TB-L Archives

July 2008

TB-L@LISTSERV.ONEONTA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jim Greenberg <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Teaching Breakfast List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 7 Jul 2008 10:36:17 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (486 lines)
TB 

Below are two recent postings to a teaching listserv I am on about
"clickers."  If you are interested in using clickers in your teaching please
contact either Mark English or myself.

******* post one ********

The posting below is an excerpt from al longer article, Teaching with
Clickers, by Erping Zhu, coordinator of instructional technology at the
Center for Research on Learning and Teaching (CRLT)
[http://www.crlt.umich.edu/]  at the University of Michigan.  She has a
Ph.D. in Instructional Systems Technology. The full article can be found at:
[http://www.crlt.umich.edu/publinks/CRLT_no22.pdf].  It is part of the CRLT
Occasional Papers series published on a variable schedule by CRLT ©Copyright
2007 The University of Michigan. Reprinted with permission.



                         Teaching with Clickers

CRLT Occasional Papers,  No. 22
Excerpt

What Do Students Appreciate Most about Clickers?

    In a class of several hundred students, it is virtually impossible for
each
    student to participate and interact with the professor. I like the
    Quizdom system because it allows each student to actively participate
    and thus gauge their comprehension.

    They allow me to interact with the material and make sure that I
    understand the lecture. They force me to apply what I've learned, also
    ensuring that I will be better able to remember it in the future.

    Using the clicker gives me a chance to think about what I'm actually
    writing down in my notes, rather than just having a collection of
    incomprehensible formulas scattered through my notes.

    Sample of student survey responses
    (Zhu, Bierwert, & Bayer, 2006, 2007)


What Is a Clicker?

A clicker system consists of three components:
1) clickers: wireless handheld transmitters that resemble small, TV remote
controls;
2) receiver: a transportable device that receives signals from the clickers;
and
3) software: an application installed on the instructor's computer to
record, display, and manage student responses and data.

Although radio frequency transmission seems to have become the standard for
now (Duncan, 2006), infrared
transmission is also still in use.  The design of clicker pads varies
widely, and the different clicker systems -Classroom Performance System
(CPS), Audience Response System, Qwizdom, TurningPoint, H-ITT, Classtalk -
are incompatible.


How Are Faculty Using Clickers in the Classroom?

Since the 1980s, the use of clickers has proliferated on college campuses.
Faculty from various disciplines such as biology, chemistry, history,
mathematics, political science, law and psychology have introduced clicker
systems into their classrooms.  Faculty use clickers for various purposes
depending on their course goals
and learning objectives.  The most common uses of clickers include the
following:

    Assessing students' prior knowledge and identifying misconceptions
before introducing a new
    subject

Prior knowledge is necessary for learning but can be problematic if it is
not accurate or sufficient.  It is a good practice for faculty to assess
students' prior knowledge of a subject and identify common
misconceptions in order to find an appropriate entry point for introducing a
new topic.  By using clicker multiple-choice questions, faculty can quickly
gauge students' knowledge level.  For instance, in a Fall 2006 Chemistry
class at U-M, the professor started each lecture with clicker questions
asking students to identify new concepts or distinguish between various new
concepts discussed in the assigned readings.

Checking students'understanding of new material

Clicker technology makes it easy for faculty to check students' mastery of
lecture content. The immediate display of student responses enables faculty
and students to see how well students understand the lecture.  As a result,
faculty can decide whether there is a need for further instruction or
supplementary materials.  By seeing peers' responses, students can gauge how
well they are doing in relation to others in the class and determine which
topics they need to review or bring to office hours.

Using Peer Instruction and other active learning strategies

Peer Instruction (Mazur, 1997) and Think-Pair-Share (Lyman, 1981) are
cooperative learning strategies that faculty often use to probe
students'understanding of lecture content and encourage them to discuss,
debate, and defend their answers during lecture.  The strategy entails
posing a question to students, giving them time to think and discuss their
responses with a partner, and then describing the results to the whole
class.

Clicker technology makes the use of these strategies feasible and
manageable, even for large classes.  For example, the instructor will plan
for each lecture several concept questions that focus more on the analysis
and evaluation of information than simple recall, rote memorization, or
calculation.  Students are asked to share and discuss their responses with
partners. Some faculty ask  students to respond twice to difficult
questions, once right after they read the question and then again after they
talk to their partners.  The faculty member then reviews and explains
students' different responses, helping them clear up their misconceptions.

Research in physics (Crouch & Mazur, 2001) shows that students' cognitive
gains from peer instruction are significant: students' scores on tests
measuring conceptual understanding improved dramatically; their performance
on traditional quantitative problems improved as well.

