Médiations pédagogiques en jeu à l’heure des systèmes numériques interactifs : une revue de littérature narrative et critique

Detroz, Pascal; Younes, Nathalie

doi:10.4000/11w0f

Article (Scientific journals)

Médiations pédagogiques en jeu à l’heure des systèmes numériques interactifs : une revue de littérature narrative et critique

Detroz, Pascal; Younes, Nathalie

2024 • In Revue Française de Pédagogie, 221

Peer reviewed

Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/2268/317284

DOI
10.4000/11w0f

Files (1)Send to Details Statistics Bibliography Similar publications

Files

Full Text

RFP220_NdS_Detroz_Younes_R3.pdf

Embargo Until 01/Jan/2029 - Author postprint (538.38 kB)

Request a copy

All documents in ORBi are protected by a user license.

Send to

RIS BibTex APA Chicago Permalink X Linkedin

Details

Keywords :

participation des étudiants; objet pédagogique numérique; méthode d’enseignement; enseignement supérieur; apprentissage assisté par ordinateur

Abstract :

[fr] Les systèmes interactifs de rétroaction à usage synchrone (SIRUS) sont de plus en plus utilisés dans l’enseignement supérieur pour, par exemple, susciter l’engagement des étudiants dans les contenus, favoriser un apprentissage en profondeur, ou encore pour mettre en oeuvre une pédagogie intégrant l’évaluation formative visant la régulation des enseignements et des apprentissages. Leur usage a donné lieu à une littérature riche et variée, aussi bien du côté francophone qu’anglophone. Sur la base d’une revue narrative et critique de la littérature, nous proposons une réflexion sur l’effet réel de l’usage de ces technologies sur l’engagement, les émotions et la performance des étudiants. Il apparaît que leur usage peut effectivement aider à stimuler le rappel des connaissances, stimuler l’attention, favoriser la compréhension, amener les étudiants à réfléchir, à s’exprimer et à développer leur pensée critique, mais à certaines conditions qui, dans une large mesure, doivent encore être précisées. En effet, la littérature abonde en résultats contradictoires qui nous invitent à des approfondissements théoriques et à des articulations méthodologiques.

Disciplines :

Education & instruction

Author, co-author :

Detroz, Pascal ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Centres généraux > IFRES - SMART (Système Méthodologique d'Aide à la Réalisation de Tests)

Younes, Nathalie

Language :

French

Title :

Médiations pédagogiques en jeu à l’heure des systèmes numériques interactifs : une revue de littérature narrative et critique

Alternative titles :

[en] Pedagogical mediations at play in the era of interactive digital systems: A narrative and critical literature review

Publication date :

July 2024

Journal title :

Revue Française de Pédagogie

ISSN :

0556-7807

Publisher :

Institut Pedagogique National, France

Volume :

221

Peer reviewed :

Peer reviewed

Available on ORBi :

since 04 May 2024

Statistics

Number of views

45 (5 by ULiège)

Number of downloads

5 (3 by ULiège)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

OpenAlex citations

Bibliography

Abdel Meguid E. & Collins M. (2017). «Students’ perceptions of lecturing approaches: Traditional versus interactive teaching». Advances in Medical EducationandPractice,no17(8),p.229-241.Enligne:.
Anthis K. (2011). «Is it the clicker, or is it the question? Untangling the effects of student response system use». Teaching of Psychology, no38(3), p.189-193. En ligne: .
Ashkzari M., Piryaei S. & Kamelifar L. (2018). «Designing a causal model for fostering academic engagement and verification of its effect on educational performance». International Journal of Psychology (IPA), no12(1), p.136-161.
Astolfi J., Giordan A., Gohau G., Host V., Martinand J., Rumelhard G. & Zadounaïsky G. (1978). «Une panacée: le dialogue de Socrate à nos jours». In J. Astolfi, A. Giordan, G. Gohau, V. Host, J. Martinand, G. Rumelhard & G. Zadounaïsky (dir.), Quelle éducation scientifique pour quelle société?Paris: PUF, p.19-37.
Atlantis E. & Cheema B. S. (2015). «Effect of audience response system technology on learning outcomes in health students and professionals: An updated systematic review». JBI Evidence Implementation, no13(1), p.3-8.
Bain K. (2004). What the Best College Teachers Do. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Bain L. & Przybyla J. (2009). «The impact of student response systems on student behavior and performance in a management information systems course». Issues in Information Systems, no10(1).
Bates S. P., Howie K. & Murphy A. St. J. (2006). « The use of electronic voting systems in large group lectures: Challenges and opportunities». New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, no 2, p. 1-8.
Baumeister R. F. (2013). « Writing a literature review». In M. J. Prinstein, The Portable Mentor: Expert Guide to a Successful Career in Psychology. New York: Springer, p. 119-132.
Beatty I. D., Leonard W. J., Gerace W. J. & Dufresne R. J. (2006). « Question driven instruction: Teaching science (well) with an audience response system». In D. Banks (dir.), Audience Response Systems in Higher Education: Applications and Cases. Hershey: IGI Global, p. 96-115.
Beekes W. (2006). «The “Millionaire” method for encouraging participation». Active Learning in Higher Education, no7(1), p.25-36.
Béguin P. & Rabardel P. (2000). «Concevoir pour les activités instrumentées». Revue d’intelligence artificielle, no14(1-2), p.35-54.
Bergtrom G. (2006). « Clicker sets as learning objects». Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, no 2.
Bojinova E. D. & Oigara J. N. (2011). «Teaching and learning with clickers: Are clickers good for students». Interdisciplinary Journal of E-learning and Learning Objects, no7, p.169-184.
Brady M., Seli H. & Rosenthal J. (2013). « Clickers and metacognition: A quasi-experimental comparative study about metacognitive self-regulation and use of electronic feedback devices». Computers & Education, no 65, p. 56-63.
Bunce D. M., VandenPlas J. R. & Havanki K. L. (2006). « Comparing the effectiveness on student achievement of a student response system versus online WebCT quizzes». Journal of Chemical Education, no 83(3).
Bunz U. (2005). «Using scantron versus an audience response system for survey research: Does methodology matter when measuring computer-mediated communication competence?» Computers in Human Behavior, no21(2), p.343-359. En ligne: .
Burns R. A. (1985). Information Impact and Factors Affecting Recall. Paper presented at Annual National Conference on Teaching Excellence and Conference of Administrators, Austin, Texas.
Burnstein R. A. & Lederman L. M. (2001). «Using wireless keypads in lecture classes». The Physics Teacher, no39.
Butera F., Batruch A., Pulfrey C., Autin F. & Toma C. (2020). « Après la note: effets psychosociaux de l’évaluation normative». In N. Younès, C. Gremion & E. Sylvestre (dir.), Évaluations, sources de synergies? Entre normalisation, contrôle et développement formatif. Neuchâtel: Presses de l’ADMEE. En ligne: .
Butera F., Buchs C. & Darnon C. (2011). L’évaluation, une menace? Paris: PUF. En ligne: .
