The Personal Response System (PRS) at the
University of Rochester
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy
Graduate Teaching Seminar, October 29, 2004
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
The Personal Response System
• The personal response system
was introduced in our large
lecture courses to increase the
involvement of the students in
these courses.
• Faculty can pose questions,
students submit their answers
using wireless transmitters, and
the data are collected using a set
of receivers connected to a
computer running the PRS
software which provides an
immediate analysis of the results.
Frank L. H. Wolfs
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Personal Response System
The components
• Each student uses a transmitter to
submit his/her answers.
• The answers can be
• Multiple-choice answers (up to 9
possible answers).
• Numerical answers (integers
only).
• Each student can indicate his/her
level of confidence by pressing
the H key (high confidence) or L
key
(low confidence) before
submitting their answer. The
default confident level is M
(medium confidence).
Frank L. H. Wolfs
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (Uncompress ed) dec ompres sor
are needed to s ee this pic ture.
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Personal Response System
The components
• The signals from the transmitters
are received by several receivers.
• The signals are infra-red signals
and require line of sight.
• The required processing time
limits the number of users to
about 40 per receiver (many
receivers can be daisy chained).
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
• Note: the use of RF technology
would increase the cost by an
order to magnitude.
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Personal Response System
How did we get started?
• The impact of PRS is well established, but cost has been the
main reason not to adopt it.
• In October 2003 I attended an AAPT meeting about the
introductory Physics course curriculum, and found out that
Prentice Hall offered the possibility of bundling the PRS
units with their text book (the cost per book increased by
$15). In addition, for every 40 text books sold, I would
receive one receiver.
• Since we already use books from Prentice Hall in our
introductory physics courses, I decided to order the bundled
version for Physics 121 for spring 2004, and Prof. Manly
decided to do the same thing for Physics 114.
• I received 8 receivers from the PRS company at no charge.
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Personal Response System
How did we get started?
• In January 2004 four receivers were installed in Hoyt hall
and connected to the built-in PC.
• The system was used successfully in both Physics 121 and
Physics 114 during the spring semester (more details about
the use in Physics 121 will be provided momentarily).
• The success in these courses resulted in the interest of other
faculty in other courses. But …..
• The cost of the PRS transmitter for students who did not buy it
bundled was significant ($35 - $40 per unit).
• The tie to Prentice Hall to reduce the cost of the transmitters is not a
good thing.
• Is there a market for used transmitters?
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Personal Response System
How do we continue?
• Planned usage of PRS for fall 2004 (700 students):
•
•
•
•
•
Astronomy 102
Biology 110
Physics 113
Physics 122
Physics 141
• I made an arrangement with the bookstore to have them
purchase PRS transmitters. The students can rent the
transmitters at a cost of $10 ($23 deposit is required).
• PRS company delivered 16 receivers which were installed in
Dewey, Hubbell, and B&L 106. Note: facilities completed
the installation during the second week of classes only after
I threatened to do it myself.
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Personal Response System
How do we continue?
• In September 2004 the institute of optics equipped one of
their class rooms with our spare receivers.
• Everything seems to be working fine. Minor issues related
to class files remain to be addressed.
• Documentation about the use of the PRS at the U of R can
be found at
http://teacher.pas.rochester.edu/PRSatUofR/PRSInfo.html
• Unfortunately, I could not get my class moved to a PRS
equipped class room for fall 2004.
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Personal Response System
Examples of its use in Physics 121.
• In Physics 121 I have used the PRS in many different ways:
• Daily quizzes at the start of lecture.
• Surveys.
• Discussion provoking concept tests.
• Attendance.
• The PRS software collects information about information
send by each student.
But, if you give credit for
participation and/or quizzes, student need to know for sure
their answer was accepted.
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Personal Response System
The questions
• In Physics 121 PRS was used for
quizzes, surveys, and concept
tests:
• Quizzes are used to ensure that
students read the material to be
covered in class before coming to
class.
• Concept tests are used to focus on
difficult concepts in the material
being discussed and provides
immediate feedback on the
misconceptions of the students.
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
• Rather than reinventing the
wheel, most of the quizzes and
concept tests were taken from
”Peer Instruction” by Eric Mazur.
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Personal Response System
Examples of its use in Physics 121.
• Quiz at the beginning of class
(based
on
the
reading
assignment):
• 3 - 4 multiple-choice questions.
• Part of the course grade.
• A group of people always leaves
right after the quiz. But …. I
know who they are!
• The occasional survey.
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Personal Response System.
• Sorry, you will have to work ………
• Let’s see if we can generate stimulating discussions ……
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Examples of PRS data
Peer Instruction: Correct = Answer 3
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Examples of PRS data
Peer Instruction: Correct = Answer 3
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Examples of PRS data
Peer Instruction: Correct = Answer 5
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Examples of PRS data
Peer Instruction: Correct = Answer 1
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Usage of attendance.
Effect of attendance on exam 1 grade.
Grade/Attendance Correlation (Lecture 6 - 11)
Results Midtem Exam # 1
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Attendance (# of Lectures)
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Usage of attendance.
Effect of attendance on pre-final course grade.
Physics 121 Attendance
90
Attendance (%)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
5
15
25
35
45
55
65
75
85
Current Grade (%)
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Usage of attendance.
Is it workshops or lectures?
• Attendance information can be
used for other studies.
Lecture Attendance
35
30
25
Number of Students
• For example, students who go to
workshops are also more likely to
go to lecture. Do they get better
grades because of the workshop
or because they come to lecture?
20
WS
NO WS
15
10
5
• There is a lot of information
available ……. A lot to learn
from it.
Frank L. H. Wolfs
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Lecture Attendance (%)
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
What did the students think?
• In general the in-class concept test were received well. The
in-class discussion changed the class atmosphere ….. but the
instructor must be willing to change focus on a moments
notice based on the feedback from the students.
• Quizzes were not well received, but this is always true,
independent of the method of delivery. …… But, forcing
student to come to class lowers your course opinion ratings!
• Main complaints came from students who purchased the
PRS transmitters separately (expensive).
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester
Summary
• The use of PRS has been successfully introduced at the U of
R.
• The simulating discussions that evolve as a result of the PRS
system are a result of the questions being used. These
discussions can take place in the recitation environment
without having to rely on PRS hardware/software.
• Anything that will increase the involvement of the students
in lecture/recitation/workshop will increase their impact.
Frank L. H. Wolfs
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester