Clicker technology

[philtubman]

I read this post by Stephen Brown, reflecting on the ways a single technology can be used in multiple quadrants of the Kolb experiential learning cycle.

“Well, clickers could be used by learners to record their emotions (click every time you feel angry/sad/amused/etc. while listening to/watching/reading/doing XYZ), so they are seemingly compatible with the diverger style, but if the results were collected together and displayed and the class were asked to reflect on them then wouldn’t that support the assimilator style? ”

This is not the way our ‘clickers’ work. They allow the teacher to send a question, then the student to give an answer. After this moderated interaction, the clickers are useless until the teacher asks another question.

The ‘technology’ of wireless transmission from a handset to a PC is ‘open’ and SHOULD allow the activities you suggest above, but this goes into the bag of closed source systems dictating pedagogy imho.
Comments?

[Stephen Brown]

Hi Phil, yes I see your point, if you take the clicker package as delivered off the shelf, including the way its been programmed. On the other hand if you can modify it a bit so that its not completely managed by the teacher  perhaps that opens up some interesting possibilities for more learner-centred activity.  i wonder if anyone has any experience of modifying the clicker  tool in this way, and how easy it is to do?

[MariusJugariu]

Hi Stephen/Phil,

I think it depends on the subject being taught. For example if you do a psychology course, you can pick a hot potato – the not very old case of Joseph Fritzl from Austria – and ask some tricky questions that would generate debates and arguments and perhaps that many would get the answer wrong, etc. This would involve their emotions, feelings, and it would be a different way of collection that info. But in a maths/statistics course I am not sure of how that would work.

[James Kerr]

Stephen and Phil,

That’s the rub, isn’t it?  When we purchase Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS) tech, be it hardware and/or software, it’s usually closed system.  These COTS systems do not usually lend themselves to modification.  One would either have to buy into an open system (hardware and software) or completely DIY, from the clickers to the programming.  Alas, this is either beyond many’s abilities or more investment in time and energy than desired or available.  Open is great, but to modify requires a completely different level of commitment, set of tools, and set of skills.

Jim

[Author]

Posts