Caldwell J. E. (2007). «Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips». CBE Life Sciences Education, no6(1), p.9-20. En ligne: .
Cantero-ChinchillaF.N.,Díaz-MartínC.,García-MarínA.P.&EstévezJ. (2020). «Innovative student response system methodologies for civil engineeringpracticallectures».Technology,KnowledgeandLearning,no25, p.835-852. En ligne: .
Charlier B., Cosnefroy L., Jézégou A. & Lameul G. (2015). «Understanding quality of learning in digital learning environments: State of the art and research needed». In A. Curaj, L. Matei, R. Pricopie, J. Salmi & P. Scott (dir.),EuropeanHigherEducationArea.Cham(Suisse):Springer,p.381-398.
Chickering A. W. & Ehrmann S. C. (1996). «Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever». AAHE bulletin, no49, p.3-6.
Constantinou V. & Ioannou A. (2016). «Technology-enhanced learning in sportseducationusingclickers:Satisfaction,performanceandimmediacy». International Journal of Education and Development Using ICT, no12(2), p.68-79. En ligne: .
Cosnefroy L. & Lefeuvre S. (2018). «Du travail de groupe à l’apprentissage collaboratif. Analyse de l’expérience d’étudiants en école de management». Revue française de pédagogie, no202, p.77-88.
Deci E. L. & Ryan R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
De Gagne J. C. (2011). «The impact of clickers in nursing education: A review of literature». Nurse Education Today, no31(8), p. e34-e40. En ligne: .
De Grez L., Valcke & Berings (2010). « Student response system and learning oral presentation skills». Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, no 2(2), p. 1786-1789. En ligne: .
DenkewiczR.(2019).«Prosandconsofaudienceresponsesystemsintheeducation of health professionals». MedEdPublish, no33. En ligne: .
Dillenbourg P. (1999). « What do you mean by collaborative learning?». In P. Dillenbourg (dir.), Collaborative-Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches. Oxford: Elsevier, p. 1-19.
D’Inverno R., Davis H. & White S. (2003). «Using a personal response system for promoting student interaction». Teaching Mathematics and Applications, no22(4), p.163-169.
Draper S. W. (1998). «Niche-based success in CAL». Computers & Education, no30(1-2), p.5-8.
Dufresne R. J., Gerace W. J., Leonard W. J., Mestre J. P. & Wenk L. (1996). « Classtalk: A classroom communication system for active learning». Journal of Computing in Higher Education, no 7, p. 3-47.
Duggan P. M., Palmer E. & Devitt P. (2007). «Electronic voting to encourage interactive lectures: A randomised trial». BMC Medical Education, no7(1), p.1-9.
Efstathiou N. & Bailey C. (2012). «Promoting active learning using Audience Response System in large bioscience classes». Nurse Education Today, no32(1), p.91-95. En ligne: .
Egelandsdal K. & Krumsvik R. J. (2017). «Peer discussions and response technology: Short interventions, considerable gains». Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, no12, p.19-30. En ligne: .
Elliott C. (2003). « Using a personal response system in economics teaching». International Review of Economics Education, no 1(1), p. 80-86.
Fallon M. & Forrest S. L. (2011). «High-tech versus low-tech instructional strategies: A comparison of clickers and handheld response cards». Teaching of Psychology, no38(3), p.194-198. En ligne: .
Ferrari R. (2015). «Writing narrative style literature reviews». MedicalWriting, no24(4), p.230-235.
Fies C. H. (2005). Classroom Response Systems: What do They Add to an Active Learning Environment? Thèse de doctorat, éducation, Université du Texas.
Florenthal B. (2019). «Students’ motivation to participate via mobile technology in the classroom: A uses and gratifications approach». Journal of Marketing Education, no41(3), p.234-253.
Fredricks J. A., Blumenfeld P. C. & Paris A. H. (2004). «School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence». Review of Educational Research, no74(1), p.59-109.
Freeman S., O’Connor E., Parks J. W., Cunningham M., Hurley D., Haak D., DirksC.&WenderothM.P.(2007).«Prescribedactivelearningincreases performance in introductory biology». Cell Biology Education, no6(2), p.132-139.
