Effect of personal response systems on student perception and academic performance in courses in a health sciences curriculum.

To increase student engagement, active participation, and performance, personal response systems (clickers) were incorporated into six lecture-based sections of four required courses within the Health Sciences Department major curriculum: freshman-level Anatomy and Physiology I and II, junior-level Exercise Physiology, and senior-level Human Pathophysiology. Clickers were used to gather anonymous student responses to questions posed within the class period after individual thought and peer discussion. Students (n = 293, 88% of students completing the courses) completed a perceptual survey on clicker effectiveness inserted into the Student Assessment of Learning Gains online instrument. Across courses and years, students uniformly rated several dimensions of clicker use as providing good to great gain in engaging them in active learning, increasing participation and involvement during class, maintaining attention, applying material immediately, providing feedback concerning their understanding, and offering an anonymous format for participation. Within these four sections, quiz grades were compared between clicker and nonclicker years. Significant increases in pre- and posttest scores were seen in Exercise Physiology in clicker years and on some, but not all material, in Anatomy and Physiology I and II based on content quizzes. Human Pathophysiology results were unexpected, with higher quiz scores in the nonclicker year. The results support the hypothesis of increased engagement with clicker use. The hypothesis of increased student performance was not consistently supported. Increased performance was seen in Exercise Physiology. In Anatomy and Physiology I and II, performance improved on some content quizzes. In Human Pathophysiology, performance did not improve with clickers.

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

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

[3]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. , 1999 .

[4]  Hannah Sevian,et al.  Clickers Promote Learning in All Kinds of Classes--Small and Large, Graduate and Undergraduate, Lecture and Lab , 2011 .

[5]  L Halloran,et al.  A comparison of two methods of teaching. Computer managed instruction and keypad questions versus traditional classroom lecture. , 1995, Computers in nursing.

[6]  M. Milner-Bolotin,et al.  Clickers beyond the First-Year Science Classroom. , 2010 .

[7]  K. Fitzpatrick,et al.  A multiyear approach to student-driven investigations in exercise physiology. , 2009, Advances in physiology education.

[8]  Marye Anne Fox,et al.  Evaluating and improving undergraduate teaching : in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics , 2003 .

[9]  Derek O. Bruff,et al.  Teaching with Classroom Response Systems: Creating Active Learning Environments , 2009 .

[10]  Bjørn H. K. Wolter,et al.  Students' Perceptions of Using Personal Response Systems ("Clickers") with Cases in Science , 2011 .

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

[12]  Ava G Porter,et al.  Evaluating the effect of interactive audience response systems on the perceived learning experience of nursing students. , 2010, The Journal of nursing education.

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

[14]  Arianne M. Dantas,et al.  Promoting student-centered active learning in lectures with a personal response system. , 2009, Advances in physiology education.

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

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

[17]  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 .

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

[19]  Kathleen Koenig,et al.  Building Acceptance for Pedagogical Reform through Wide-Scale Implementation of Clickers. , 2010 .

[20]  Kirsten Crossgrove,et al.  Using clickers in nonmajors- and majors-level biology courses: student opinion, learning, and long-term retention of course material. , 2008, CBE life sciences education.

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

[22]  Mary Peat,et al.  Is formative assessment an effective way to improve learning? A Symposium at Experimental Biology 2008. , 2008, Advances in physiology education.

[23]  R. Schülke.  [Anatomy and physiology]. , 1968, Zahntechnik; Zeitschrift fur Theorie und Praxis der wissenschaftlichen Zahntechnik.

[24]  S. Skinner.  On Clickers, Questions, and Learning , 2009 .

[25]  Loretta L. Jones,et al.  A Review of Literature Reports of Clickers Applicable to College Chemistry Classrooms , 2008 .

[26]  Jeremy Roschelle,et al.  Classroom Response and Communication Systems: Research Review and Theory , 2004 .

[27]  Marc W. Patry,et al.  Clickers in Large Classes: From Student Perceptions towards an Understanding of Best Practices. , 2009 .