Using clickers in nonmajors- and majors-level biology courses: student opinion, learning, and long-term retention of course material.

Student response systems (clickers) are viewed positively by students and instructors in numerous studies. Evidence that clickers enhance student learning is more variable. After becoming comfortable with the technology during fall 2005-spring 2006, we compared student opinion and student achievement in two different courses taught with clickers in fall 2006. One course was an introductory biology class for nonmajors, and the other course was a 200 level genetics class for biology majors. Students in both courses had positive opinions of the clickers, although we observed some interesting differences between the two groups of students. Student performance was significantly higher on exam questions covering material taught with clickers, although the differences were more dramatic for the nonmajors biology course than the genetics course. We also compared retention of information 4 mo after the course ended, and we saw increased retention of material taught with clickers for the nonmajors course, but not for the genetics course. We discuss the implications of our results in light of differences in how the two courses were taught and differences between science majors and nonmajors.

[1]  Andrew Gavrin,et al.  Just-in-Time Teaching , 2011 .

[2]  William C. Bessler,et al.  The use of an electronic response system in teaching biology , 1971 .

[3]  G. Semb,et al.  Knowledge Taught in School: What Is Remembered? , 1994 .

[4]  J. Postlethwait,et al.  Workshop Biology: Demonstrating the Effectiveness of Active Learning in an Introductory Biology Course , 2002 .

[5]  S P Rao,et al.  Peer instruction improves performance on quizzes. , 2000, Advances in physiology education.

[6]  Marie A. Abate,et al.  An Interactive Response System to Promote Active Learning in the Doctor of Pharmacy Curriculum , 2004, American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education.

[7]  Ulrich Schiefele,et al.  Motivation and learning — The role of interest in construction of representation of text and long-term retention: Inter- and intraindividual analyses , 2005 .

[8]  Deborah Allen,et al.  Approaches to biology teaching and learning: understanding the wrong answers--teaching toward conceptual change. , 2005, Cell biology education.

[9]  The Impact of Cooperative Quizzes in a Large Introductory Astronomy Course for Non-Science Majors. , 2004 .

[10]  Erica Suchman,et al.  Evaluating the impact of a classroom response system in a microbiology course. , 2006, Microbiology education.

[11]  Andrew Gavrin,et al.  Just-In-Time Teaching: Blending Active Learning with Web Technology , 1999 .

[12]  Chen-Lin C. Kulik,et al.  Timing of Feedback and Verbal Learning , 1988 .

[13]  J. Poulis,et al.  Physics lecturing with audience paced feedback , 1998 .

[14]  Michèle Shuster,et al.  Assessment of the effects of student response systems on student learning and attitudes over a broad range of biology courses. , 2007, CBE life sciences education.

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

[16]  S. DiCarlo,et al.  Student retention of course content is improved by collaborative-group testing. , 2003, Advances in physiology education.

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

[18]  E. Mazur,et al.  Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results , 2001 .

[19]  Cynthia B Paschal,et al.  Formative assessment in physiology teaching using a wireless classroom communication system. , 2002, Advances in physiology education.

[20]  E. Mazur,et al.  Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual , 1999 .

[21]  D. Nicol,et al.  Peer Instruction versus Class-wide Discussion in Large Classes: A comparison of two interaction methods in the wired classroom , 2003 .

[22]  Paulette Robinson,et al.  Introductory biology courses: a framework to support active learning in large enrollment introductory science courses. , 2005, Cell biology education.

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

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

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

[26]  Diane M. Bunce,et al.  Comparing the Effectiveness on Student Achievement of a Student Response System versus Online WebCT Quizzes , 2006 .

[27]  William B Wood,et al.  Teaching more by lecturing less. , 2005, Cell biology education.

[28]  Gregor Novak,et al.  Just-in-Time Teaching in biology: creating an active learner classroom using the Internet. , 2004, Cell biology education.

[29]  B. Bloom,et al.  Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain , 1966 .

[30]  David E. Meltzer,et al.  Transforming the lecture-hall environment: The fully interactive physics lecture , 2002 .

[31]  Marion K. Slack,et al.  Administrative Career Planning: A Ten-Year Update of the Pharmacy Deanship , 2004, American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education.

[32]  Maryfran Barber,et al.  Clicker evolution: seeking intelligent design. , 2007, CBE life sciences education.

[33]  John T. Guthrie,et al.  Feedback and sentence learning , 1971 .

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

[35]  Douglas Duncan,et al.  Clickers in the Classroom: How to Enhance Science Teaching Using Classroom Response Systems , 2004 .

[36]  B. Bloom.  Taxonomy of educational objectives , 1956 .

[37]  Joseph Casanova,et al.  An Instructional Experiment in Organic Chemistry, The Use of a Student Response System. , 1971 .