Fujikura T., Takeshita T., Homma H., Adachi K., Miyake K., Kudo M., Takizawa T., Nagayama H. & Hirakawa K. (2013). « Team-based learning using an audience response system: A possible new strategy for interactive medical education». Journal of Nippon Medical School, no 80(1), p. 63-69.
Fuller F. F. (1969). « Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization». American Educational Research Journal, no 6(2), p. 207-226. En ligne: .
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, no33(1), p.60-71. En ligne: .
Glaser R. (1990). «The reemergence of learning theory within instructional research». American Psychologist, no45(1), p.29-39.
Green B. N., Johnson C. D. & Adams A. (2006). « Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: Secrets of the trade». Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, no 5(3), p. 101-117.
Greer L. & Heaney P. J. (2004). «Real-time analysis of student comprehension: An assessment of electronic student response technology in an introductory earth science course». Journal of Geoscience Education, no52(4), p.345-351.
Grund C. K. & Tulis M. (2020). «Facilitating student autonomy in large-scale lectureswithaudienceresponsesystems».EducationTechnologyResearch and Development, no68, p.975-993. En ligne: .
Han J. H. (2014). «Closing the missing links and opening the relationships among the factors: A literature review on the use of clicker technology using the 3P Model». JournalofEducationalTechnology&Society, no17(4), p.150-168. En ligne: .
HanJ.H.&FinkelsteinA.(2013).«Understandingtheeffectsofprofessors’pedagogical development with clicker assessment and feedback technologies and the impact on students’ engagement and learning in higher education». Computer & Education, no 65, p. 64-76. En ligne: .
Hatch J., Jensen M. & Moore R. (2005). « Manna from heaven or “clickers” from hell». Journal of College Science Teaching, no 34(7), p. 36-39.
Hedgcock W. H. & Rouwenhorst R. M. (2014). « Clicking their way to success: Using student response systems as a tool for feedback». Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, no 22, p. 16-25.
Heilporn G. (2021). Stratégies favorisant l’engagement des étudiants dans des modalités de cours hybrides en enseignement supérieur. Thèse de doctorat, éducation, Université de Sherbrooke.
Heilporn G., Lakhal S., Bélisle M. & St-Onge C. (2020). « Engagement des étudiants: une échelle de mesure multidimensionnelle appliquée à des modalités de cours hybrides universitaires». Mesure et évaluation en éducation, no 43(2), p. 1-34. En ligne: .
Hoekstra A. (2008). «Vibrant student voices: Exploring effects of the use of clickers in large college courses». Learning, MediaandTechnology, no33(4), p.329-341. En ligne: .
(2014). «Because you don’t realize how many people have different experiences than you: Effects of clicker use for class discussions in sociology». Teaching Sociology, no43(1), p.53-60. En ligne: .
Huberman M. (1989). «Les phases de la carrière enseignante: un essai de description et de prévision». Revue française de pédagogie, no86, p.5-16. En ligne: .
Hunsu N. J., Adesope O. & Bayly D. J. (2016). «A meta-analysis of the effects of audience response systems (clicker-based technologies) on cognition and affect». Computers & Education, no94, p.102-119. En ligne: .
IrvingA.,ReadM.,HuntA.&KnightS.(2000).UseofInformationTechnology in Exam Revision. Paper presented at 4th Computer Assisted Assessment Conference, 2000, Loughborough.
Ismaile S. & Alhosban F. (2018). «Students perceptions of audience response system in classroom feedback: A qualitative study». International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, no5, p.67-72. En ligne: .
Jézégou A. (2010). «Créer de la présence à distance en e-learning: cadre théorique, définition, et dimensions clés». Distancesetsavoirs, no8, p.257-274. En ligne: .
(2022). La présence à distance en e-Formation. Enjeux et repères pour la recherche et l’ingénierie. Villeneuve d’Ascq: Presses universitaires du Septentrion.
Jonassen D. H. (1995). « Computers as cognitive tools: Learning with technology and not from technology». Journal of Computing in Higher Education, no 6, p. 40-73.
