawback of Poll Everywhere in limiting the number of and Socrative Teacher modules. The teacher module allows
responses for their free plan. As of 2013, Socrative has recorded instructor to prepare and manage quizzes, run polls and view
a strong growth with total of 450,000 registered members and reports. The student module is a simpler module for students to
more than 40,000 new registration each month [15]. Socrative participate in the activities. It can run on multi platforms either
was developed in 2011 by a Boston-based start-up. It is a free on an internet connected web browser or can be installed as
service (with paid option for additional features) that allows native application on any mobile devices. Socrative offers the
instructors to gather timely response from students in the form flexibility and ease of use by eliminating the needs for students
of multiple choice, true/false, or short answers and to handle in- to create account, they can join a virtual classroom via a room
class polling, off-class pooling or formative assessment. code created by the instructor without prior registration.
Socrative is also equipped with gamification feature for running
B. Interactive Teaching Model
a quick quiz game. The service is available across platforms and
devices (laptops, tablets, and/or smartphones) provide the ease The experimented interactive teaching model is shown in
for instructors to engage students and gather feedback by Fig. 1. It incorporates both in-class and off-class components to
harnessing the mobile technologies that students bring to class. increase students’ engagement by encouraging students’
responses (before and during the class), providing timely
The researches using Socrative to enhance teaching in higher assessment feedback, and implementing gamification in
education have been continuously growing over the past few learning.
years. Many have indicated positive acceptance level of students
and/or instructors toward the use of this technology in improving
students in-class participation [16][17][18]. A response of 96%
Off-class can handle in-class quizzes and give students immediate
feedbacks on the answers and grades to regulate their learning.
Pre-class Adjust Pedagogical Approach
Poll / Teaching Material Space race is a quiz-based game used interchangeably with
the graded quiz for better learning experience. Although graded
In-class
quiz can provide more precise evaluation of students’
performance, space race is vital in engaging the students by
making learning more enjoyable. Researches revealed that
gamification in learning can motivate and attract students to
Graded learn [24][25]. The combination of mobile learning and game-
Ungraded Quick Exit Quiz/ based learning approaches offer possibilities to promote the
Lecture
Quiz Question Ticket Space engagement of university students [26].
Race
C. Activities
Preparation. Instructor was required to register for a
Socrative teacher account to be used throughout the experiment.
Fig. 1. Interactive teaching model with in-class and off-class components Upon the account creation, a virtual classroom was
automatically setup and assigned with a unique name, which
The interactive model emphasizes on two main aspects could be changed by the instructor from the teacher module. In
which are rapid feedback and formative assessment. This is this experiment, the subject code was used as the room name for
supported by the research findings that rapid feedback has the easy access.
potential to enhance student learning and formative assessment
can inform instructor about their students’ understandings of Before the class commenced, a set of multiple choice and
concepts and thus provide instructor with information to adapt true/false questions related to the lecture topic for that particular
different teaching practices [20]. day were prepared and uploaded to Socrative. There were
multiple ways to upload the questions to Socrative. The
The off-class component consists of pre-class poll which questions could be created in real-time by logging into the online
allows students to prepare and provide feedback before class teaching module, imported from an offline Excel file or
commences. The feedbacks will assist the instructor to extracted from the repository. Amongst the available methods,
implement Just-in-Time Teaching (JiTT) by fine-tuning the preparing the questions in offline Excel file was recommended.
lecture materials or classroom activities to best meet students’ Excel file provided flexibility in making addition and
needs. This can increase the effectiveness of learning during amendment, and could be kept as a secondary backup. To use
classroom time and encourage students to prepare before class. this method, instructor had to download the Excel template from
Existing research and study claimed that students’ Socrative, populate the questions and answers, then import it to
concentration declines after 10 to 15 min into lectures [21]. Socrative by clicking the Import Quiz button from the teacher
Hence, the in-class model is designed with intersection of module.
