Creating Learner-Centered Classrooms: Use of an Audience Response System in Pediatric Dentistry Education

Methodology

The University of Kentucky Teaching and Academic Support Center (TASC) is responsible for the hardware associated with the portable ARS system that can be used in any classroom/teaching facility. Faculty members may have access to the software (Synthesis 2000®) through TASC. Since the use of ARS was novel to the pediatric dentistry curriculum and the instructors were unsure of student acceptance, computer-based instructional technology (that is, ARS) was used to motivate third-year student dentists to demonstrate, through simulated case scenarios, their comprehension of treatment of pulpal pathology in children in only one two-hour interactive session. Handouts and reading assignments were distributed to each student dentist two weeks prior to the scheduled class meetings. In class, each individual was given an electronic wireless audience responder (Figure 1⇓). Fifteen questions, representing the core concepts in pulp therapy for the pediatric patient, were posed at various points throughout the PowerPoint discussion. Most questions were linked to case-based scenarios (Figure 2⇓). Five multiple-choice responses, one of which was correct, were displayed on the screen. Each question and its corresponding multiple-choice responses were read aloud. Students were given fifteen seconds to formulate a response, which was registered through the audience responder system. The software system then graphed a composite representation of the class’s response. While over 50 percent of the class generally chose the appropriate responses, the instructor was able to redirect and explain any incorrect answers chosen.

Figure 1.

Sample ARS handheld unit

Figure 2.

Sample of case-based scenario

At the end of the quiz bowl, individual students’ scores were tabulated by the responder system. The exercise, which did not have a bearing on the student’s course grade, provided a means of self-assessment by allowing students to gauge their own perceived level of understanding and preparation. Rewards (gift certificates for food, video rentals, etc.) were given to the top three performers in the class.

The use of an audience response system has been integrated into the third-year pediatric dentistry curriculum for two consecutive years. Through the use of an objective and subjective traditional-style questionnaire, students of each class were asked to anonymously evaluate the quiz bowl. The evaluation tool employed Likert-type questions with a scale from 1 (disagree) to 5 (agree). Of the 103 students who participated in the ARS-supported classes, nearly 76 percent returned completed surveys. Seventy-four percent of respondents agreed that the use of the ARS provided an opportunity for students to assess how well they understood the information presented in lectures (Table 1⇓). Seventy-seven percent agreed that the ARS helped to reinforce basic concepts discussed during the lecture (Table 2⇓). The majority also thought that the use of the ARS motivated them to learn the key concepts of pulp therapy for the pediatric dental patient (Table 3⇓). Students confirmed that the pediatric dentistry course was the first course in the curriculum to utilize such instructional technology (Table 4⇓).

Discussion

Schackow et al. have asserted that the use of ARS-enhanced lectures improved post-lecture quiz performance in family medicine residents.⁹ While no attempt was made in the current study to examine test outcomes, students’ survey responses suggest they perceived the ARS system to be helpful in learning the course material. Other educators have found the integration of audience response systems as an effective means of actively engaging students during lectures.¹⁰ Verbal and written feedback from third-year student dentists at the University of Kentucky revealed similar outcomes. Students offered such comments as “we had fun and learned a lot,” “excellent,” and “loved it.” Students appeared attentive and receptive to the novel teaching approach. Feedback instantly provided by ARS on what and how well students are learning can be used to help refocus teaching efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of student learning.¹⁴

Conclusion

Schleyer stated that in computer science “the emphasis is not on information, but how it is represented, processed, manipulated, and managed.”¹⁵ To a certain extent, such is true for dental education. While the material is of vital importance, in the eyes of the student learner the representation/presentation of said material is critical. Bonwell and Eison found that active inquiry, not passive absorption, is what engages students. The authors further asserted that active inquiry should pervade the curriculum.⁵

The use of electronic wireless audience response systems in dental education represents a method to communicate critical material in an engaging and challenging fashion. It affords participants the opportunities for immediate feedback and highlights areas of study requiring more focus. The intent of the pilot project was to show there is increased motivation by student dentists to learn core concepts in pulp therapy when encouraged through the use of effective instructional technology such as the audience response system. Pee et al. have called for innovative teaching and learning in undergraduate dental education.¹⁶ The pilot project at the University of Kentucky College of Dentistry is an attempt to build a learner-centered classroom. Based on feedback from our students, classroom use of ARS will be continued in the future.