東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Mobile Polling and Self-Regulation: ...

Hardin, Lee.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Mobile Polling and Self-Regulation: How Students May Be Tempted with Distractions.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Mobile Polling and Self-Regulation: How Students May Be Tempted with Distractions./
作者:	Hardin, Lee.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2021,
面頁冊數:	121 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-12, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International82-12A.
標題:	Educational technology. -
電子資源:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28417059
ISBN:	9798738648618

Mobile Polling and Self-Regulation: How Students May Be Tempted with Distractions.
Hardin, Lee.

Mobile Polling and Self-Regulation: How Students May Be Tempted with Distractions. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2021 - 121 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-12, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Temple University, 2021.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

Mobile polling is a widely used classroom response system at the university level. The current study examines the predictors and outcomes of mobile polling including self-regulation and academic achievement. Furthermore, this study explores whether or not mobile polling benefits some students more than others, specifically those with higher levels of self-regulation. The data was collected from two separate University classrooms taught by the same teacher (n = 66). The first section of students were to use mobile polling software after taking their midterm exam and use the software for the remainder of the semester. The other section of students served as the control group and received the same instruction, Powerpoints, and assignments minus the usage of mobile polling. All students from both classes were given an 89 question survey known as the Barkley Deficits in Executive Function Scale (BDEFS) which measured their ability to self-regulate their behavior. A hierarchical regression model was used to find that mobile polling had no statistical significance on academic achievement at the end of the semester. The only significant predictor throughout the entire study was the initial achievement variable, which was the scores from the midterm exam. Another hierarchical regression model found that self-regulation, measured with the use of the BDEFS system, was not a significant predictor of academic achievement. When initial achievement was controlled for, the Overall EF score from the BDEFS system revealed that self-regulation had zero effect on the variance as denoted by R Square and the R Square change in the regression model. Supplemental analysis revealed that Overall EF is a significant predictor of academic achievement when a Repeated Measures ANOVA was used, though the R Square change was still low. Factor analysis was used to find which questions loaded together under five subscales, truncating the BDEFS system and revealing that Self-Restraint/Inhibition traits were a better predictor than the overall score from the BDEFS questionnaire yet was not a significant predictor of achievement. Finally, a 2 x 2 ANCOVA that investigated the interaction between high/low levels of Self-Regulation and usage of Mobile Polling and found that it did not significantly affect academic achievement. In fact, the highest mean came from the completely opposite group as expected, which was students in the control group with lower levels of self-regulation.

ISBN: 9798738648618Subjects--Topical Terms:

517670
Educational technology.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Achievement

Mobile Polling and Self-Regulation: How Students May Be Tempted with Distractions.
LDR:03671nmm a2200385 4500 001 2284388
005 20211123073010.5
008 220723s2021 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798738648618
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI28417059
035 $a AAI28417059
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Hardin, Lee. $0 (orcid)0000-0002-3716-3060 $3 3563555
245 1 0 $a Mobile Polling and Self-Regulation: How Students May Be Tempted with Distractions.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2021
300 $a 121 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-12, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Byrnes, James.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Temple University, 2021.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a Mobile polling is a widely used classroom response system at the university level. The current study examines the predictors and outcomes of mobile polling including self-regulation and academic achievement. Furthermore, this study explores whether or not mobile polling benefits some students more than others, specifically those with higher levels of self-regulation. The data was collected from two separate University classrooms taught by the same teacher (n = 66). The first section of students were to use mobile polling software after taking their midterm exam and use the software for the remainder of the semester. The other section of students served as the control group and received the same instruction, Powerpoints, and assignments minus the usage of mobile polling. All students from both classes were given an 89 question survey known as the Barkley Deficits in Executive Function Scale (BDEFS) which measured their ability to self-regulate their behavior. A hierarchical regression model was used to find that mobile polling had no statistical significance on academic achievement at the end of the semester. The only significant predictor throughout the entire study was the initial achievement variable, which was the scores from the midterm exam. Another hierarchical regression model found that self-regulation, measured with the use of the BDEFS system, was not a significant predictor of academic achievement. When initial achievement was controlled for, the Overall EF score from the BDEFS system revealed that self-regulation had zero effect on the variance as denoted by R Square and the R Square change in the regression model. Supplemental analysis revealed that Overall EF is a significant predictor of academic achievement when a Repeated Measures ANOVA was used, though the R Square change was still low. Factor analysis was used to find which questions loaded together under five subscales, truncating the BDEFS system and revealing that Self-Restraint/Inhibition traits were a better predictor than the overall score from the BDEFS questionnaire yet was not a significant predictor of achievement. Finally, a 2 x 2 ANCOVA that investigated the interaction between high/low levels of Self-Regulation and usage of Mobile Polling and found that it did not significantly affect academic achievement. In fact, the highest mean came from the completely opposite group as expected, which was students in the control group with lower levels of self-regulation.
590 $a School code: 0225.
650 4 $a Educational technology. $3 517670
650 4 $a Educational psychology. $3 517650
650 4 $a Educational tests & measurements. $3 3168483
653 $a Achievement
653 $a Classroom technology
653 $a Distractions
653 $a Mobile devices
653 $a Mobile polling
653 $a Self-regulation
690 $a 0710
690 $a 0525
690 $a 0288
710 2 $a Temple University. $b Educational Psychology. $3 1024095
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 82-12A.
790 $a 0225
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2021
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28417059