teaching and various interactive activities such as quizzes, polls, Despite the convenience and flexibility, this method had a
exit tickets and space races in order to achieve the goal of drawback. The Excel template could not support true/false
maximizing students’ attention and participation in the class. question, a workaround by converting a true/false question into
Quick question can run multiple times during the lecture and multiple choice question with only two choices (i.e. True and
exit ticket is a quick poll that run once at the end of the lecture False) was used. Although short answer question was supported,
to capture student feedbacks. The quick questions and exit it was not advisable to be used in any graded assessment due to
tickets allow students to feedback anonymously on the teaching the lack of intelligent matching algorithm in Socrative, any
effectiveness (i.e. presentation style, teaching pace, pedagogical correct answers but worded differently would be incorrectly
method) or the topics to be reiterated. With this, the instructor assessed.
not only knowing the thinking and learning performances of a Pre-class poll. Pre-class poll was launched two days before
small part of students in class where most of the students neither the class to gain insight into students’ understanding and
reveal their doubts nor answer the questions that the instructor expectation for the coming lecture. Students were asked to study
formulated publicly, but also hearing broader opinions the teaching materials beforehand and a follow up poll was
especially in a big classroom setting. This can improve learning carried out with some of the common questions such as ‘list
effectiveness with teaching adjusted to the needs of students, and three important concepts in the module’, ‘vote for the toughness
further enhance student motivation to participate as they know level of each submodule’, or a simple task for students to find
their voices are heard. the answer from the lecture slides. This pre-class poll provided
A few research studies mentioned that quizzes as formative sufficient time for instructor to adjust the teaching material in
assessment can better engage students in their learning [22][23]. response to the feedbacks before the class commenced.
A quiz overlapping strategy with graded and ungraded quiz is Ungraded quiz. Questions of ungraded quiz were composed
applied in this model. Ungraded quiz is used as reading quiz from half of the graded quiz questions related to the lecture
before lecture commence, whereas graded quiz is used as topics. Ungraded quiz was launched for a short 10 minutes at the
formative assessment at the end of the lecture to evaluate beginning of lecture as reading quiz, with the settings of student
students’ learning outcome. With the aid of Socrative, instructor
paced navigation, disable student results and disable student
names as shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 4. Sample Socrative teacher’s view with students’ votes

Short answer question was preferable in this activity instead

of multiple choice question to encourage active thinking. This
activity could be triggered as frequently as necessary during the
lecture. It provided immediate feedback to instructor regarding
the students’ understanding on the taught concepts, hence
allowed the instructor to adjust the teaching pace or revisit a
Fig. 2. Ungraded quiz settings certain topic accordingly.
Exit ticket. Exit Ticket was a quick way for instructor to
The student paced navigation setting allowed students to skip gather summative feedback and mainly triggered at the end of
questions or navigate forward and backward through the quiz in the class. This activity provided students a chance to reflect what
their own way, and submitted the entire assessment once they they had learnt, voice up their concerns, or raise red flag. It gave
had completed the activity. This activity was not a graded instructor a good snapshot of the students’ progress and attitude
assessment; hence it was neither needed to collect students’ towards the class. This helped instructor to adjust the following
name nor notify the students of their grades. The intention of this day’s lesson and teaching accordingly.
ungraded quiz was to estimate the students’ comprehensions and
understanding of the topic, at the same time entice the student to The exit ticket activity consisted of three common questions
stay focus and be more engaged to find the answer for the graded that could not be altered. The first question was “How well did
Quiz. Furthermore, the ungraded quiz provided a good overview you understand today’s material?”, the second question was
regards the topics to be covered and encouraged students to ask “What did you learn in today’s class?” and the third question
questions and clarify any doubts during the lecture. was “Please answer the teacher’s question”. The last question
allowed instructor to ask customize question by projecting out
Quick question. The quick question was usually carried out in the classroom for student to answer. The customize questions
in two phases. Short question was launched for 1-2 minutes after that most frequently asked are ‘What questions or concerns do
the explanation of a subtopic during the lecture to collect the you have about today’s lecture’, ‘Which topic you like the most’
feedbacks from students, sample snapshot is shown in Fig. 3. or ‘Write one question about today’s lesson that has left you
puzzled’.
This activity was extremely helpful to provide broader
feedbacks to the instructor, as most of the students were always
shy away when instructor verbally asked in the class which
resulted in a false impression that the lectures were progressing
well.
Graded quiz. A graded quiz normally consisted of 20
questions and was given at the last 15-20 minutes of the class as
formative assessment to evaluate students’ learning. The quiz
was launched with the settings of student immediate feedback
navigation, randomize question order, randomize answer order
and disable student feedback as shown in Fig. 5.
