Using an Audience Response System (ARS) a.k.a. “clicker” to do attention research

Advisor: David Brooks This study makes an effort to examine whether a student's attention or engagement is increased by possession of an Audience Response System (ARS, or clicker). This experiment tested a difference in performance between students who possessed an ARS and those who did not. The experiment was conducted at a small state college in the Midwest where small class size is typical. Approximately half the students in each tested classroom were handed a clicker and then the entire class was taught a topic. After the topic presentation, students possessing clickers were assessed using a question based on that topic. The assessment was discussed. Further instruction was given on that topic. Then a second question was asked. Just before responding, however, students were surprised by an instruction to hand their clickers to students who were not expecting to be assessed. Barnard's exact test was used to analyze the 2x2 data from eight classes with α = 0.05. The results indicated there were no significant differences between the two groups of students. The last-minute change in performance expectation did not appear to affect the assessment outcomes. This study utilized ARSs to collect data for the experiment. Advantages and disadvantages of using ARS devices to collect data were examined. ARSs were found to be effective in collecting research data. iii Dedication To my wife, Teena, and my children, Kasey, Nick, and Sam. Always pursue your goals with perseverance and huge amounts of effort. If you've learned anything from me may it be you have to work hard, sometimes fail, then get up and keep going to get where you want to be in life. On the journey, remember to be happy and stay in the present moment. iv Acknowledgments I want to thank my mentors in this pursuit – David Brooks and Lois Veath. Without someone " gently " encouraging me I know I wouldn't have made it – you have given me hope when doubt was threatening my progress and have truly made a positive difference in my life. To my Mother, Father, and Family-I want to thank you for helping shape who I am today. Without your contributions I wouldn't have gotten this far – your encouragement and faith in me has always been appreciated.

[1]  Meghan D. McAuliffe,et al.  Efficacy of Personal Response Systems (“Clickers”) in Large, Introductory Psychology Classes , 2008 .

[2]  Lisa Greer,et al.  Real-Time Analysis of Student Comprehension: An Assessment of Electronic Student Response Technology in an Introductory Earth Science Course , 2004 .

[3]  Charles R. Graham,et al.  Empowering or compelling reluctant participators using audience response systems , 2007 .

[4]  Robin H. Kay,et al.  Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: A review of the literature , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[5]  G. Upton.  A Comparison of Alternative Tests for the 2 Times 2 Comparative Trial , 1982 .

[6]  H. Russell Bernard,et al.  Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches , 2000 .

[7]  Jeremy Roschelle,et al.  Theorizing the Transformed Classroom: Sociocultural Interpretation of the Effects of Audience Response Systems in Higher Education , 2006 .

[8]  Michael E. Lantz,et al.  The use of 'Clickers' in the classroom: Teaching innovation or merely an amusing novelty? , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[9]  Daiyo Sawada,et al.  Audience Response Systems: Insipid Contrivances or Inspiring Tools? , 2006 .

[10]  R. Burnstein,et al.  Using Wireless Keypads in Lecture Classes , 2001 .

[11]  R. Hake.  Lessons from the Physics Education Reform Effort , 2001, physics/0106087.

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

[13]  Leon M. Lederman,et al.  The Use and Evolution of an Audience Response System , 2006 .

[14]  R. Hake.  Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses , 1998 .

[15]  Louis Abrahamson.  A Brief History of Networked Classrooms: Effects, Cases, Pedagogy, and Implications , 2006 .

[16]  Nathaniel Lasry.  Clickers or Flashcards: Is There Really a Difference? , 2008 .

[17]  Klaus Woelk.  Optimizing the Use of Personal Response Devices (Clickers) in Large-Enrollment Introductory Courses , 2008 .

[18]  N. Lasry,et al.  Clickers or Flashcards : Is There Really a Difference ? , 2008 .

[19]  N. Cue,et al.  A Universal Learning Tool for Classrooms , 1998 .

[20]  E. Wit.  Who wants to be… The use of a personal response system in statistics teaching , 2003 .

[21]  Eric Mazur,et al.  Peer Instruction: A User's Manual , 1996 .

[22]  Jill A. Marshall,et al.  Classroom Response Systems: A Review of the Literature , 2006 .

[23]  Scott Freeman,et al.  Prescribed active learning increases performance in introductory biology , 2007, CBE life sciences education.

[24]  V. Simpson,et al.  Using Electronic Voting Systems in Lectures , 2005 .

[25]  Michele H. Jackson,et al.  The learning environment in clicker classrooms: student processes of learning and involvement in large university‐level courses using student response systems , 2007 .

[26]  David S. Kreiner,et al.  Incorporating Active Learning with PowerPoint-Based Lectures Using Content-Based Questions , 2009 .

[27]  Robert S. Feldman,et al.  Promoting Active Learning Using Individual Response Technology in Large Introductory Psychology Classes , 2007 .

[28]  Jeff Cain,et al.  A primer on audience response systems: current applications and future considerations. , 2008, American journal of pharmaceutical education.