CEC FIPP Activity Report
Name Ruth Roach
Date September 21, 2010
Department English
FIPP Partner Chris Richardson
Class title & section # English B, Section 9635
Name of Activity/Strategy Ongoing Testing (Clickers)
Category: (Please select only one.) (Reminder: You will submit one report from each of
the categories.)
Classroom Activity
Classroom Environment
Classroom Expectations
Feedback & Evaluation
Homework & Out-of-Classroom Learning Experiences
Briefly describe the activity/strategy, providing enough detail so that a colleague can
replicate the activity/strategy.
1. Introduction Fortunately, a Title-V mini-grant this past summer permitted the
purchase of two sets of clickers for the Compton campus, and it was thought to
experiment with using the teaching and learning pedagogy of On-course
combined with the pedagogy of appropriate clickers use--and appropriate
educational pedagogy in general--in a basic skills English classroom.
2. Set-up & Supplies Set-up requires (1) planning appropriate questions and
placing them on PowerPoint slides with enumerated answers and (2) bringing
and plugging in the equipment: a laptop, a projector, and the clicker set with a
flashdrive device that is inserted into the laptop.
3. Directions Students were given preparation for a quiz on verbs through several
clicker questions that asked them to identify correct or incorrect verb usage or
formation. For instance, they were asked whether or not it is acceptable to say,
"I seen a movie this weekend," and to evaluate "the trees was swaying in the
wind" versus "the trees were swaying in the wind." Another question was
directed at the eliminating incorrect verb formations like "had came" where
"had come" is the correct form of this irregular verb. Once the question was
posed on a PowerPoint slide projected onto the chalkboard, students had the
predetermined number of seconds (20 seconds) to click the device in their
hands with whatever they thought was the correct answer. Automatically, the
program tabulates the number of responses for the answers students gave and
projects them on the board, which allows me to assess if there are areas for
further review, and a quick focused discussion of correct and incorrect
responses follows before the next question is posed.
What worked well? Students discovered which questions they answered correctly and,
therefore, knew well, in preparation for the quiz. At the same time, when I asked if they
were now ready for the quiz, several said, "no," and I then was able to redirect their new
self-awareness in a positive direction to the study of the pertinent flashcards on verb
tenses. Students were told to review these flashcards in pairs, which renewed their
group interaction and commaraderie--interdependence in this "high stakes" task of quiz
preparation where they had each other to perform the preparatory flashcard quizzing.
What would you change? I usually like to have a pre-test and post-test, but have been
running a bit behind schedule due to the insertion of the On-course activities on day
one, ironically (time well-spent, nonetheless). We caught-up that day, but scores on the
"official" quiz that followed on the same day showed a majority "got it," but more would
have perhaps benefited with the typical combination of pre-test and post-test and/or
questioning throughout the lecture, which would typically be done.
Would you use the activity/strategy again? Why or why not? Yes, I would definitely use the
strategy for feedback and informal or formative evaluation. One reason is that students
were surveyed about (1) their liking of clickers and (2) whether or not clickers helped
them learn, in the summer grant-sponsored pilot, with high favorability for both (74% on
first question and 97% on second question). Additionally, the students were surveyed
that day and also responded favorably to clickers in class. Requested additional clicker
sets on campus for faculty use are awaited.
Please describe any student learning and/or changes that you observed after the
implementation of the activity/strategy. As mentioned earlier, I liked that if students were
not prepared, they were aware of it and studied with focused attention on relevant
material to improve their skills. In my view, this is empowering them with the information
about their individual skill level--and in a non-intimidating way, as a student in the
summer pilot commented. Furthermore, it is empowering them in their own education,
once they have that information about their skill level, to take the next steps necessary
to improve those skills and seek answers in the right places within class materials,
including also using each other for stimulation and as a resource.