Grant Gardner S. Dutta, K. Mulcahy, V. Tabakova, D. Majewski

1. Faculty Use of Personal Response Devices to Promote Active Learning in University Learning Environments: A Comparative Study Grant Gardner S. Dutta, K. Mulcahy, V. Tabakova, D. Majewski MTSU STEM Education Research Conference Murfreesboro, TN Feb 7, 2014 Murfreesboro, TN

2. Active Learning Research • Student-centered active learning is the “central dogma” of undergraduate STEM education • Moving beyond the what and into the why and how • Clicker technologies • Flipped classrooms

3. Background • College STAR: Supporting Transition, Access, and Retention: A University of North Carolina System project supporting students with learning differences East Carolina UNC-Greensboro Appalachian St.

4. Background • Project Goals • Become campuses that are more welcoming of students with learning differences • Develop focused and direct student support models for students with learning differences • Develop wide reaching instructional support with Universal Design for Learning • Maintain collaboration and dialogue with institutional partners

5. Universal Design for Learning Affective Networks: The “why” of learning. Strategic Networks: The “how” of learning. Recognition Networks: The “what” of learning. How we gather facts and categorize what we see, hear, and read. How we get engaged and stay motivated. How we organize and express our ideas.

6. Universal Design for Learning Affective Networks: The “why” of learning. Strategic Networks: The “how” of learning. Recognition Networks: The “what” of learning. Multiple Means of Representation Multiple Means of Engagement Multiple Means of Action & Expression

7. Universal Design for Learning • Multiple Means of Representation • Options for perception, language/symbols, comprehension • Multiple Means of Expression • Options physical action, expressive skills/fluency, executive functions • Multiple Means of Engagement • Options for recruiting interest, sustaining effort, self regulation

8. Universal Design for Learning

11. Pirate CREWS • Pirate CREWS – Faculty Learning Community • Subodh Dutta, Teaching Assistant Professor, Chemistry • Karen Mulcahy, Teaching Assistant Professor, Geography • Vera Tabakova, Teaching Associate Professor, Economics • Diane Majewski, CREW Coordinator Anatomy of a clicker question: http://www.collegestar.org/modules/crs/description

12. If you discovered a single-celled organism and it possessed a nucleus, what Domain of life would you classify it in? • Bacteria • Archaea • Eukarya

13. Engagement/Assistive Technology

14. Universal Design for Learning • Multiple Means of Representation • VAK interactions with content • Multiple Means of Expression • Variety of formats for discussion/conclusions • Multiple Means of Engagement • Active participation and accountability

15. Research Background • Increase in content knowledge (long- and short-term) • (Crossgrove & Curran, 2008; Mayer et al., 2009; Cotner et al., 2008) • Increase in cognitive/affective engagement • (Mayer et al., 2009; Cotner et al., 2008) • Positive attitudes towards clickers • (Crossgrove & Curran, 2008) • Increase/facilitation of critical reasoning • (Knight et al., 2013)

16. Research Questions • Mapping the landscape of clicker use at ECU • Is there a specific ‘type’ of undergraduate instructor who utilizes clicker technology? • Is there a specific field in higher education that is more likely to utilize clicker technology? • How are undergraduate instructors using clicker technology? • Why are undergraduate instructors using, not using or discontinuing use of clicker technology?

17. Sample Demographics Clicker-use not correlated to age (rho = .101, p = .231) or gender (rho = .096, p = .549)

18. Instructional Descriptors Clicker-use not correlated to experience (rho = -.049, p = .549) or faculty designation (rho = -.112, p = .158)

19. Conclusions • Is there a specific ‘type’ of undergraduate instructor who utilized clicker technology? • No. There is not a specific ‘type’ of instructor more likely to adopt innovative clicker technologies.

20. Clicker Use by Faculty Content Clusters Social Sciences Humanities Basic Sciences Pre-Health Medicine

21. Conclusions • Is there a specific field in higher education that is more likely to utilize clicker technology? • STEM fields are disproportionately adopting clicker technology. • Social science fields have a large number of individuals who have discontinued use.

22. How are Clickers Used?

23. Conclusions • How are undergraduate instructors using clicker technology? • Undergraduate instructors often adopt clickers for the right reason, but there is still work to be done on appropriate use of these technologies in the classroom as well as assisting instructors in the why of their use.

24. Why Not Use Clickers?

25. Research Questions • Why are undergraduate instructors not using or discontinuing use of clicker technology? • Convincing faculty of the efficacy and theoretical application of these technologies is difficult.

26. Additional Data • Interviews aligned with research questions • Faculty perceptions and knowledge of clicker alignment with UDL principles

27. Broader Implications

28. Thank You

29. References • Bruff, D. (2009). Teaching with classroom response systems. (1st edition). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. • Cotner, S. H., Fall, B. A., Wick, S. M., Walker, J. D., & Baepler, P. M. (2008). Rapid feedback assessment methods: Can we improve engagement and preparation for exams in large enrollment courses. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 437-443. • Crossgrove, K., & Curran, K. L. (2008). Using clickers in nonmajors- and majors-level biology courses: Student opinion, learning, and long-term rentention of course material. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 7, 146-154. • Freeman, et al., (2007). Factors affecting educational innovations with in-class electronic response systems. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(2), 149-170. • Knight, J. K., Wise, S. B., & Southard, K. M. (2013). Understanding clicker discussions: Student reasoning and the impact of instructional cues. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12, 645-654. • Mayer, R. E., Stull, A., DeLeeuw, K., Almeroth, K., Bimber, B., Chun, D., Bulger, M., Campbell, J., Knight, A., & Zhang, H. (2009). Clickers in college classrooms: Fostering learning with questioning methods in large lecture classes: Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 51-57.