Fig. 3. Sample Socrative teacher’s view with students’ answers The student immediate feedback navigation setting
disallowed backward navigation, while the randomization
Followed by the instructor triggering the voting process for setting enforced different question and answer sequence. This
students to vote on the collected answers. Instructor usually combination was effective in minimizing the plagiarism
removed the duplicate answer before the voting. The votes were especially in a non-exam venue where students were sitting next
displayed in real-time in the Socrative teacher module, sample to each other; students had little chance to plagiarize within the
screenshot is shown in Fig. 4. limited time.
 Fig. 6. Sample space race result snapshot

This activity meant to encourage engagement through team

Fig. 5. Graded quiz settings
works, so the marks were equally honored to each team
members. Students had shown great interest in this activity and
During the quiz, students’ progress and scores could be were actively participated in the team discussion during the
monitored via the dashboard in real-time which enable instructor game.
to have a better control. Various reports were generated after the IV. RESULTS
quiz completion for analysis purposes. Three report types
available in Socrative were Whole Class Excel, Individual The analysis of this study is based on the qualitative data
Student(s) PDF and Question Specific PDF. The Whole Class collected from the students’ survey questionnaire and
Excel report provided an overview of the class performance with instructor’s teaching evaluation scores, complemented with
the information of students’ marks and the scores of each quantitative data of students’ academic results and attendance
question. This format was usually used by instructor to publish records.
the results for students’ reference. The Individual Student(s) A. Students’ Survey
PDF was not particularly useful, as most of the information can
be obtained from the Whole Class Excel report, hence this Survey was conducted online anonymously at the end of the
format was not used in this experiment. The Question Specific semester where students were asked to fill-up a questionnaire
PDF was an important report used by the instructor as revision consists of total 9 questions. Questions 1-4 evaluate the impact
with the class immediately after the quiz. This report displayed of engagement, questions 5-6 assess the acceptance of the
the answer and the correct ratio of each answer choice. It was teaching tool, question 7-8 evaluate the tool as assessment
useful in analyzing each question difficulty level and to identify engine and the last open question to capture any additional
the questions that required further explanation. comments from the students. The questions are as per listed in
TABLE I. This survey has obtained 84% response rate with 38
In this experiment, the revision after the quiz had out of 45 students took part in the survey.
successfully drawn the students’ attention and improved the
class participation. Every student eagerly wanted to know the TABLE I. SURVEY QUESTIONS
correct answer and to check if others had made the same
Q1 My learning experience of using the Socrative tool in
mistakes. This is aligned with the research findings which the classroom is good.
claimed that by making assessment feedback more accessible,
students are more likely to engage with it and this will have a Q2 The usage of Socrative tool able to motivate me in my learning.
beneficial impact on their learning [27]. Q3 The usage of Socrative tool encourage me to stay focus in the
classroom.
Space race. Space race was a quiz-based game used as an
alternative to graded quiz in this experiment. Both components Q4 Socrative tool able to enhance my engagement with the lecturer.
were used interchangeably for better learning results. In this Q5 Overall, I am satisfied with the usage of Socrative tool in
activity, quizzes were deployed as fast-paced rocket race game my classroom.
to track the students’ performance. Students could participate in Q6 I am likely to recommend other lecturers or friends to use the
the space race by pairs or small groups. During the game, each Socrative tool.
correct answer moved the rocket one step across the screen as Q7 If you are to recommend the Socrative tool, you prefer it to be used
shown in Fig. 6 and the team with most questions correctly as:
answered would win the space race. In this experiment, students
Q8 If you are to take this subject again, which assessment components
were grouped in five per team to achieve optimum groups with do you prefer to have higher mark weightage?
manageable number of members.
Q9 Any other comments?
 Five-point Likert scale is used in Q1-Q6, with 1 as ‘Strongly In this experiment, Socrative was used to handle the
Disagree’ and 5 as ‘Strongly Agree’. A summary of the findings, ungraded and graded quiz in class. It is crucial to evaluate the
the means, standard deviations and skewness are listed in students’ acceptance on the adoption of mobile technology in
TABLE II and Fig. 7. assessment handling. Survey results of Q7 and Q8 are analyzed
and shown in Fig. 8.
