Preparing the right questions for clicker use is just as important as learning how to operate the technology.  By writing effective questions, instructors will ensure a closer connection between clicker questions and course learning objectives (Beatty, Gerace, Leonard, & Dufresne, 2006).

Different questions elicit different responses and require different levels of cognitive engagement. Knowledge-level questions ask for simple recall of facts and data without assessing them critically, whereas analysis, synthesis and evaluation questions require critical thinking and judgment. When faculty are simply assessing students’ basic understanding, a knowledge-level question may be appropriate. But when faculty wish to engage students in thinking critically about course content, a knowledge-level question may fall short of reaching the goal. For example, Mazur (1993) found that students in his physics class could manipulate equations but had limited understanding of the principles behind the math. As a result, he focused on concept questions that asked students to interpret data or explain equations rather than recall facts or do calculations.

In addition to writing questions that measure the given learning objectives, faculty may need to learn techniques for writing effective multiple-choice questions. Practical suggestions from Wit (2003), Beekes (2006), and Draper and Brown (2002) for writing effective questions include the following:

1. Distinguish between students’ knowledge of jargon and their understanding of concepts;
2. Create wrong answers (distracters) that seem very logical or plausible to students to prevent them from easily eliminating wrong answers;
3. Limit the number of answer choices to five or less; and
4. Consider including “I don’t know” as an answer choice to prevent students from guessing.

Over the past twenty years, studies examining the usefulness and weakness of clickers in various instructional settings have revealed both promise and problems. In Fall 2006 and Winter 2007, surveys were conducted of students taking Literature, Science, and the Arts (LS&A) classes that used clickers. The surveys asked students whether clickers were helpful for improving teaching and student learning. The findings were consistent with those from studies in institutions across the country, revealing both strengths and drawbacks of this technology.

Positive feedback

The research on student and faculty attitudes indicates that most students enjoy using clickers in class because it makes lecture more fun and interesting (Beekes, 2006; Conoley, Moore, Croom, & Flowers, 2006; Duncan, 2006; Stuart, Brown, & Draper, 2004). Students also welcome the use of clickers to check their prior knowledge or understanding of the content during lecture (Abrahamson, 1999; Cue, 1998; Dufresne, Gerace, Leonard, Mestre, & Wenk, 1996; Shapiro, 1997). Students reported that they were able to improve their own understanding of the content and better understand the instructor’s expectations (Tomorrow’s professor, 2006). Clicker questions help students learn because they are more likely to respond to questions and participate in the class discussion when clickers are used (Greer & Heaney, 2004; Hoffman & Goodwin, 2006). Clickers have also been shown to help facilitate and enhance learning (Conoley et al.; Uhari, Renko, & Soini, 2003).

Feedback from students at the University of Michigan about using clickers in teaching shows similar trends. Surveys of large LS&A classes that used clickers in the Fall 2006 and Winter 2007 semesters showed that most students (54%) liked using clickers in class.  Over 55% of students thought more about the material during lecture when clicker questions were asked (Zhu et al., 2006, 2007). Similarly, most students (57%) either strongly agreed or agreed that clicker questions helped them clarify whether they comprehended the lecture material (Zhu et al., 2006). Furthermore, about half of the students surveyed either strongly agreed or agreed that the use of clickers forced them to come prepared for class by doing the assigned readings and also made them pay more attention in lecture (Zhu et al., 2006). While clicker use improved student class attendance in large lecture courses, over 68% of students strongly agreed or agreed that clickers are better used for getting them to interact and receive feedback on their understanding (Zhu et al., 2007).

Negative attitude

Amidst all the positive feedback, a few negative comments about clickers have been reported.  One of the most common complaints is the additional cost of purchasing a clicker (Greer & Heaney, 2004; Zhu et al., 2006, 2007). For both students and faculty, encountering technical difficulties during class engenders some negative attitudes toward the use of clickers (Hall, Collier, Thomas, & Hilgers, 2005; Silliman & McWilliams, 2004; Zhu et al., 2006, 2007).  In some cases, students disliked using clickers in class because they did not add much to the classroom experience and ruined the flow of a lecture (Knight & Wood, 2005; Zhu et al., 2006, 2007).  In addition, U-M surveys showed that students do not like very basic clicker questions that only record their answers and take attendance.  Inconsistent use of clickers and the absence of faculty feedback on student responses after a clicker question were also viewed unfavorably.

CRLT Occasional Paper 22: Teaching with Clickers

Classroom Response System ("Clickers") Bibliography, Vanderbilt University

Transforming Student Learning with Classroom Communication Systems, Educase Research Bulletin

iClicker Support from LSA Technology Services