Students’ Perceptions of the Benefits of Mobile Polling Technology in Teaching and Learning in College: Implications of Students’ Participation and academic Performance

Ismail Ismail, Elihami Elihami, Mustakim Mustakim


Abstract: Students’ perceptions of the benefits of mobile polling technology in teaching and learning in college: Implications of student’ participation and academic performance. Objectives: This study aims to analyze students’ perceptions of interactive teaching using Poll-Everywhere application as a useful teaching methodology. Methods: Strategic Lecturers enter questions using the Poll-Everywhere application. Students’ perceptions of interactive teaching that effectively uses this technology are statistically evaluated using a questionnaire. Findings: The level of student academic ability increased significantly between the two sections for Reading III Test (M = 89.74, SD = 3.26), and Reading V ( M = 90.42, SD = 3.91).
Conclusions: Students consider it a useful method for giving real feedback, which encourages their performance and participation. Lecturers regard Poll-Everywhere as an effective teaching innovation that encourages deeper information storage and as an effective teaching aid in monitoring student progress and identifying shortcomings.

Keywords: Poll-Everywhere, student’ participation, academic performance, feedback, Mobile Polling.


Abstrak: Persepsi siswa tentang manfaat teknologi polling seluler dalam pengajaran dan pembelajaran di perguruan tinggi: Implikasi dari partisipasi mahasiswa dan kinerja akademik. Tujuan: Studi ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis persepsi mahasiswa tentang pengajaran interaktif menggunakan aplikasi Poll-Everywhere sebagai metodologi pengajaran yang berguna. Metode: Strategis Dosen memasukkan pertanyaan menggunakan aplikasi Poll-Everywhere. Persepsi mahasiswa tentang pengajaran interaktif yang efektif menggunakan teknologi ini dievaluasi secara statistik menggunakan kuesioner. Temuan: Tingkat kemampuan akademik mahasiswa meningkat secara signifikan antara dua bagian untuk Tes Membaca III (M = 89,74, SD = 3.26), dan Membaca V (M = 90.42, SD = 3.91). Kesimpulan: Mahasiswa menganggapnya sebagai metode yang berguna untuk memberikan umpan balik nyata, yang mendorong kinerja dan partisipasi mereka. Dosen menganggap Poll-Everywhere sebagai inovasi pengajaran yang efektif yang mendorong penyimpanan informasi yang lebih dalam dan sebagai alat bantu pengajaran yang efektif dalam memantau kemajuan siswa dan mengidentifikasi kekurangan.

Kata kunci: Poll-Everywhere, partisipasi siswa, kinerja akademik, umpan balik, Polling Seluler.



Full Text:



Abdel Meguid, E., & Collins, M. (2017). Students’ perceptions of lecturing approaches: traditional versus interactive teaching. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 8, 229–241.

Achen, R. M., & Lumpkin, A. (2015). Evaluating Classroom Time through Systematic Analysis and Student Feedback. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(2).

Agbatogun, A. O. (2014). Developing Learners’Second Language Communicative Competence Through Active Learning: Clickers or Communicative Approach? Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17 No. 2, 257–269. Retrieved from

Bachman, L., & Bachman, C. (2011). A study of classroom response system clickers: Increasing student engagement and performance in a large undergraduate lecture class on architectural research. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 22(1), 5–21. Retrieved from

Barbour, M. E. (2008). Electronic voting in dental materials education: the impact on students’ attitudes and exam performance. Journal of Dental Education, 72(9), 1042–7.

Benjamin, J. (1996). ACADEMIC STAFF’S CONCEPTIONS OF AND APPROACHES TO COLLABORATION IN THE TEACHING OF LARGE FIRST YEAR UNIVERSITY COURSES. In Annual Conference of the Higher Education Research and Development of Australasia (HERDSA), (pp. 61–67). Glenelg, South Australia.

Calma, A., Webster, B., Petry, S., & Pesina, J. (2014). Improving the quality of student experience in large lectures using quick polls. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 54(1), 114–136.

Embi, M. A. (2012). Web 2.0 Survey & Polling Tools: A Quick Guide. Centre for Academic Advancement Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

FitzPatrick, K. A., Finn, K. E., & Campisi, J. (2011). Effect of personal response systems on student perception and academic performance in courses in a health sciences curriculum. Advances in Physiology Education, 35(3), 280–289.

Freeman, M., Bell, a, Comerton-Forde, C., Pickering, J., & Blayney, P. (2007). Factors affecting educational innovation with in class electronic response systems. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(2004), 149–170.

Gauci, S. A., Dantas, A. M., Williams, D. A., & Kemm, R. E. (2009). Promoting student-centered active learning in lectures with a personal response system. Advances in Physiology Education, 33(1), 60–71.

