The Use Of Socrative In Promoting Classroom Engagemen 362540

The Use Of Socrative In Promoting Classroom Engagement Aqualitative I

Teaching statistics can be a challenging task brought about by the negative attitude that many students hold towards the subject. The phenomenon of ‘statistics anxiety’ has been found to adversely impact the student learning experience (Perepiczka & Becerra, 2011). Traditional teaching methods, such as lecturing with PowerPoint slides, tend to promote passive learning, which has been associated with poorer student outcomes compared to active learning approaches (Freeman et al., 2014). In response, there is a growing need to explore innovative strategies that enhance student engagement and reduce statistics anxiety. One promising avenue is the integration of technology into the classroom to foster active participation and interaction.

Technological tools, particularly Student Response Systems (SRSs), have been increasingly employed to engage students actively during lectures and tutorials. SRSs are electronic devices or platforms that enable real-time interaction between students and instructors, allowing instant feedback and class-wide responses to questions posed during instruction (Fies & Marshall, 2006). These systems aim to make classes more interactive and focused, thereby increasing student attention and participation. Studies have shown that students respond favorably to the incorporation of technological tools like clickers and web-based SRSs, perceiving them as engaging and beneficial for learning (Trees & Jackson, 2007; Jordan & Mitchell, 2009). The advent of online SRS platforms such as Socrative offers additional flexibility and accessibility, expanding the potential for active learning in various educational settings.

Socrative is a free, web-based interactive response platform designed to facilitate real-time engagement and assessment. Teachers can create quizzes, polls, and exercises that students access via devices such as smartphones, tablets, or computers connected to the internet. Socrative’s key features include instant response collection, visualization of aggregated data, and immediate feedback, which allows instructors to adjust their teaching strategies dynamically. Its user-friendly interface and compatibility across multiple devices make Socrative an appealing tool for educators aiming to foster engagement and formative assessment (Dervan, 2014).

Despite the promising features of Socrative, research on its effectiveness remains limited and methodologically flawed in many cases. Previous studies often employed small samples, lacked control groups, or used unvalidated measures, making it difficult to conclusively determine the tool’s impact on student engagement or learning outcomes (Kaya & Balta, 2016; Wash, 2014). There is a significant necessity for rigorous, large-scale investigations to evaluate the true benefits of Socrative and similar platforms in enhancing student experiences, particularly in challenging subjects like statistics where anxiety and passive learning are prevalent barriers.

The present study forms part of a broader project aimed at evaluating whether Socrative can improve undergraduate students’ engagement and competence in statistics, and reduce statistics anxiety. Employing a mixed-methods approach, the research combines quantitative surveys with qualitative analyses of student feedback. The qualitative component focuses on capturing students’ perceptions and experiences when using Socrative within tutorial settings, providing insights that can inform future pedagogical strategies.

Methodology

The participant sample consisted of undergraduate students participating in an intermediate-level statistics course in Melbourne, Australia. The participants were divided into five tutorial groups, each containing approximately 15 students, through a cluster-randomized sampling technique. These groups were randomly assigned to either an intervention group that utilized Socrative or a control group that followed traditional teaching practices. Participation involved completing pre- and post-intervention surveys designed to assess engagement levels, perceived competence, autonomy, and statistics anxiety. The participation in surveys was voluntary, and a total of eighteen valid responses were obtained, with nine students in the Socrative intervention group.

In the Socrative-enhanced tutorials, students first responded to an initial question to assess their perceived ability related to the week's content via Socrative’s anonymous polling feature, which displayed class-wide response data instantaneously. The tutorial then proceeded with collaborative problem-solving. After completing the task, students responded again to the same question, allowing a direct comparison of perceived ability pre- and post-intervention. The survey at the end of weeks three and six included questions for quantifying engagement, perceived competence, and statistics anxiety, alongside three open-ended qualitative questions: (1) What did you enjoy about using Socrative?; (2) What did you dislike?; and (3) How could Socrative be improved?

Qualitative Analysis and Results

The qualitative data from student responses were systematically analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) inductive thematic analysis method. Through familiarization, coding, theme development, and refinement, three main themes emerged regarding students’ perceptions of Socrative: novelty, evaluation of performance, and fun.