Starting class discussion on difficult topics

The anonymity of responses facilitated by the clicker technology allows
faculty to initiate class discussion and
debate on sensitive topics that might otherwise be difficult to explore.
For example, questions on controversial issues in a political science course
can sometimes be met with absolute silence (Abrahamson, 1999), but the use
of clickers can help change classroom dynamics.  Faculty can start the class
lecture or discussion by posing controversial questions and offering
"common-sense" multiple-choice responses. Students' responses, and their
questions about their peers' responses, can provide an opening for class
discussion.  When students recognize their own opinions and co-direct a
class discussion, they may feel a greater sense of ownership over the
lecture and discussion. As a result, they will be more engaged in and
responsible for their own learning.  Also, instead of drawing conclusions
from the most vocal students, the faculty member receives
a far more accurate overview of opinions from the entire class.  Most
important, the anonymous feature of the clicker system ensures that
viewpoints that might not otherwise be expressed during class discussion are
given a voice.

Administering tests and quizzes during lecture

The relative ease of managing students' responses has made the clicker
system a helpful device for testing and grading during lecture.  Features
such as automatic scoring and record-keeping for each student enable faculty
to administer all sorts of tests and quizzes in large lecture halls.  For
example, in one physics class at U-M, students' responses to questions posed
during lecture are scored. Students who answer the questions correctly earn
points that count toward a small percentage of the course grade (allocating
too many points to a clicker quiz can increase the likelihood of cheating).
Moreover, with instant feedback from students, faculty can adjust the pace
of a lecture and the amount of content presented, assist students in
identifying their knowledge deficiency, help students re- evaluate their
study strategies, and determine what additional resources they might need to
provide.

Gathering feedback on teaching

With clicker technology, faculty can gather anonymous feedback on their own
teaching by asking students to respond to questions regarding the lecture,
class discussion, homework assignments, group activities, or the overall
learning experience in the course.  If used early in the term, faculty can
make changes to the class that benefit students before the end of the term.

Recording class attendance and participation

Taking attendance in a large lecture course is usually daunting, if not
impossible.  But with a system that recognizes each student, it is feasible
and convenient for faculty to take student attendance in a large lecture.
For example, students' responses to questions asked at the beginning of the
lecture often serve as a record of their attendance.  The instructor can
easily run reports on student responses and find out who is present or
absent from the class.

Admittedly, faculty hold different views on student class attendance.  Some
firmly believe that being in class and listening to a lecture is an integral
part of learning, making class attendance a must; others think it is not
essential for learning and it can be left to the students to decide.
Similarly, student opinions about mandatory class attendance vary.  Some U-M
students surveyed in 2006 and 2007 responded negatively when clickers were
used only to check class attendance (Zhu, Bierwert, & Bayer).

There are many other creative ways clickers are being used in classrooms.
Draper, Cargill, and Cutts (2002) list three: Students can use them to give
anonymous feedback on their peers'class presentations by responding to a
brief post-presentation survey.  Faculty can create a sense of community and
group awareness by clustering people's hobbies, habits, and preferences
through student responses to anonymous surveys.  Faculty may also use
clickers for psychological experiments.  Kam & Sommer (2006) note the use of
clickers for campaign simulation and polling research, as well as the
technology's ability to monitor and facilitate individual and group games.
In summary, the only limitation on innovative applications of clickers is
the
creativity of the instructor.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------

Reminder, the full article with following additional sections:
* What Are Student and Instructor Attitudes towards Using Clickers in the
Classroom?
* Challenges and Best Practices
* Recommendations for Using Clickers

can be found at: [http://www.crlt.umich.edu/publinks/CRLT_no22.pdf]. Also
for additional information and examples regarding the use of clickers, visit
the page "Engaging Students in Large Lectures Using a Classroom Response
System" at the CRLT website
(http://www.crlt.umich.edu/inst/responsesystem.html).

                          References (full list from article)

Abrahamson, A. L. (1999, May). Teaching with Classroom Communication System
-- What it involves and why it works. Paper presented at International
Workshop, New Trends in Physics Teaching, Puebla, Mexico. Retrieved January
15, 2007, from http://www.bedu.com/Publications/PueblaFinal2.html

Audience Response Systems. http://www.audienceresponse.com/

Beatty, I. D., Gerace, W. J., Leonard, W. J., & Dufresne, R. J. (2006).
Designing effective questions for classroom response system
teaching.American Journal of Physics, 74(1), 31-39.

Beekes, W. (2006). The "Millionaire" method for encouraging participation.
Active Learning in Higher Education: The Journal of the Institute for
Learning and Teaching, 7(1), 25-36.

Classroom Performance System (CPS). http://www.einstruction.com/

Classtalk. http://www.bedu.com/

Conoley, J., Moore, G., Croom, B., & Flowers, J. (2006). A toy or a teaching
tool? The use of audience-response systems in the classroom. Techniques (The
Journal of the Association for Career and Technical Education), 81(7),
46-49.

Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience
and results. American Journal of Physics Teachers, 69(9), 970-977.

Cue, N. (1998). A universal learning tool for classrooms? Proceedings of the
First Quality in Teaching and Learning Conference, Hong Kong International
Trade and Exhibition Center. Retrieved on January 15,
2007 from: http://celt.ust.hk/ideas/prs/pdf/Nelsoncue.pdf

Draper, S., & Brown, M. (2002). Use of the PRS (Personal Response System)
handsets at Glasgow University, Interim Evaluation Report. Retrieved January
15, 2007, from http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/%7Esteve/ilig/interim.html

Draper, S.W., Cargill, J., & Cutts, Q. (2002). Electronically enhanced
classroom interaction. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 18(1),
13-23.

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, 7(2), 3-47.

Duncan, D. (2006). Clickers: A new technology with exceptional promise.
Astronomy Education Review, 5(1), 70-88.

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, 52(4),
345-351.

Hall, R. J., Collier, H. L.,Thomas, M. L., & Hilgers, M. G.  (2005). A
student response system for increasing engagement, motivation, and learning
in high enrollment lectures. Proceedings of the Eleventh Americas Conference
on Information Systems (pp. 1-7).Omaha, NE.

H-ITT Classroom Response System. http://www.h-itt.com/

Hoffman, C., & Goodwin, S. (2006). A clicker for your thoughts: Technology
for active learning. New Library World, 107(1228/1229), 422-433.

Judson, E., & Sawada, D. (2002). Learning from past and present: Electronic
response systems in college lecture halls. Journal of Computers in
Mathematics and Science Teaching, 21(2), 167-181.

Kam, C. D., & Sommer, B. (2006). Real-time polling technology in a public
opinion course. PS: Political Science & Politics, 39(1), 113- 117.

Knight, J., & Wood, W. B. (2005). Teaching more by lecturing less. Cell
Biology Education, 4, 298-310.

Lyman, F. (1981). The responsive classroom discussion: The inclusion of all
students. In A.S. Anderson (Ed.), Mainstreaming Digest (pp. 109-113).
College Park: University of Maryland.

Mazur, E. (1993). Understanding or memorization: Are we teaching the right
thing?Proceedings of the Resnick Conference on Introductory Physics Courses,
Rensselaer Polytechnical Institute, Troy, NY.

Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user's manual.Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.

Qwizdom Response System. http://www.qwizdom.com/

Shapiro, J. A. (1997). Student response found feasible in large science
lecture hall. Journal of College Science Teaching, 26(6), 408-412.

Silliman, S. E., Abbott, K., Clark, G. C., & McWilliams, L. (2004).
Observations on benefits/limitations of an audience response system.
Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual
Conference & Exposition. Retrieved February 20, 2007, from
http://www.asee.org/acPapers/2005-1686_Final.pdf

Simpson , V., & Oliver, M. (2006). Electronic voting systems for lectures
then and now: A comparison of research and practice. Australasian Journal of
Educational Technology. 23(2), 187-208.

Stuart, 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, 20(2), 95-102.

Tomorrow's Professor Blog, (2006).  Posting #757.  Retrieved February, 2006,
from http://ampstools.mit.edu/tomprofblog/archives/2006/11/

Wit, E. (2003). Who wants to be... The use of a personal response system in
statistics teaching. MSOR Connections, 3(2), 14-20.

Uhari, M., Renko, M. & Soini, H. (2003).  Experiences of using an
interactive audience response system in lectures. BMC Medical
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/3/12.

Zhu, E., Bierwert, C., & Bayer, K. (2006). Qwizdom Student Survey December
06. Unpublished raw data.

Zhu, E., Bierwert, C., & Bayer, K. (2007). Qwizdom Student Survey March
2007. Unpublished raw data.

Acknowledgements: Jeff Chun, a graduate student in the Center for the Study
of Higher and Postsecondary Education and a CRLT Graduate Research
Assistant, contributed to the literature review and the summary
of survey data.

********* post two *********


The posting below is a follow-on to the previous posting,  #883 Teaching
with Clickers. It is a summary of the highlights of a publication: Clicker
Resource Guide: An Instructor's Guide to the Effective Use of Personal
Response Systems (Clickers) in Teaching (see link in posting below). The
article is by Beth Simon, CSE Department, University of California, San
Diego, and is taken liberally from the full guide -- with the permission of
the CWSEI  (Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative at the University of
British Columbia).



              What Every Faculty Member Should Know about the Effective use
of Clickers in Teaching

* Why is it that every faculty member who is experienced with using clickers
effectively swears by them?

