# [LON-CAPA-cvs] cvs: modules /gerd/roleclicker description.tex

www lon-capa-cvs@mail.lon-capa.org
Sat, 07 May 2005 14:59:12 -0000

www		Sat May  7 10:59:12 2005 EDT

Modified files:
/modules/gerd/roleclicker	description.tex
Log:
Next step: intro

Index: modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex
diff -u modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex:1.5 modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex:1.6
--- modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex:1.5	Fri May  6 14:57:33 2005
+++ modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex	Sat May  7 10:59:11 2005
@@ -31,11 +31,71 @@
\LARGE\sc A Comparative Study of\\ In-Class Student Response Mechanisms
\end{center}
\section{Goals and Objectives}\label{intro}
+Peer-instruction has been around for almost 15 years; the effect of such interventions has been well-researched, and the techniques have found broad adoption, particularly in science teaching.
+
+At the heart of peer-instruction are learner-learner discussions - as learners are explaining concepts to each other, they gain deeper
+understanding. This outcome is established through both per-question pre-/post-discussion response analyses,
+and through course-wide pre-/post-test scores on concept inventories, where the gain is consistently higher in courses using
+peer-instruction techniques.
+
+However, to our knowledge, formal research data on the discussion process itself is missing:
+while most instructors employing peer-instruction would walk around the classroom during discussion periods and eavesdrop on
+learners, we are not aware of a systematic study of these discussions. Are they as effective as they could be?
+
+\begin{itemize}
+\item what happens in groups where all partners agree?
+\item are post-discussion responses better simply because stronger students dominate the discussion?
+\item are disinterested students profiting from the discussions?
+\end{itemize}
+
+In small enrollment courses, these concerns can be addressed through intervention of the instructor, while in large enrollment
+courses, technological means might be needed to encourage and support active-engagement peer-discussions on a conceptual level for all
+learners.
+
+Currently, peer-instruction is frequently already mediated through technological means such as electronic student response systems
+("clickers"). These devices allow for personal responses and feedback during lectures in the form of multiple-choice answers, but
+offer no personal-level interactivity beyond simple acknowledgment of having received an answer. The technique currently has the
+following limitations:
+\begin{itemize}
+\item the software does not guide the process of group formation
+\item the question format is limited to single-response multiple-choice
+\item all students are receiving the same question
+\end{itemize}
+
+
+We aim to research the educational effects of the following technology-mediated extensions of peer-teaching practice:
+\begin{description}
+\item[Computer-Guided Group Formation]
+\item[Different Question Types]
+\item[Randomized Questions]
+\end{description}
+
+The proposed project has three phases:
+\begin{enumerate}
+\item Formal analysis of peer-discussion behavior using currently available techniques
+\item Introduction of technology-mediated extensions to the current techniques and analysis of their impact on discussion behavior
+\item Commoditizing and dissemination of successful techniques
+\end{enumerate}
+
+
+
+\subsection{Intellectual Merit}
+
+
+\section{Timeline}
+
+
+
+
+%
+% Copy-Paste Material
+%
+

\subsection{Overview}
-Peer-instruction has been around for almost 15 years; the effect of such interventions has been well-researched, and the techniques have found broad adoption, particularly in science teaching.

-Peer-teaching is often mediated through technological means such as electronic student response systems ("clickers"). These devices allow for personal responses and feedback during lectures in the form of multiple-choice answers, but offer no personal-level interactivity beyond simple acknowledgment of having received an answer. The technical limitations of the devices limit the types of questions that can be asked to those which fit that format.

Within the next five years, we can expect that every student will own or be able to afford a two-way interactive personal wireless communication device, such as an internet-enabled PDA, PocketPC, cellphone, or even more likely a combination of these. We believe that the current "clickers" are a transient technology, and that the next generation communication devices will open up new avenues for personal responses and peer-teaching, and be an enabling tool for new pedagogies. For example:
\begin{itemize}
@@ -984,7 +1044,10 @@

Gerd Kortemeyer is Co-PIs on the current NSF-CCLI-ASA grant Diagnostic Question Clusters: Development and Testing in Introductory Geology and Biology (\#0243126, \\$491,606, September 15, 2003 through August 31, 2006) to develop diagnostic questions for college students in both biology and geology. In the ASA project, a pool of peer-reviewed, diagnostic question clusters to assess students' understanding will be developed, including tools for analysis, peer review, and online publication of these question clusters.

+%
% references
+%
+
\newpage

\setcounter{page}{0}\pagenumbering{roman}