Stories

Monday December 03, 2007 | 000 Multidisciplinary

Shaping Instruction Using Real Time Student Feedback

Nathaniel Lasry, PhD Cégep John Abbott College

^{Figure 1:
An infrared ‘clicker'}

In this article, I describe a classroom experiment I recently did to determine whether using Peer Instruction (PI) with ‘clickers' would be advantageous at John Abbott College¹. PI is a student-centered, instructional approach developed at Harvard by physicist Eric Mazur². In PI, students frequently use wireless handheld devices (aka. ‘clickers') to provide instructors with real-time feedback which is then used to shape the instruction.

A Paradigm Change

Peer Instruction involved changing the structure of my physics courses. I now present brief lectures (approximately 10 minutes, within limits of average adult attention spans) followed by ConcepTests: multiple choice conceptual questions having misconceptions as possible choices. Students simply press their choice number on the clicker and the data is transmitted to my computer. I then have instant feedback, assessing in real-time the exact percentage of the class having the correct answer. But more importantly, I also get to know the percentage of students holding each misconception. With this feedback, if the correct response rate is very high (>80%), my students have well understood the concept, and I may simply address the remaining misconceptions that 20% of the class believes before proceeding to the next concept. If, the concept is poorly understood (< 30% of correct answers on ConcepTest), I revisit the concept and explain further before resubmitting the ConcepTest to the group. Most frequently, the rates of correct response are neither very high nor very low. When moderate response rates (30%-80%) are obtained, students are asked to turn to their neighbour and try to convince them of their choice, the Peer Intruction per se.

: Figure 2: Students involved in a PI discussion. Reproduced with consent from author from: PI: A user’s manual

This discussion forces students to formulate their thoughts clearly and better represent the concept. Furthermore, students may be better equipped than instructors at understanding their peers' misconceptions and conceptual change may thus be facilitated. After discussion, students are presented with the same ConcepTest and are asked to revote. I can then acknowledge the correct response and explain why the remaining misconceptions are wrong. The method can be charted as follows:

Implementing PI and ‘Clickers’ at John Abbott?

Implementing an extensive and somewhat costly instructional approach is often problematic in public institutions. Yet, I faced virtually no resistance implementing PI. Since the first implementation of the approach at John Abbott, more than half of the full-time physics department (8/14) members currently use some form of PI in their classrooms. Instructors in other departments have also manifested interest. In the chemistry department, one professor has used clickers in his introductory course and a nursing instructor has adopted the method in her courses. From the reception at the different levels of administration to instructors in diverse fields, it is fair to say that PI was warmly welcomed by our community.

: Figure 3: The PI process

Modifications to course structure

Using PI with clickers in the classroom requires a number of changes, as would any new technology. To present students with ConcepTests that will allow clicker votes, one needs to write or import ConcepTests into PowerPoint. Many ConcepTests can be found either online though Project Galileo http://galileo.harvard.edu/ or through textbook publishers that now package textbooks with ‘clicker questions’. Thus, there are currently sufficient resources available to make the use of ConcepTests quite feasible. The clicker technology does require familiarization with the hardware and software. I do recommend that all interested instructors setup the clickers and receivers and try them a few times before attempting to use them in class.

Reception by students

Students warmly welcomed using clickers. Interesting unsolicited student feedback was found in the form of computer doodles made in Microsoft Paint and placed on physics lab computers as screen savers. The pictures below were found on the physics lab computers screens after PI students had left. These pictures were not present before students entered the lab.

Figure 4: Unsolicited student feedback: computer doodles

The Remaining Question: Does it enhance students' learning?

Although administrators, colleagues and students may welcome the approach, it is important not to conflate appreciation and pedagogical effectiveness. I therefore set out to explicitly measure learning differences between PI and non-PI sections.

Results essentially confirm the effectiveness of the method¹. All PI students gained significantly more conceptual knowledge than students in non-PI sections. Furthermore, although less class-time was spent in PI on traditional problem solving skills, PI students also performed better than their non-PI peers in problem solving (yielding higher grades on the common final exam). PI is therefore an effective pedagogical approach in Cegep.

Conclusion

Many science instructors teach today the way science was taught 100 years ago³. Yet, the PI approach is changing the way teachers and students conceive instruction. Its methodology requires few changes from traditional lecturing. Its approach does not conflict with institutional constraints as it is well received by administrators, teaching colleagues and students. By focusing on basic concepts it has taken away the perception that science is about finding formulas integrating Simon’s notion that “the meaning of “knowing” has shifted from being able to remember to being able to find and use” ⁴. Through PI students are pushed to find and use the basic concepts instead of memorizing which formulas to use.

References

¹ The entire text of the PAREA study is available online through the CDC. There is also the 15p summary article available through the CDC.

² E. Mazur, Peer instruction : a user's manual. (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J., 1997).

³ R. Beichner, L. Bernold, E. Burniston, P. Dail et al., "Case study of the physics component of an integrated curriculum," American Journal of Physics 67, 16 (1999).

⁴H.A. Simon, in Paper prepared for the Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning for the Sciences of Science Learning: An Interdisciplinary Discussion (Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University, 1996).

Comments by readersReact to this text

English
French

Who's Talking in your Classroom?

I went to the very interesting talk at the AQPC Conference of college teachers in Sherbrooke and only this morning I attended the workshop that presents this information. Unfortunately I did not have a second to stay and talk at the end to find out more about the presenter, who was excellent. I have been using cooperative learning and cooperative teaching practices in the ESL classroom, with and without technology, since 1996 and I love getting students in groups to peer teach. I have noticed, which was comforting to me as a teacher, that it is essential that the teacher verify that all of the information being passed back and forth between students is on the mark, lest they be led astray once again by the ever changing world of classroom politics. It was surprising to me to notice that other teachers at that same workshop found that observation (that teachers need to pay selective attention to what is being said by students during peer teaching) to be controversial. I do love controversy. I wonder why we are so quick to throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to trying out new approaches to "teaching" in the classroom. I agree that the information gets easily disseminated at the end of the peer teaching while checking for understanding at the end by the whole class. I find that the practice selectively listening during the activity itself informs my teaching practice and of course I just assumed that this is the way it is for all teachers. It is encouraging to know that students are the center of learning with the teacher standing right there beside them.

Jane Lee Pankovitch, teacher, Cégep de Victoriaville [2010-6-04]

Post your comments below! Spaces marked with an asterisk (*) are obligatory

Last name :

First name :

E-Mail Address :

Function :

Organization :