* Why are the students in classes using well-implemented clicker questions
dramatically more engaged and asking more numerous and deeper questions?

* Why do the students in these classes overwhelmingly recommend that
clickers should be used in all lecture classes?

This article highlights a guide written to help instructors understand the
answers to these questions, and to help them use personal response systems
("clickers") in their classes in the most comfortable and pedagogically
effective manner.  The authors are involved in the Science Education
Initiative at the University of Colorado and the Carl Wieman Science
Education Initiative at the University of British Columbia.  They have
supported many different instructors as they introduced or refined the use
of clickers into their courses, several of them have used clickers
extensively in teaching, and the have observed a large number of classes -
both those which use clickers and those which do not.  They have also
carried out a number of studies on clicker use and their impact on students
and on student opinions about their use.

What are Clickers?

Clickers (or personal response systems) are physical devices which allow
each student to electronically submit an answer to a question from their
seat in class.  Using what looks like a television remote control, students
usually answer multiple choice questions posed to the class.  Students
register their answer by pushing the appropriate button, and a computer
records their response.  A histogram of responses can be shown to the whole
class.  There are a number of commercial clicker systems available.

Using Clickers Effectively for Learning

The first point about clickers that must be emphasized is that clickers in
themselves are not a solution to anything.  Like a chalkboard, they can only
serve to extend the capabilities of the instructor.  Although clickers can
be, and unfortunately often are, used primarily to encourage attendance,
they are most effective when they are used expressly to facilitate
intellectual engagement of the student and communication between student and
instructor.  When used this way, the amplification of a good instructor's
capabilities can
transform a classroom and result in dramatically improved student learning,
particularly in large classes.  In the words of one instructor known to be
an exceptionally good traditional lecturer when half way through his first
term of using clickers:

 "This is great fun.  My worst day using clickers is about as good as my
best day using standard lecture [in the past]."

An experienced insightful instructor, when giving a traditional lecture, can
tell when many of the students are not engaged and can often tell when
students do not understand the material.  However, it is more difficult to
know *why* they are disengaged and/or confused, and how to fix these
problems.  Clickers, when used well, can provide the *why* and *how to fix*
for experienced instructors. For other instructors, in addition to serving
those functions, clickers can also help them know much better *when*
students are disengaged and
confused.

It is essential to recognize that these benefits do not happen automatically
when one introduces clickers to the classroom.  These desirable outcomes are
only achieved when the instructor thinks carefully about his or her
instructional goals and how clicker questions and related discussion can
help achieve those goals.  It can take some time to tap the full potential
of clickers in the classroom.  The "Clicker Resource Guide: An Instructor's
Guide to the Effective Use of Personal Response Systems (Clickers) in
Teaching" (available
here: http://cwsei.ubc.ca/resources/instructor_guidance.htm) not only
outlines a common progression of clicker use, but also describes in detail
recommended approaches, writing effective questions, and logistics
(including dealing with unexpected situations).  It also provides an
extensive FAQ and an appendix of example questions from the sciences.

Below is a review of the key points from the guide:

* Clickers are not a magic bullet - they are not necessarily useful as an
end in themselves.  Clickers become useful when you have a clear idea as to
what you want to achieve with them, and the questions are designed to
improve student engagement and instructor-student interaction.

* What clickers do provide is a way to rapidly collect an answer to a
question from every student; an answer for which they are individually
accountable.  This allows rapid reliable feedback to both you and the
students.

* Used properly, clickers can tell you when students are disengaged and/or
confused, why this has happened, and can help you to fix the situation.

* The best questions focus on concepts you feel are particularly important
and involve challenging ideas with multiple plausible answers that reveal
student confusion and generate spirited student
discussion.

* A common mistake is to use clicker questions that are too easy. Students
value challenging questions more and learn more from them. Students often
learn the most from a question that they get wrong.

* For challenging questions, students should be given some time to think
about the clicker question on their own, and then discuss with their peers.

* Good clicker questions and discussion result in deeper, more numerous
questions from a much wider range of students than in traditional lecture.

* Listening to the student discussions will allow you to much better
understand and address student thinking.

* Even though you will sacrifice some coverage of content in class, students
will be more engaged and learn much more of what you do cover.

* When clickers are used correctly, students overwhelmingly support their
use and say they help their learning.




Mr. James B. Greenberg
Director Teaching, Learning and Technology Center
Milne Library 
SUNY College at Oneonta
Oneonta, New York 13820

blog: The 32nd Square at http://32ndsquare.blogspot.com
wiki: The 32nd Square at http://32ndsquare.wikidot.com
email: [log in to unmask]
phone: 607-436-2701
fax:   607-436-3081
IM:  oneontatltc
Twitter: greenbjb

"Ignorance is curable, stupidity lasts forever"

ATOM RSS1 RSS2