Comments on: Classroom response systems http://blog.punchbarrel.com/2008/12/16/classroom-response-systems/ Frank Carver's musings about software and life Sun, 22 Jan 2012 22:15:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Derek http://blog.punchbarrel.com/2008/12/16/classroom-response-systems/comment-page-1/#comment-1782 Derek Fri, 16 Jan 2009 02:43:57 +0000 http://blog.punchbarrel.com/?p=888#comment-1782 I'm a big fan of the idea of a classroom "backchannel," and Frank's done a great job here of describing the possibilities of such a thing. Unfortunately, there are big gaps in terms of technology and pedagogy between a backchannel like Frank describes and the standard college or university lecture. Making it relatively easy for faculty to negotiate those gaps is a significant challenge. I think that the use of classroom response systems to collect student responses to multiple-choice questions posed by instructors is a nice stepping stone to a richer interactive classroom experience. Clicker technology has matured to the point where many faculty are able to use it comfortably, and teaching approaches that make good use of clickers don't have to be too different from those faculty are used to using. I've seen many faculty start using clickers in relatively limited ways, see how the technology can change the classroom dynamic in productive ways, then start experimenting with other ways to use it to interact with students during class. Even multiple-choice questions can be extremely useful when used with classroom response systems. They can be used to generate discussion certainly, and well-designed questions can surface important student misconceptions. One limitation of the backchannel that Frank describes is that it relies (for the most part) on students identifying their own misconceptions and misunderstandings. Well-designed multiple-choice questions can help students realize misconceptions they didn't even know they had. I’m a big fan of the idea of a classroom “backchannel,” and Frank’s done a great job here of describing the possibilities of such a thing. Unfortunately, there are big gaps in terms of technology and pedagogy between a backchannel like Frank describes and the standard college or university lecture. Making it relatively easy for faculty to negotiate those gaps is a significant challenge.

I think that the use of classroom response systems to collect student responses to multiple-choice questions posed by instructors is a nice stepping stone to a richer interactive classroom experience. Clicker technology has matured to the point where many faculty are able to use it comfortably, and teaching approaches that make good use of clickers don’t have to be too different from those faculty are used to using.

I’ve seen many faculty start using clickers in relatively limited ways, see how the technology can change the classroom dynamic in productive ways, then start experimenting with other ways to use it to interact with students during class.

Even multiple-choice questions can be extremely useful when used with classroom response systems. They can be used to generate discussion certainly, and well-designed questions can surface important student misconceptions. One limitation of the backchannel that Frank describes is that it relies (for the most part) on students identifying their own misconceptions and misunderstandings. Well-designed multiple-choice questions can help students realize misconceptions they didn’t even know they had.

]]> By: Samantha http://blog.punchbarrel.com/2008/12/16/classroom-response-systems/comment-page-1/#comment-1768 Samantha Thu, 08 Jan 2009 08:11:01 +0000 http://blog.punchbarrel.com/?p=888#comment-1768 That's an interesting concept Frank. We have a problem still that most of our teachers are not ready for implement these "simple" clicker handsets anyway. I can imagine some teachers folding because their "class" is not sitting attentively perched on every one of his words. But back on the issue of clickers as they are today, in the K-12 arena, cost of these things is a real issue. It’s not so simple to ask every student to buy their own clicker, so they end up buying a class pod (say 30) and share it between classes. Then they learn the issues of contantly needing to register the things for each new student that grabs one. Time wasted and people discouraged. For those K-12 schools with 1:1 computer labs or 1:1 laptop programs, they may want to consider “Virtual Clickers” - http://studentresponsenetwork.wordpress.com That’s an interesting concept Frank. We have a problem still that most of our teachers are not ready for implement these “simple” clicker handsets anyway. I can imagine some teachers folding because their “class” is not sitting attentively perched on every one of his words.

But back on the issue of clickers as they are today, in the K-12 arena, cost of these things is a real issue. It’s not so simple to ask every student to buy their own clicker, so they end up buying a class pod (say 30) and share it between classes. Then they learn the issues of contantly needing to register the things for each new student that grabs one. Time wasted and people discouraged.

For those K-12 schools with 1:1 computer labs or 1:1 laptop programs, they may want to consider “Virtual Clickers” – http://studentresponsenetwork.wordpress.com

]]>