TABLE II. RESULTS OF THE STUDENTS’ SURVEY
Assessment
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6
Usage of Socrative Components with
N 38 38 38 38 38 38 Higher Weightage
Mean 4.3684 4.1579 4.3421 4.2632 4.5789 4.2895
Std.
Deviation 0.5891 0.7893 0.7081 0.6445 0.5517 0.7679 13
16 %
Skewness -0.2922 -0.2941 -0.6076 -0.3011 -0.8385 -0.5587
%
45 24
% % 63
39
Results of Students' Survey %
%
25
20
15
Count

10 Ungraded exercises tool Online quizzes

5 Graded quiz tool Paper-based tests
0 Both Both with equal weightage
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6

Strongly Disagree Disagree Fig. 8. Survey results of Socrative usage and assessment components with
higher weightage
Neither Agree
The results indicate that majority of the students at 84%
Strongly Agree
welcomed the usage of Socrative as graded quiz tool. And, 63%
of the students voted for higher assessment weightage in online
Fig. 7. Results of students’ survey quizzes over the paper-based tests. From the findings, 3rd
conclusion is drawn: Socrative is highly accepted by students as
In general, students had responded positively in the survey. formative assessment tool.
It is observed that the bars are sided to the right side of the graph
(Fig. 7) which indicates that most of the students responded The high acceptance is not surprise in view of Socrative able
between strongly agree and agree while none disagreed to any to provide instant feedbacks and answers to the students, which
of the questions. The mean and skewness of Q1-Q4 shows that is lacking from the paper-based assessment, a disjointed process
students had a good learning experience with Socrative and involving staff marking manually and students collecting
agreed that their focus in the class and their engagement with the marked papers at a later time. Researches showed that students
lecturer had improved. The main driver that kept the students most value the feedback which they can use immediately to
staying alert was the impromptu quick questions and quizzes, improve an assessment mark [28]. The online publication of
which had motivated students to clarify any doubts during the results and feedback and the adaptive release of grades were
lecture in order to achieve better scores in the assessment. The found to significantly enhance students’ engagement [29].
less agreed point is Q2 with bigger standard deviation at 0.7893 The last question in the survey is an open question to gather
and lower mean at 4.1579 where some students stayed neutral the opinions, comments and concerns regarding the usage of
about the effectiveness of Socrative in motivating their learning. Socrative in the classroom. Generally, students responded with
The findings above lead to 1st conclusion: The implementation positive comments such as ‘Socrative is an excellent tool’, ‘it is
of mobile-based teaching model using Socrative does enhance a great platform’, ‘it allows me to give feedback easily’ etc. One
the students’ learning experience and their engagement with the of the highlighted response is ‘Socrative is fun’, this supported
instructor. the aim of mobile-based teaching where the fun element in the
Result of Q5 indicates that students were satisfied with the modern technology is an important factor to enhance students’
usage of Socrative in the class with the smaller standard engagement in their learning.
deviation at 0.5517 and highest mean at 4.5789. Most of the
B. Academic Results
students were very likely to recommend the others to use the tool
as supported by the result in Q6. This confirms the 2nd The academic result is a crucial element to be examined in
conclusion: Socrative is highly accepted by student as teaching the hypothesis of better students’ engagement leads to better
aided tool. academic performance. Past year results are adopted for
comparison in consideration of identical class settings such as This finding is not a surprise in view of many students feed
class size (45 students), instructor, syllabus and assessment backed that they felt more difficult in connecting directly the
arrangements. The academic results of the students who project work with the in-class learning. Indeed, those tasks
participated in this experiment (year 2016) and the past year where aiming at different kind of competences development.
results (year 2015) are analyzed based on three major The nature of project is a less engaging task in classroom; but a
components (i.e. quizzes, project and exam) as shown in Fig. 9 group work which required more self-learning, team works,
and Fig. 10. leadership and peer discussion. The tasks in a project tend to be
challenging and the learning outcome is to derive and apply the
theories learnt. It is observed that the implementation of
interactive teaching model alone is not sufficient, it should be
complemented with peer discussion platforms and project
management tools. Hence, the 4th conclusion is drawn: Mobile-
based teaching model using Socrative does improve students'
test performance but not project work.
