Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Articles/Articoli

Vol. 12 No. 2 (2021): Evaluation, feedback, equity: a challenge in education

Digitally mediated questioning as a feedback enabler

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/ess2-2021oa12480
Submitted
settembre 7, 2021
Published
2021-12-21

Abstract

The promotion of interactive processes, digitally mediated, has become a strategic element in the university to promote active teaching. Starting from a brief analysis of the literature, the contribution presents a series of methodological and operational indications to highlight the close relationship between the teacher’s ability to create “good questions” and the implementation of active and inclusive teaching mediated by student response systems. Questions represent the key means by which teachers discover what students already know, identify gaps and support student development by bridging the gap between what they currently know and the learning objectives. The scientific literature and the results of some experiments conducted nationally highlight that the recursive use of feedback during digitally mediated questioning teaching sessions can facilitate the transition from a teaching model centered on disciplinary content to strategies open to collaboration and meaningful learning.

References

  1. Al-Zahrani M.Y., Al-Bargi A. (2017). The Impact of Teacher Questioning on Creating Interaction in EFL: A Discourse Analysis. English Language Teaching, 10(6): 135-150. DOI: 10.5539/elt.v10n6p135.
  2. Black P., Wiliam D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1): 7-72.
  3. Blasco-Arcas L., Buil I., Hernández-Ortega B., & Sese F. J. (2013). Using clickers in class. The role of interactivity, active collaborative learning and engagement in learning performance. Computers & Education, 62: 102-110. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.019.
  4. Bonaiuti G. (2012). I “clickers” in classe. Educazione 2.0., testo disponibile al sito: http://www.educationduepuntozero.it/tecnologie-e-ambienti-di-apprendimento/i-clickers-classe-4054320761.shtml.
  5. Bonaiuti G., Ricciu R. (2017). Dispositivi mobili per aumentare l’attenzione e migliorare l’apprendimento. Form@re - Open Journal per la formazione in rete, 17(1): 190-203. DOI: 10.13128/formare-20470.
  6. Bonwell C.C, Eison J.A. (1991). Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington: DC, testo disponibile al sito: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED336049.pdf.
  7. Brown O. (2015). Enriching the Synergetic Instructor–Student Assessments with a Web-based Audience Response System. ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle: Washington. DOI: 10.18260/p.24012.
  8. Caldwell J.E. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 6(1): 9-20.
  9. Calvani A. (2017). Come fare una lezione efficace. Roma: Faber Carrocci.
  10. Chaiyo Y., Nokham R. (2017). The effect of Kahoot, Quizizz and Google Forms on the student’s perception in the classrooms response system. International Confer-ence on Digital Arts, Media and Technology (ICDAMT), 178-182.
  11. Ciani A., Ferrari L., Vannini I. (2020). Progettare e valutare per l’equità e la qualità nella didattica. Aspetti teorici e indicazioni metodologiche. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  12. Clancy I., Marcus-Quinn A. (2019). Exploring the possibilities of automated feed-back for third level students. Form@re - Open Journal Per La Formazione in Rete, 19(3): 247-256. DOI: 10.13128/form-7731.
  13. Coggi C. (2019). Innovare la didattica e la valutazione in università. Il progetto IRI-DI per la formazione dei docenti. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  14. Deeley S. J. (2018). Using technology to facilitate effective assessment for learning and feedback in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(3): 439-448. DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2017.1356906.
  15. Ferrari L. (2017). Didattiche attive, tecnologie digitali e peer instruction all’Università. In: Le emergenze educative della società contemporanea. Progetti e proposte per il cambiamento. Lecce: Pensa Multimedia, 1027-1031.
  16. Guglielmi D., Luppi E., Neri B., Sangiorgi E., Salomoni P., Vannini I. (2020). La ricerca formazione per l’innovazione della didattica universitaria. In: Faculty Development in Italia Valorizzazione delle competenze didattiche dei docenti universitari. Genova: Genova University Press, 133-147.