Jones S., Henderson D. & Sealover P. (2009). «“Clickers” in the classroom». Teaching and Learning in Nursing, no4(1), p.2-5. En ligne: .
Joshi N., Lau S. K., Pang M. F. & Lau S. S. Y. (2021). «Clickers in class: Fostering higher cognitive thinking using ConcepTests in a large undergraduate class». The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, no30, p.375-394. En ligne: .
Kahu E. R. (2013). « Framing student engagement in higher education». Studies in Higher Education, no 38(5), p. 758-773.
Khademi Ashkzari M., Piryaei S. & Kamelifar L. (2018). «Designing a causal model for fostering academic engagement and verification of its effect on educational performance». International Journal of Psychology (IPA), no12(1), p.136-161.
King A. (1993). «From sage on the stage to guide on the side». College Teaching, no41(1), p.30-35.
King S. O. (2016). «Investigating the most neglected student learning domain in higher education: A case study on the impact of technology on student behaviour and emotions in university mathematics learning». Problems of Education in the 21st Century, no72, p.31-52.
King S. O. & Robinson C. L. (2009). « “Pretty lights” and maths! Increasing student engagement and enhancing learning through the use of electronic voting systems». Computers & Education, no53(1), p.189-199. En ligne: .
Leclercq D. (1986). La conception des questions à choix multiple. Bruxelles: Labor.
Leclercq D. & Glowacki J. (2005). « TOPACMER: indices de participation d’étudiants à un cours dans l’enseignement supérieur». In N. Rege Colet (dir.), Actes du Colloque AIPU 2005: L’enseignement supérieur du XXIe siècle: de nouveaux défis à relever. Genève: Université de Genève.
Lin Y.-C., Liu T.-C. & Chu C.-C. (2011). «Implementing clickers to assist learning in science lectures: The clicker-assisted conceptual change model». Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, no27(6), p.979-996.
López-Quintero J. L., Varo-Martínez M., Ana M., Laguna-Luna & PontesPedrajasA.(2016).«Opinionson“classroomresponsesystem”byfirst-year engineering students». Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, no228, p.183-189. En ligne: .
Ma S., Steger D. G., Doolittle P. E., Lee A. H., Griffin L. E. & Stewart A. (2020). «Persistence of multitasking distraction following the use of smartphone-based clickers». International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, no32(1), p.64-72.
MasikunasG.,PanayiotidisA.&BurkeL.(2007).«Theuseofelectronicvoting systems in lectures within business and marketing: A case study of their impact on student learning». Research in Learning Technology, no15(1), p.3-20. En ligne: .
(2009). «Changing the Nature of Lectures Using a Personal Response System». Innovations in Education and Teaching International, no46(2), p.199-212. En ligne: .
Mathiasen H. (2015). « Digital voting systems and communication in classroom lectures. An empirical study based around physics teaching at bachelor level at two Danish universities». Journal of Interactive Media in Education, no 2015(1).
Mazur É. (2014). Peer Instruction: une méthode éprouvée d’enseignement interactif. Lausanne: Presses polytechniques et universitaires romandes.
McDermott L. C. & Redish E. F. (1999). « Resource letter: PER-1: Physics education research». American Journal of Physics, no 67(9), p. 755-767.
McGowan H. M & Gunderson B. K. (2010). «A randomized experiment exploring how certain features of clicker use effect undergraduate students’ engagementandlearninginstatistics».TechnologyInnovationsinStatistics Education, no4(1).
Meedzan N. & Fisher K. (2009). «Clickers in nursing education: An active learning tool in the classroom». Online Journal of Nursing Informatics (OJNI), no13(2), p.1-19.
Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D. G. & PRISMA Group (2009). « Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement». Annals of Internal Medicine, no 151(4), p. 264-269.
Moss K. & Crowley M. (2011). « Effective learning in science: The use of personal response systems with a wide range of audiences». Computers & Education, no 56(1), p. 36-43. En ligne: .