Students appreciated the novelty of Socrative, citing it as an interesting departure from traditional passive learning formats. Many expressed that the interactive nature made them feel more engaged and connected to the content, noting that seeing their responses visualized in real-time created a unique classroom experience (“It was interesting seeing if I understood the content being discussed”). The ability to compare personal perceptions with peers’ responses helped students evaluate their performance and gauge class understanding (“I liked seeing how my feelings about the work compared with others”). Most respondents also found the activity fun, with some describing it as a more enjoyable way to learn statistics compared to conventional methods (“It was a fun way the lecturer engaged with the class”).

However, some students experienced drawbacks. The most common critique was that using Socrative could be time-consuming, with responses indicating that the process sometimes felt like a waste of valuable instruction time (“Sometimes it felt like a bit of a waste of time”). A few students pointed out that the activities could be perceived as distracting or detracting from the lesson’s flow. Interestingly, a third of respondents reported no dislikes, suggesting that for some, Socrative’s benefits outweighed any inconveniences.

Regarding improvements, students proposed making Socrative more versatile by transforming it into a dedicated app to enhance usability and mobility (“It would have been nicer if it was in an app”). Others suggested leveraging Socrative as a revision tool for consolidating learned material (“It can be used to quickly review the material learned in previous lessons”). Some recommended clearer instructions to mitigate confusion during activities, highlighting the importance of user-friendly guidance.

Discussion and Implications

The findings suggest that Socrative positively influences classroom dynamics by increasing student engagement, fostering interaction, and making learning more enjoyable. The visual feedback and anonymized responses appear to create a safe environment where students feel more willing to participate and express their opinions, thereby reducing the intimidation often associated with active participation (Blackburn & Stroud, 2015). This increased engagement is critical in a subject like statistics, where anxiety can hinder learning and confidence (Perepiczka & Becerra, 2011).

While qualitative data indicates high student enthusiasm, it is essential to consider limitations, notably the small sample size and potential bias in voluntary participation. Future research should aim for larger, more diverse samples and incorporate control conditions to rigorously assess Socrative’s impact on measurable learning outcomes. Additionally, integrating focus groups or interviews could deepen understanding of user experiences and preferences, facilitating iterative enhancements to the platform and teaching strategies.

Practical implications include recommending educators incorporate Socrative and similar SRS tools into their teaching repertoire, especially for large classes where engagement is challenging. By enabling real-time assessment and immediate feedback, Socrative can help identify misconceptions promptly, allowing targeted interventions. There is also scope to expand its use beyond initial engagement to include formative assessment, revision, and even summative evaluations.

Conclusion

The use of Socrative as an interactive response system demonstrates promising potential in promoting student engagement in statistics classrooms. The qualitative evidence underscores that students find the tool fun, novel, and beneficial for assessing their understanding. However, further rigorous research involving larger samples and multiple institutions is necessary to conclusively establish its efficacy. As educational technology continues to evolve, tools like Socrative can be instrumental in transforming passive lectures into active, student-centered learning environments that may ultimately reduce statistics anxiety and improve educational outcomes.

References

• Blackburn, M., & Stroud, J. (2015). Voices from ‘the other side’—using personal response systems to support student engagement. Smart Learning, 199.
• Dervan, P. (2014). Increasing in-class student engagement using Socrative (an online Student Response System). The All Ireland Journal of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education, 6(2).
• Fies, C., & Marshall, J. (2006). Classroom response systems: A review of the literature. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 101–109.
• Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415.
• Jordan, S., & Mitchell, T. (2009). e-Assessment for learning? The potential of short-answer free-text questions with tailored feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 371–385.
• Kaya, A., & Balta, M. (2016). The effect of Socrative on students’ academic achievement and motivation. International Journal of Educational Technology, 2(1), 22–31.
• Perepiczka, M., & Becerra, M. (2011). Relationship Between Graduate Students’ Statistics Self-Efficacy, Statistics Anxiety, Attitude Toward Statistics, and Social Support. The Professional Counselor, 1(2), 99–108.
• Wash, R. (2014). The impact of Socrative on student engagement and learning in higher education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 51(2), 187–206.
• Trees, A. R., & Jackson, M. H. (2007). The learning environment in clicker classrooms: Student processes of learning and involvement in large university level courses using student response systems. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(1), 21–40.