The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A review of literature reports of clickers applicable to college chemistry classrooms
Abstract
The use of clickers (also referred to as Audience Paced Feedback, Classroom Communication Systems, Personal Response Systems, Electronic Voting Systems, Student Response Systems, Audience Response Systems, voting-machines, and zappers) has grown in college chemistry classrooms within the last decade. This review summarizes the pedagogic applications of research on clickers as well as insights from their practical use. Fifty-six publications reporting on the use of clickers in college-level science classrooms are categorized as practical application or research studies, and reviewed. Publications on the practical use of clickers suggest that students have a positive attitude towards the technology and that many benefits and few drawbacks are associated with its use. Research studies show that the use of clickers results in measurable increases in student learning in some cases and inconclusive results in other cases. In every published report of student improvement with the use of clickers, the course included student collaboration of some form.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Assessment and Classroom Learning
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/0969595980050102 · Cited by 8,152
Hake, R. R. (1998) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.18809 · Cited by 6,072
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075070600572090 · Cited by 5,846
Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results
Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.1374249 · Cited by 2,682
Cited by
Singer, S., & Smith, K. A. (2013) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/jee.20030 · Cited by 835
Using Continuous Student Feedback to Course-Correct during COVID-19 for a Nonmajors Chemistry Course
Hwang, C. S. (2020) · Journal of Chemical Education · doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00808 · Cited by 30
Vyas, V. S., & Reid, S. A. (2023) · Journal of Chemical Education · doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c01121 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- MacArthur, J. R., & Jones, L. L.
- Venue
- Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.
- Publisher
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
- Published
- 2008
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 187-195
- ISSN
- 1109-4028 (ISSN-L)
- 1756-1108
- OpenAlex
- W2075785964
- Cited by
- 220
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 44.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A review of literature reports of clickers applicable to college chemistry classrooms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/b812407h
- The paper
- MacArthur, J. R., & Jones, L. L. (2008). A review of literature reports of clickers applicable to college chemistry classrooms. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. https://doi.org/10.1039/b812407h
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.