Mundy D. P. & Proctor J. (2008). « Integrating wireless interaction into the lecture theatre». Eighth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. Los Alamitos: IEEE, p. 534-535.
Nelson C., Hartling L., Campbell S. & Oswald A. E. (2012). «The effects of audienceresponsesystemsonlearningoutcomesinhealthprofessionseducation».ABEMESystematicReview:BEMEGuideNo.21.MedTeach.,no34(6), p. e386-e405. En ligne: .
Nicol D. J. & Boyle J. T. (2003). «Peer instruction versus class-wide discussion in large classes: A comparison of two interaction methods in the wired classroom». Studies in Higher Education, no28(284), p.458-473.
Nielsen K. L., Hansen G. & Stav J. B. (2013). «Teaching with student response systems (SRS): Teacher-centric aspects that can negatively affect students’ experience of using SRS». ResearchinLearningTechnology, no21. En ligne: .
Nijimbere C. (2013). «Approche instrumentale et didactiques: apports de Pierre Rabardel». Adjectif.net. En ligne: .
Nleme Ze Y. & Molinari G. (2021). « L’engagement des étudiants dans les forums de discussion des MOOC: dimensions et indicateurs». Distances et médiations des savoirs, no 36. En ligne: .
Novak G., Patterson E., Gavrin A. & Wolfgang C. (1999). Just-In-Time Teaching: Blending Active Learning and Web Technology. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.
Pae C. U. (2015). «Why systematic review rather than narrative review?». Psychiatry Investigation, no12(3), p.417-419.
Pati D. & Lorusso L. N. (2018). «How to write a systematic review of the literature». HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, no11(1), p.15-30.
Patterson B., Kilpatrick J. & Woebkenberg E. (2010). «Evidence for teaching practice: The impact of clickers in a large classroom environment». Nurse Education Today, no30(7), p.603-607. En ligne: .
Peftitsis D. & Mavroudi A. (2022). «Students perceptions on teaching design of power electronics using student-response systems: Thematic content analysis of interviews». IEEEAccess, no10, p.64059-64071.
PeltierC.&SéguinC.(2021).«Hybridationetdispositifshybridesdeformation dans l’enseignement supérieur: revue de la littérature 2012-2020». Distances et médiations des savoirs, no35. En ligne: .
Preszler R. W., Dawe A., Shuster C. B. & Shuster M. (2007). «Assessment of the effects of student response systems on student learning and attitudesoverabroadrangeofbiologycourses».CellBiologyEducation,no6(1), p.29-41.
Pryke S. (2020). «The use of Socrative in university social science teaching». Learning and Teaching, no13(1), p.67-86. En ligne: .
Rabardel P. (1995). Les hommes et les technologies; approche cognitive des instruments contemporains. Paris: Armand Colin.
Redmond P., Abawi L., Brown A., Henderson R. & Heffernan A. (2018). «An online engagement framework for higher education». Online Learning, no22(1), p.183-204.
Rege Colet N. & Romainville M. (2006). La pratique enseignante en mutation à l’université. Bruxelles: De Boeck.
Rivière E., Quinton A., Neau D., Constans J., Vignes J. R. & Dehail P. (2019). «Analyse docimologique des premières Épreuves classantes nationales informatisées (ECNi) de 2016: propositions d’amélioration». Revue de médecine interne, no40(1), p.47-51. En ligne: .
Roschelle J., Penuel W. R. & Abrahamson L. A. (2004). Classroom Response and Communication Systems: Research Review and Theory. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego.
Ruhl K. L., Hughes C. A. & Schloss P. J. (1987). « Using the pause procedure to enhance lecture recall». Teacher Education and Special Education, no 10(1), p. 14-18.
Saussez F. & Lessard C. (2009). « Entre orthodoxie et pluralisme, les enjeux de l’éducation basée sur la preuve». Revue française de pédagogie, no 168, p. 111-136. En ligne: .
Schirmer B. R. (2021). «Writing a literature review narrative». International JournalofEducation, no13(2), p.94-103.
Sensevy G., Santini J., Cariou D. & Quilio S. (2018). «Preuves fondées sur la pratique,pratiquesfondéessurlapreuve:distinctionetmiseensynergie». Éducationetdidactique,no12-2,p.111-125.Enligne:.
