Using classroom communication systems to support interaction and discussion in large class settings

Teaching methods that promote interaction and discussion are known to benefit learning. However, large class sizes make it difficult to implement these methods. Research from the United States has shown that an electronic classroom communication system (CCS) can be used to support active discussion in large lecture classes. This investigation extends that research and it evaluates students' and teachers' experiences of CCS technology in the context of two different modes of discussion — peer-group and classwide discussion. With CCS technology, students' answers to multiple-choice concept tests are collated in real time with the class results fed back as a histogram. This information serves as the trigger for each mode of discussion. This paper explores the unique contribution of CCS technology, the relative strengths of peer- and class-wide discussion and some practical implementation issues. DOI:10.1080/0968776030110305

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

[2]  Leonard Springer,et al.  Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis , 1997 .

[3]  R. Hake.  Interactive-engagement vs Traditional Methods in Mechanics Instruction* , 1998 .

[4]  S. Brookfield.  Becoming a critically reflective teacher , 1995 .

[5]  Ibrahim A. Halloun,et al.  The initial knowledge state of college physics students , 1985 .

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

[7]  Karl A. Smith,et al.  Strategies for energizing large classes : from small groups to learning communities , 2000 .

[8]  L. West,et al.  Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change , 1985 .

[9]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. , 1957 .

[10]  R. Glaser.  The Reemergence of Learning Theory within Instructional Research. , 1990 .

[11]  S. Brookfield.  Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. , 1995 .

[12]  D. Bligh.  What's the Use of Lectures? , 1971 .

[13]  L. McDermott.  Research on conceptual understanding in mechanics , 1984 .

[14]  Karen Panetta,et al.  A Collaborative Learning Methodology for Enhanced Comprehension using TEAMThink , 2002 .

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

[16]  Annemarie S. Palincsar,et al.  Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. , 1998, Annual review of psychology.

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

[18]  A. Lockey,et al.  Teaching and learning , 2001, Emergency medicine journal : EMJ.

[19]  D. Krathwohl.  Taxonomy of educational objectives: The Classification of educational goals. Handbook II: Affective domain / David R. Krathwohl, Benyamin S. Bloom, Bertram B. Masia , 1964 .

[20]  M. Brumby,et al.  Misconceptions about the concept of natural selection by medical biology students , 1984 .

[21]  B R Parry,et al.  Misconceptions about the colonic J-pouch , 1999, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[22]  E. Cohen.  Restructuring the Classroom: Conditions for Productive Small Groups , 1994 .

[23]  Robert J. Dufresne,et al.  Classtalk: A classroom communication system for active learning , 1996, J. Comput. High. Educ..