C. Attendance Records
Attendance records of the participants are compared with the
past year attendance records in view of the resemblance in both
class settings. The average at 85% attendance in year 2016 has
shown a minor drop against the average at 90% in year 2015.
The finding shows that students were not positively influenced
to come to lecture although students who attended lecture
enjoyed the class and felt they were more engaged. This leads to
the 5th conclusion: The implementation of mobile-based
interactive teaching model does not improve students'
Fig. 9. Assessment results by components attendance.
When checking the correlation between the attendance
Results in Fig. 9 show that quizzes have higher mean performance and academic results with the multivariate linear
compared to project and exam. This finding can relate to the regression analysis with Pearson correlation coefficient, it is
discussion in Section A – Students’ Survey, where students observed that a significant correlation is found at r (42) = .53,
strongly voted for online graded quizzes and prefer higher p< .001 as listed in TABLE III. Since students who attended the
weightage over the paper-based tests. One influencing factor lecture claimed that they were more engaged as per discussed in
that causes better students’ performance in the quizzes is the Section A - Students’ Survey, this supports the hypothesis of
instantaneous feedbacks that instructor received during the better students’ engagement leads to better academic
lecture, which allows the topics in doubt to be reiterated right performance.
away.
TABLE III. MULTIVARIATE LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF
Comparison of Assessment Results ATTENDANCE RECORDS AND ACADEMIC RESULTS

Regression Statistics
46.48
Final exam Multiple R 0.5266
59.45
R Square 0.2773
Adjusted R Square 0.2601
78.23
Group project
68.14 Standard Error 13.8322
Observations 44
66.76
Quizzes
72.4 ANOVA
Significance
df SS MS F F
0 20 40 60 80 100
Regression 1 3083.9718 3083.9718 16.1185 0.0002
2015 2016 Residual 42 8035.9075 191.3311

Fig. 10. Comparison of assessment results Total 43 11119.8793

As seen from the results in Fig. 10, students’ performance in Standard

quizzes and exam are significantly improved upon the Coefficients Error t Stat P-value
implementation of Socrative from 66.76% in 2015 to 72.4% in Intercept 18.1356 10.4049 1.7430 0.0887
2016, and from 46.48% in 2015 to 59.45% in 2016 respectively.
However, weakening result is observed in the group project. Attendance 0.4711 0.1173 4.0148 0.0002
D. Teaching Evaluation Scores Five-point Likert scale is used in the survey and the
The levels of student engagement are highly influenced by satisfaction percentage is calculated based on 0% as ‘Strongly
the students’ appreciation levels of the teaching. In Sunway Disagree’ and 100% as ‘Strongly Agree’. Significant
University, students are required to participate in the teaching improvement is observed at the mean 91.4% in year 2016
evaluation for every subject they enroll. The survey comprises compared to 77.5% in year 2015. This indicates that students
of 15 questions, with 8 questions on subject evaluation and 7 were more satisfied with the overall quality delivered by the
questions on teaching appreciation. This evaluation activity is instructor in year 2016. This leads to the 6th conclusion:
carried out anonymously at university level in every semester. Students’ satisfaction of the subject and teaching quality are
The teaching evaluation scores for the programing class greatly improved with the implementation of mobile-based
involved in this research are listed in TABLE IV. interactive teaching model
Strong positive readings at 93% in Q3 ‘The subject enabled
TABLE IV. TEACHING EVALUATION RESULTS
me to achieve the learning outcomes’, Q7 ‘When I enquired, I
2015 2016a Diff received helpful feedback on my progress in the subject’, Q10
% % % ‘The lecturer’s explanations helped my understanding’ and Q12
Mean 77.5 91.4 13.9 ‘The lecturer encouraged students to be involved in their
SUBJECT learning’ show that students’ learning experience had improved
Q1 I had a clear understanding 81.0 92.0 11.0 with the real-time feedback mechanism implemented in the
of the aims and goals of classroom; students felt more in control of their studies with the
this subject ease and comfort of the feedback channel hence encourage them
Q2 The subject was well- 78.0 90.0 12.0 to be more involved in their learning. The positive readings
structured confirm that mobile-based interactive teaching model is
Q3 The subject enabled me to 77.0 93.0 16.0 effective in enhancing the interactions between instructor and
achieve the learning students which leads to better students’ engagement in their
outcomes learning.
