Student Response Systems (SRS) and the Performance of First-Generation Students Majoring in Business

Ricardo Cunningham

Abstract


Traditionally, first-generation college students (students whose parents didn’t attend college) are at a distinct disadvantage in regards to academic performance and outcomes at post-secondary institutions; and according to the literature, the most commonly declared major of first-generation students is business. Student response systems (SRS) are an in-class student polling technology that is designed to create an engaging and inviting learning environment that maximizes active learning. This study seeks to determine if SRS causes a significant improvement in the exam scores for first-generation college students majoring in business exposed to SRS compared to first-generation college students majoring in business not exposed to SRS.


Keywords


First-generation students, student response systems, SRS, technological pedagogy

Full Text:

PDF

References


Attinasi, L. (1989). Mexican Americans’ perceptions of university attendance and the implications for freshman-year persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 60, 247-277.

Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. T. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 213-238.

Berkner, L. & Chavez, L. (1997). Access to post-secondary education for the 1992 high school graduates (NCES 98-105). Washington, D. C.: National Center for Education Statistics, U. S. Government Printing Office.

Bilson, J. & Terry, B. (1982). In search of the silken purse: Factors in attrition among first-generation students. College and University, 58, 57-75.

Berkner, L. Horn, L. & Clune, M. (2000). Descriptive summary of 1995-96 beginning postsecondary students: Three years later, with an essay on students who started at less-than-4-year institutions (NCES 2000-188). Washington, D. C.: National Center for Education Statistics, U. S. Government Printing Office.

Callan, P. M. (2000). Introduction. in Measuring up 2000: the state-by-state report card for higher education. Washington, D. C.: National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, 12-14.

Carnaghan, C. & Webb, A. (2007). Teaching with classroom response systems: resources for engaging and assessing students with clickers. Issues in Accounting Education, 22(3), 391-409. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/iace.2007.22.3.391

Chen, X. (2005). First-generation students in post-secondary education: a look at their college transcripts. N. C. F. E. Statistics, 1-83.

Choy, S. (2000). Debt burden four years after college (NCES 2000-188). Washington, D. C.: National Center for Education Statistics, U. S. Government Printing Office.

Chronicle of Higher Education: Almanac Issue. (1996, September). 43(1).

Grayson, P. J. (1997). Academic achievement of first-generation students in a Canadian university. Research in Higher Education, 38(6), 659-676. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1024955719648

Hill, G. W., Smith, R. A., & Horn, M. (2004). Using technology to increase student interest, motivation, and (perhaps) learning. Retrieved May 4th, 2007 from www.smartroom.com/KSUAPA.pdf.

Horn, L. (1998). Stopouts or stayouts?: undergraduates who leave college in their first year (NCES 1999-087). Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office.

Horn, L. & Nunez, A. (2000). Mapping the road to college: first-generation students’ math track, planning strategies, and context of support (NCES 2000-153). Washington, D. C.: National Center for Education Statistics, U. S. Government Printing Office.

Hossler, D. Schmit, J. & Vesper, N. (1999). Going to college: how social, economic, and educational factors influence the decisions students make. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Ishitani, T. T. (2006). Studying attrition and degree completion behavior among first-generation college students in the United States. Journal of Higher Education, 77(5), 861-885.

Judson, E. & Sawada, D. (2002). Learning from past and present: electronic response systems in college lecture halls. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 21(2), 167-181.

Kojaku, L. & Nunez, A. (1998). Descriptive summary of 1995-96 beginning postsecondary students, with profiles of students entering 2- and 4-year institutions (NCES 1999-030). Washington, D. C.: National Center for Education Statistics, U. S. Government Printing Office.

Kulik, J. A. & Kulik, C. C. (1988). Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Review of Educational Research, 58(1), 79-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543058001079

Lara, J. (1992). Reflections: bridging cultures. In L. Zwerling & H. London (Eds.), First-generation students: Confronting the cultural issues. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 80, 65-70.

Lowery, R. C. (2005). A comparison of student-response systems for classroom teaching and learning. Conference Papers of the Midwestern Political Science Association, 1-22.

Nunez, A. M. & Cuccaro-Alamin, S. (1998). First-generation students: undergraduates whose parent never enrolled in postsecondary education (NCES 1999-082). Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office.

Pascarella, E. T., Pierson, C. T., Wolniak, G. C., Terenzini, P. T., et al. (2004). First-generation college students. Journal of Higher Education, 75(3), 249-284.

Pike, G. R. & Kuh, G. D. (2005). First- and second-generation college students: a comparison of their engagement and intellectual development. Journal of Higher Education, 76(3), 276-300.

Poulis, J., Massen, C, Robens, E. & Gilbert, M. (1998). Physics lecturing with audience paced feedback. American Journal of Physics, 66, 439-441. http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.18883

Pratt, P. & Skaggs, C. (1989). First-generation college students: are they at greater risk for attention than their peers? Research in Rural Education, 6(2), 31-34.

Rendon, L., Hope, R. & Associates. (1996). Educating a new majority: Transforming America’s educational system for diversity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Richardson, R. & Sinner, E. (1992). Helping first-generation minority students achieve degrees. In L. Zwerling & H. London (Eds.), First-generation students: Confronting the cultural issues. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 80, 29-43.

Selingo, J. (2003). What Americans think about higher education. The Chronicle of Higher Education, A10.

Slain, D. (2004). An interactive response system to promote active learning in the doctor of pharmacy curriculum. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 68(5), 1-9.

Somers, P., Woodhouse, S., & Cofer, J. (2004). Pushing the boulder uphill: the persistence of first-generation college students. NASPA Journal, 41(3), 418-435.

Stage, F. & Hossler, D. (1989). Differences in family influences on college attendance plans for male and female ninth graders. Research in Higher Education, 30, 301-315.

Terenzini, P., Springer, L., Yaeger, P., Pascarella, E., & Nora, A. (1996). First-generation college students: characteristics, experiences, and cognitive development. Research in Higher Education, 37, 1-22.

U. S. Census Bureau. (2000, December). Educational attainment in the United States. Current population reports. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/prod/2000pubs/p20-528.pdf.

Warburton, E., Bugarin, R., & Nunez, A. (2001). Bridging the gap: academic preparation and postsecondary success of first-generation students (NCES 2001-153). National Center for Education Statistics, Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office.

Ward, C. R., Reeves, J. H., & Heath, B. P. (2003, March). Encouraging active student participation in chemistry classes with a web-based, instant feedback, student response system. Presented at CONFCHEM: Conferences in Chemistry.

York-Anderson, D. & Bowman, S. (1991). Assessing the college knowledge of first-generation and second-generation students. Journal of College Student Development, 32, 116-122.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18533/job.v1i4.45

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2016 Journal of Business

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.