Hampel, R., & Pleines, C. (2013). Fostering Student Interaction and Engagement in a Virtual Learning Environment: An Investigation into Activity Design and Implementation. CALICO Journal, 30(3), 342–370.

Heaslip, G., Donovan, P., & Cullen, J. G. (2014). Student response systems and learner engagement in large classes. Active Learning in Higher Education, 15(1), 11–24.

Henderson, M., Selwyn, N., & Aston, R. (2017). What works and why? Student perceptions of “useful” digital technology in university teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education, 42(8), 1567–1579.

Holmes, M. R., Tracy, E. M., Painter, L. L., Oestreich, T., & Park, H. (2015). Moving from Flipcharts to the Flipped Classroom: Using Technology Driven Teaching Methods to Promote Active Learning in Foundation and Advanced Masters Social Work Courses. Clinical Social Work Journal, 43(2), 215–224.

Hwang, W. Y., Huang, Y. M., Shadiev, R., Wu, S. Y., & Chen, S. L. (2014). Effects of using mobile devices on English listening diversity and speaking for EFL elementary students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(5), 503–516.

Kay, R., & LeSage, A. (2009). A strategic assessment of audience response systems used in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 235–249.

Keough, S. M. (2012). Clickers in the Classroom: A Review and a Replication. Journal of Management Education, 36(6), 822–847.

Khan, A., Egbue, O., Palkie, B., & Madden, J. (2017). Active Learning : Engaging Students To Maximize Learning In An Online Course. The Electronic Journal of E-Learning Volume, 15(2), 107–115. Retrieved from

Kolb, L. (2011). Adventures with Cell Phones Why Cell Phones Are Important in Learning A basic cell phone, 68, 39–43.

Martin, E. (1999). Changing academic work: Developing the learning university. (: Heather Eggins, Ed.). SRHE and Open University Press.

Mula, J. M., & Kavanagh, M. (2009). Click Go the Students , Click-Click-Click : The efficacy of a student response system for engaging students to improve feedback and performance. E-Journal of Business Education & Scholarship of Teaching, 3(1), 1–17. Retrieved from

Noel, D., Stover, S., & McNutt, M. (2015). Student perceptions of engagement using mobile-based polling as an audience response system : Implications for leadership studies. Journal of Leadership Education, (Summer), 53–70.

Penuel, W. R., Boscardin, C. K., Masyn, K., & Crawford, V. M. (2007). Teaching with student response systems in elementary and secondary education settings: A survey study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(4), 315–346.

Prastya, D. (2017). Pengaruh Multimedia Interaktif Terhadap Hasil Belajar Peserta Didik Kelas IV Sekolah Dasar. Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif, VII(1), 21–31.

Project Tomorrow. (2011). The New 3 E’S of Education: Enabled and Engaged, Empowered. How today’s Students are Leveraging Emerging Technologies for Teaching and Learning, 53, 160. Retrieved from www. tomorrow. org/speakup/speakup_reports. html

Research, H. (2010). Strategies for Teaching Large Undergraduate. Retrieved from

Siau, K., Nah, F. F., Siau, K., Sheng, H., & Nah, F. F. (2006). Use of a Classroom Response System to Enhance Classroom Interactivity Use of a Classroom Response System to Enhance Classroom Interactivity. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, 49(3), 398–403.

Sikarwar, A. S. (2015). Flipped Classroom with Poll Everywhere: Engaging Students with Active Learning in Large Group Settings. Journal of Asian Scientific Research, 5(2), 111–119.

Simpson, V., & Oliver, M. (2006). Using electronic voting systems in lectures. Retrieved June, 21, 2006. Retrieved from

Simpson, V., & Oliver, M. (2007). Electronic Voting Systems for Lectures Then and Now: A Comparison of Research and Practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(2), 187–208.

Stagg, A., & Lane, M. (2010). Using Clickers to Support Information Literacy Skills Development and Instruction in First-Year Business Students Review of Background Literature for This Study. Journal of Information Technology Education, 9.

Stowell, J. R. (2015). Use of clickers vs. mobile devices for classroom polling. Computers and Education, 82, 329–334.

Sun, J. C. Y. (2014). Influence of polling technologies on student engagement: An analysis of student motivation, academic performance, and brainwave data. Computers and Education, 72, 80–89.

Termos, M. H. (2013). The Effects of the Classroom Performance System on Student Participation, Attendance, and Achievement. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 25(1), 66–78. Retrieved from

Rich. J. (2017). Polling Students to Check Understanding. Retrieved from

University of Liverpool. (2013). An introduction to 'personal response systems' at University of Strathclyde [ONLINE] Retrieved from: [Accessed 10 April 2015].


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2019 Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

View My Stats

Creative Commons License
The copyright is reserved to The Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif that is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.