4.3 Article

Utilising interactive applications as educational tools in higher education: Perspectives from teachers and students, and an analysis of academic outcomes

期刊

EDUCATION FOR CHEMICAL ENGINEERS
卷 46, 期 -, 页码 1-9

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ece.2023.10.001

关键词

High education; Interactive applications; Classflow; Kahoot!; Moodle; Wooclap

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Our study examines the impact of using multiple interactive applications on student participation and academic performance. We surveyed students and teachers on online teaching and integrating interactive applications. The results show that these applications are essential in combating student boredom and disinterest, and also provide valuable feedback for teachers.
Our students belong to a highly digitised generation with easy and rapid access to information. They are dependent on technology and tend to become bored quickly. There is an ongoing debate regarding the need to reconsider our teaching methods in order to capture the attention of our students. This study surveyed both students and teachers on the subject of online teaching and its impact on university education. Additionally, it explored issues related to integrating interactive applications in education. These applications are considered essential tools in combating student boredom and disinterest. They also enable teachers to receive valuable feedback, which was highlighted as critically important by educators in the survey.In this context, we conducted a study within a chemical engineering program at a Spanish university. We examined the use of four different interactive applications (Kahoot!, Wooclap, Classflow, Moodle) and compared the results with those from previous years when only one of these applications was employed. This study aimed to determine how using multiple applications led to increased student participation, driven by avoiding monotony, resulting in improved academic performance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据