1. Trying to Find the Effect of Clickers
……………… Autumn Sutherlin, Associate Professor of Biochemistry, Abilene Christian University

2. Trying to Find the Effect of Clickers
Autumn Sutherlin, Ph.D.
Abilene Christian University
April 13, 2011

3. Where We began Technology Available Immediate Feedback Active Learning
Does it improve learning?
Immediate Feedback
Active Learning
5 Studies

4. How do we measure improvement in learning?
Grades
Exams
Quizzes
Attitude changes

5. How do we know if the grades change?
Quasi-experimental design
2 sections of the same course
Same instructor
Switching treatment with replication
Section
Exam I
Exam II
Exam III
Exam IV
8 AM
Control
Treatment
9 AM

6. Control vs. Experimental
Only difference was the way students could respond
Control
Volunteer
In groups
Treatment
Clickers
“Everyone” had to answer
Immediate feedback

7. Comparing Groups Homogeneity of Variance Other data collected GPA ACT
Gender
Major

8. Advantages and Disadvantages to Switching Treatments
“Better” controls
Treat the classes the same
Disadvantages
Hard to look at long term effects
Hard to use pre- and post-tests

9. Attitude Changes
Pre and Post Survey
Matched questions
Reliability

10. Other Details
Procuring the technology
Permission

11. Initial Analysis T-test Correlation changes Are the means different?
t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Equal Variances
Treatment
Control
Mean
Variance
Observations
440
437
Pooled Variance
Hypothesized Mean Difference df
875
t Stat
P(T<=t) one-tail
t Critical one-tail
P(T<=t) two-tail
t Critical two-tail
T-test
Are the means different?
Are they significant?
P < 0.05
Correlation changes
ACT
GPA
Gender

12. Results In short No significant difference Positive feedback
Others studies showed a variety results
Question: Do changing methodologies cause an improvement?

13. Study 2: Changing Methodology
Same overall design
Different questions
No significant difference
Students responded that they learn more
Question: Are students studying less because they feel like they learned the material in class?

14. Study 3: Study Time Same overall design No significant difference
Study time survey
No significant difference
Continuing positive response from students
Question: Is it the teacher?

15. Studies 4 and 5: Different instructors
Same overall design
Different instructors
Results
Biology
No significant difference
Positive surveys
Organic Chemistry
Still Analyzing
Question: Do they make a bigger difference in larger classes or different populations?

16. Where we are now More analysis Re-examining surveys
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
MANOVA
Re-examining surveys
Testing other situations

17. No significant difference BUT
We are learning new things.
Each study leads to new questions.

18. Acknowledgements Collaborators: Support:
Gordon Sutherlin, Harding University Cannon-Clary College of Education
Joshua Brokaw, ACU Department of Biology
Kevin Stewart, Harding University Department of Chemistry
Support:
ACU Adam’s Center for Teaching and Learning
ACU Mobile Learning Initiative
Harding University Cannon-Clary College of Education

19. Abilene Christian University
Contact
Autumn Sutherlin, Ph.D.
Abilene Christian University