Use of clickers vs. mobile devices for classroom polling

An increasing number of instructors are using mobile devices in place of "clickers" to acquire student responses to questions posed by the instructor during class. This exploratory study compared the number of correct, incorrect, and missing responses of students who responded to in-class polling questions using clickers or mobile devices. In one of two classes, students using mobile devices had a greater number of missing responses and fewer correct responses than students using clickers, but there were no differences in final grades. In the other class, there were no differences on these measures. Overall, students' attitudes toward using clickers and mobile devices were favorable, but 31% of those who reported using a mobile device could not connect to the Internet "sometimes" or "most of the time." Of those who completed the technology survey, the majority (58%) reported being "never" or "rarely" distracted by other uses of their mobile device during class. Instructors who desire to have students use mobile devices for classroom polling should be aware of the possible differences in missing and correct responses, and the potential challenges unique to mobile technology. In one class, using mobile devices resulted in more missing responses and fewer correct answers.Final grades did not differ between students using clickers and students using mobile devices.Students generally report positive experiences with clickers and mobile devices.Mobile devices can be distracting for some students.

[1]  Kevin Wong,et al.  Classroom communication on mobile phones – first experiences with web-based ‘clicker’ system , 2011 .

[2]  C. End,et al.  Costly Cell Phones: The Impact of Cell Phone Rings on Academic Performance , 2010 .

[3]  Jeffrey R. Stowell,et al.  Using Student Response Systems (“Clickers”) to Combat Conformity and Shyness , 2010 .

[4]  Jerry Chih-Yuan Sun,et al.  Influence of polling technologies on student engagement: An analysis of student motivation, academic performance, and brainwave data , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[5]  Greet Langie,et al.  Replacement of a clicker system by a mobile device audience response system , 2013 .

[6]  Jeffrey H. Kuznekoff,et al.  The Impact of Mobile Phone Usage on Student Learning , 2013 .

[7]  Christine McDonald,et al.  Mobile-phone-based classroom response systems: Students’ perceptions of engagement and learning in a large undergraduate course , 2013 .

[8]  Jeffrey R. Stowell,et al.  Harnessing Mobile Technology for Student Assessment , 2015 .

[9]  Eugene Judson,et al.  Learning from Past and Present: Electronic Response Systems in College Lecture Halls , 2002 .

[10]  A. D. Froese,et al.  Effects of Classroom Cell Phone Use on Expected and Actual Learning. , 2012 .

[11]  Jane E Caldwell,et al.  Clickers in the large classroom: current research and best-practice tips. , 2007, CBE life sciences education.

[12]  S. A. Becker,et al.  NMC Horizon Report: 2016 Higher Education Edition , 2015 .

[13]  Michelle K. Smith,et al.  Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance on In-Class Concept Questions , 2009, Science.

[14]  J. Stowell,et al.  Benefits of Electronic Audience Response Systems on Student Participation, Learning, and Emotion , 2007 .

[15]  Lei Bao,et al.  Testing a new voting machine question methodology , 2008 .