  17. Heaslip G., Donovan P., Cullen J.G. (2014). Student response systems and learner en-gagement in large classes. Active Learning in Higher Education, 15(1): 11-24. DOI: 10.1177/1469787413514648.
  18. Herrada R.I., Baños R., Alcayde A. (2020). Student Response Systems: A Multidisciplinary Analysis Using Visual Analytics. Education Sciences, 10: 1-23. DOI: 10.3390/educsci10120348.
  19. Kasprzak M. (n.d.). Questioning Techniques: Guidelines & Best Practices, University of Toronto, testo disponibile al sito: https://tatp.utoronto.ca/teaching-toolkit/first-time-taing/questioning-techniques/.
  20. Keyser M.W. (2000). Active learning and cooperative learning: understanding the dif-ference and using both styles effectively. Research Strategies, 17: 35-44.
  21. Laici C., Pentucci M. (2019). Feedback with technologies in higher education: a systematic review. Form@re - Open Journal Per La Formazione in Rete, 19(3): 6-25. DOI: 10.13128/form-7698.
  22. Luppi E., Neri B., Vannini I. (2020). Innovare la didattica nell’emergenza. Il percorso dell’Università di Bologna. Scuola democratica, 3: 591-603. DOI: 10.12828/99907.
  23. Meltzer D.E., Thornton R.K. (2012). Resource Letter ALIP-1: Active-Learning In-struction in Physics. American Journal of Physics, 80(6): 478–496. DOI: 10.1119/1.3678299.
  24. Mishra P., Koehler M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108: 1017-1054.
  25. Namathaka L., Kalulu M., Malisawa, A., Mhoni S., Kabuwe E., Kasitomu H., Mhura H., Namachapa A. (2000). Teacher Training Resource Handbook: Innovative Approach to Teaching and Learning. Save the Children, Westport: CT, testo disponibile al sito: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED446082.pdf.
  26. NSW Government (n.d.). Effective teacher questioning, Teachers standard accredita-tion, testo disponibile al sito: https://education.nsw.gov.au/teaching-and-learning/professional-learning/teacher-quality-and-accreditation/strong-start-great-teachers/refining-practice/teacher-questioning/effective-teacher-questioning#Effective0.
  27. Panciroli, C., & Macauda, A. (2019). Feedback images in university teaching. Form@re - Open Journal Per La Formazione in Rete, 19(3): 234-246. DOI: Doi: 10.13128/form-7730.
  28. Persaud V., Persaud R. (2019). Increasing Student Interactivity Using a Think-Pair-Share Model with a Web-Based Student Response System in a Large Lecture Class in Guyana. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 15(2): 117-131.
  29. Ranieri M., Bruni I., Raffaghelli J. E. (2018). Gli Student Response System nelle aule universitarie: esperienze d’uso e valore formativo. Lifelong Lifewide Learning, 14(31): 96-109. DOI: 10.19241/lll.v14i31.117.
  30. Rossi P.G., Pentucci M., Fedeli L., Giannandrea L., Pennazio V. (2019). From the informative feedback to the generative feedback. Education Sciences & Society - Open Access, 9(2): 83-107, testo disponibile al sito: https://journals.francoangeli.it/index.php/ess/article/view/7102.
  31. Sadler R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 1: 119-144.
  32. Sardareh S.A., Saad M.R.M., Othman A.J, Me R.C. (2014). ESL Teachers’ Questioning Technique in an Assessment for Learning Context: Promising or Problematic? International Education Studies, 7(9): 61-174. DOI: 10.5539/ies.v7n9p161.
  33. Schneider J., Börner D., van Rosmalen P., Specht M. (2016). Can You Help Me with My Pitch? Studying a Tool for Real-Time Automated Feedback. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 9(4): 318-327. DOI: 10.1109/TLT.2016.2627043.
  34. Shanmugavelu G., Ariffin K., Vadivelu M., Mahayudin Z., & R K Sundaram M. A. (2020). Questioning Techniques and Teachers’ Role in the Classroom. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 8(4): 45-49. DOI: 10.34293/education.v8i4.3260.
  35. Stanojević, L. (2018). The effect of web-based classroom response system on students learning outcomes: Results from programming course. Megatrend revija, 15(2): 213-232. DOI: 10.5937/MegRev1802213S.
  36. Sullivan P., Liburn P. (2004). Open-ended math activities: Using “good” questions to enhance learning in mathematics. South Melbourne, VIC: Oxford University Press.
  37. TEAL (2013). Deeper Learning through Questioning. American Institutes for Re-search, testo disponibile al sito: https://lincs.ed.gov/sites/default/files/12_TEAL_Deeper_Learning_Qs_complete_5_1_0.pdf.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...