Sheng R., Goldie C. L., Pulling C. & Luctkar-Flude M. (2019). «Evaluating student perceptions of a multi-platform classroom response system in undergraduate nursing». Nurse Education Today, vol. 78, p.25-31. En ligne: .
Simpson V. & Oliver M. (2007). «Electronic voting systems for lectures then and now: A comparison of research and practice». Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, no23(2), p.187-208.
Stein P. S. (2006). «Using audience response technology for pretest reviews in an undergraduate nursing course». Journal of Nursing Education, no45(11), p.469-473.
StowellJ.R.,OldhamT.&BennettD.(2010).«Usingstudentresponsesystems (“clickers”) to combat conformity and shyness». Teaching of Psychology, no37(2), p.135-140. En ligne: .
Stuart S. A. J., Brown M. I. & Draper S.W. (2004). « Using an electronic voting system in logic lectures: One practitioner’s application». Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, no 20(2), p. 95-102.
Van Daele T., Frijns C. & Lievens J. (2017). «How do students and lecturers experience the interactive use of handheld technology in large enrolment courses?». British Journal of Educational Technology, no48(6), p.1318-1329.
Van de Pol J., Volman M. & Beishuizen J. (2011). «Patterns of contingent teaching in teacher-student interaction». Learning and Instruction, no21(1), p 46-57.
Van Dijk L. A., Van Der Berg G. C. & Van Keulen H. (2001). «Interactive lectures in engineering education». European Journal of Engineering Education, no26(1), p.15-28. En ligne: .
Viau R. (2009). La motivation en contexte scolaire. Bruxelles: De Boeck, 5e éd.
Vosniadou S. & Vamvakoussi X. (2006). «Examining mathematics learning from a conceptual change point of view: Implications for the design of learning environments». In L. Verschaffel, F. Dochy, M. Boekaerts & S. Vosniadou (dir.), Instructional Psychology: Past, Present and Future Trends. Sixteen Essays in Honour of Erik De Corte. Londres: Elsevier, p.55-70.
Vygotsky L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Webb A. & Carnaghan C. (2006). «Investigating the effects of group response systems on student satisfaction, learning and engagement in accounting education». SSRN Electronic Journal. En ligne: .
Wieman C. (2010). «Why not try a scientific approach to science education?». In J. C. Hughes & J. Mighty (dir.), Taking Stock: Research on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Montréal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, p.175-190.
Wilson K. & Korn J. H. (2007). «Attention during lectures: Beyond ten minutes». Teaching of Psychology, no34(2), p.85-89. En ligne: .
Wit E. (2003). « Who wants to be… The use of a personal response system in statistics teaching». MSORconnections, no3(2), p.14-20.
Wong G., Greenhalgh T., Westhorp G., Buckingham J. & Pawson R. (2013a). «RAMESES publication standards: Realist syntheses». BMCmedicine, no11, p.1-14.
(2013b). «RAMESES publication standards: Meta-narrative reviews». JournalofAdvancedNursing, no69(5), p.987-1004.
Wood W. B. (2004). «Clickers: A teaching gimmick that works». Developmental Cell,no7,p.796-798.Enligne:.
Wood D., Wood H. & Middleton D. (1978). «An experimental evaluation of four face-to-face teaching strategies». International Journal of Behavioral Development, no1, p.131-147.
Younès N. (2020). Vers une évaluation écologique dans l’enseignement supérieur: dispositifs et transformations en jeu. Habilitation à diriger des recherches, sciences de l’Homme et Société, université de Lorraine.
Younès N., Soulier S. & Detroz P. (2017). «Utilisation des boîtiers de vote et développement professionnel». Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire / International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, no14(3), p.17-34. En ligne: .
Zilberberg E. (2020). Identifications imposées ou choisie et participation visible à des évaluations médiatisées non certificatives. Thèse de doctorat, sciences de l’éducation, université de Nanterre-Paris 10.
Zurmehly J. & Leadingham C. (2008). «Exploring student response systems in nursing education». CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing, no26(5), p.265-270.