Q4 The subject was 80.0 91.0 11.0
intellectually stimulating. V. CONCLUSION
(That is, it made me think) Generally, the feedbacks received in this study are positive.
Q5 The subject developed my 77.0 90.0 13.0 The implementation of mobile-based interactive teaching model
problem solving skills does encourage the engagement and participation of students in
Q6 The learning resources 74.0 90.0 16.0 class. Majority students agreed that their focus in the class and
assisted my learning in their bonding with the instructor were improved which greatly
this subject enhanced their learning experience.
Q7 When I enquired, I 77.0 93.0 16.0
received helpful feedback
Students and instructor have positive attitude about
on my progress in the Socrative as the feedback and formative assessment tool. The
subject cost-free and interactive features have added to the popularity of
Q8 Overall, I am satisfied
Socrative in the education sector.
79.0 92.0 13.0
with the quality of this Students' overall academic performance had improved
subject
especially in the test and exam components, but no positive
TEACHING influence is observed on project works. This agrees to the
Q9 The lecturer was well 79.0 92.0 13.0 arguments that the nature of group project requires more team
organized works and peer discussions, hence the needs of not only the
Q10 The lecturer’s 75.0 93.0 18.0 interactive teaching, but implementation of peer discussion and
explanations helped my project management assistance tools.
understanding
Statistically significant correlation is found between the
Q11 The lecturer inspired me to 72.0 92.0 20.0
learn students' attendance records and exam grades, however the
mobile-based interactive teaching does not positively change the
Q12 The lecturer encouraged 78.0 93.0 15.0 students' attendance behavior. This concludes that the students
students to be involved in
their learning who attended the class felt engaged and able to score better but
students who are a frequent absentee did not become motivated
Q13 The lecturer encouraged 75.0 89.0 14.0
me to participate
to attend the class.
Q14 My marked assignments 82.0 91.0 9.0 Based on the findings and the experience in the classroom,
were returned within the this mobile-based interactive teaching model is recommended
stipulated time for instructors who are looking to integrate a quick feedback or
Q15 Overall, the lecturer was 78.0 90.0 12.0 active learning element to their classroom to better engage their
excellent audience. One aspect that can be looked into is the influence of
a.
with implementation of Socrative
bigger class size towards the effectiveness of this teaching model [15] R. GRÉGORY, “How technology breeds innovation in the educational
and the impact on the teaching and learning experience. systems,” 2013. [Online]. Available: https://www.pentalog.com/blog/it-
services/socrative-startup-boston-usa/. [Accessed: 28-Sep-2016].
This research also reveals a high acceptance of mobile [16] M. F. Tretinjak, A. Bednjanec, and M. Tretinjak, “Interactive teaching
technology integrated pedagogy activities by higher education with Socrative,” in 38th International Convention on Information and
students in Malaysia Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics, MIPRO
2015 - Proceedings, 2015, no. May, pp. 848–851.
REFERENCES [17] D. M. Coca, “Software Socrative and smartphones as tools for
implementation of basic processes of active physics learning in
[1] L. Taylor and J. Parsons, “Improving Student Engagement.,” Curr. Issues classroom : An initial feasibility study with prospective teachers,” Eur. J
Eudcation, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1–33, 2011. Phys. Educ., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 17–28, 2013.
[2] H. Poll, “Pearson student mobile device survey 2015,” 2015. [18] P. Wash, “Taking advantage of mobile devices: Using Socrative in the
[3] F. Onyechere Ugochukwu and M. Z. Ismail, “The future of BYOD in classroom,” J. Teach. Learn. with Technol., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 99–101,
organizations and higher institution of learning,” Int. Journals 2014.
Accounting, Bus. Manag., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–5, 2015. [19] F. H. Altaany and K. A. Alsoudani, “Impact of using socrative for student
[4] I. Pogar, M. Gligora, and V. Davidovi, “BYOD : a challenge for the future in Irbid national university,” in Proceeding of the 3rd Global Summit on
digital generation,” in 36th International Convention on Information and Education GSE 2015, 2015, no. March, pp. 223–230.
Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics, MIPRO [20] A. Ooms, T. Linsey, M. Webb, and A. Panayiotidis, “The in-classroom
2013 - Proceedings, 2013, pp. 748–752. use of mobile technologies to support diagnostic and formative
[5] B. Martinez and H. Seli, “Just-in-Time or Plenty-of-Time teaching? assessment and feedback,” in 7th London International Scholarship of
Different electronic feedback devices and their effect on student Teaching and Learning Conference, 2008, p. 9.
engagement,” J. Educ. Technol. Soc., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 234–244, 2014. [21] J. Stuart and R. J. D. Rutherford, “Medical student concentration during
[6] A. O. Agbatogun, “Developing learners’ second language communicative lectures,” Lancet, vol. 312, no. 8088, pp. 514–516, 1978.
competence through active learning: Clickers or communicative [22] C. Viegas, G. Alves, and N. Lima, “Formative assessment diversity to
approach?,” Educ. Technol. Soc., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 257–269, 2014. foster students engagement,” 2015 Int. Conf. Interact. Collab. Learn., no.
[7] E. Bojinova and J. Oigara, “Teaching and learning with Clickers in higher September, pp. 929–935, 2015.
education,” Int. J. Teach. Learn. High. Educ., vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 154–165, [23] D. Malandrino, I. Manno, G. Palmieri, V. Scarano, and G. Filatrella,
2013. “How quiz-based tools can improve students’ engagement and
[8] S. Simelane and A. Mji, “Impact of technology-engagement teaching participation in the classroom,” in 2014 International Conference on
strategy with the aid of Clickers on student’s learning style,” Procedia - Collaboration Technologies and Systems (CTS), 2014, pp. 379–386.
Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 136, pp. 511–521, 2014. [24] G. Sprint and D. Cook, “Enhancing the CS1 student experience with
[9] E. D. Bojinova and J. N. Oigara, “Teaching and learning with Clickers: gamification,” in ISEC 2015 - 5th IEEE Integrated STEM Education
Are Clickers good for students?,” Interdiscip. J. E-Learning Learn. Conference, 2015, pp. 94–99.
Objects, vol. 7, pp. 169–184, 2011. [25] B. Herbert, D. Charles, A. Moore, and T. Charles, “An investigation of
[10] P. Dervan, “Increasing in-class student engagement using Socrative (an gamification typologies for enhancing learner motivation,” in 2014
online student response system),” All Irel. J. Teach. Learn. High., vol. 6, International Conference on Interactive Technologies and Games (
no. 2, p. 1977, 2014. iTAG), 2014, pp. 71–78.
[11] M. Kastner, “The use of an audience response system to monitor students’ [26] A. Bartel and G. Hagel, “Engaging students with a mobile game-based
knowledge level in real-time, its impact on grades, and students’ learning system in university education,” in Global Engineering
experiences,” in Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Education Conference (EDUCON), 2014 IEEE, 2014, pp. 957–960.
Conference on System Sciences, 2016, no. March, pp. 104–113. [27] C. Jacobs, M. Wilson, and C. Barker, “Using the latest developments in
[12] T. Surentheran, “Use of an electronic voting system to facilitate mobile technology to improve students’ engagement with assessment
interactive engagement and enhance active learning of undergraduate feedback,” in 2015 International Conference on Interactive Mobile
students in biomedical science,” Investig. Univ. Teach. Learn., vol. 9, no. Communication Technologies and Learning (IMCL), 2015, no.
spring, pp. 111–121, 2014. November, pp. 124–126.
[13] “About Poll Everywhere.” [Online]. Available: [28] M. Price, K. Handley, J. Millar, and B. O’Donovan, “Feedback : all that
https://www.polleverywhere.com/about. [Accessed: 06-Oct-2016]. effort, but what is the effect?,” Assess. Eval. High. Educ., vol. 35, no. 3,
[14] W. M. Kappers, “Poll Everywhere! Even in the classroom: An pp. 277–289, 2010.
investigation into the impact of using PollEverywhere in a large-lecture [29] H. J. Parkin, S. Hepplestone, G. Holden, B. Irwin, L. Thorpe, and S. H.
classroom,” in 121st ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 2014. Helen J. Parkin Graham Holden, Brian Irwin and Louise Thorpe, “A role
for technology in enhancing students’ engagement with feedback,”
Assess. Eval. High. Educ., vol. 37, no. 8, pp. 963–973, 2012.