Tag: iclicker2

Getting the most out of peer instruction

Peer instruction is a powerful, evidence-based instructional strategy that supports active learning in all sizes of classes. Typically in peer instruction, every 15-20 minutes,

  1. the instructor poses a conceptually challenging, multiple choice question
  2. students think about the question on their own and vote for one of the choices using some kind of audience response tool (“clickers”)
  3. students turn to their neighbors and discuss the question and their answers
  4. students may vote a second time, depending on the nature of the question
  5. the instructor leads a class-wide discussion where students share their thinking, finishing with
  6. the instructor models expert-like thinking and confirms why the right answers are right and the wrong answers are wrong

This can take anywhere from 2 to 10 or more minutes, depending on the question, the answers, and the richness of the discussion.

There are many pieces needed to make peer instruction effective, including

  • creating time in class (often by using a “flipped” model for the class),
  • building peer instruction into the syllabus and grading scheme,
  • writing good questions, and
  • selecting and using some education technology.

Even with all those pieces in place, there is still plenty of opportunity for an instructor to “short-circuit” the activity  and lose whatever potential for learning may have existed by how they run peer instruction in class. What follows is not The Right Way To Run Peer Instruction With Clickers ™ but rather, some recommendations to reduce the risk of messing it up.

Credit where it’s due

My colleague, Beth Simon, and I came up with this particular “choreography” or “protocol” with input from

To click or not to click?

(Image: Peter Newbury CC-BY)I’m going to describe peer instruction using i>clickers but you can adapt these recommendations to other #edtech options if those alternative

  • allow each student to individually commit to an answer
  • allow the instructor to see the results of the votes WITHOUT the students seeing them

The i>clicker system does these. Other electronic polling systems like PollEverywhere, TurningPoint, REEF, and Learning Catalytics do these, too, though it might take some clever manipulation of your laptop and the display to prevent the results of the votes from automatically being projected. I have many colleagues who can pull this off using colored ABCD voting cards.

Peer instruction for 2 types of questions

I want to distinguish between 2 types of peer instruction questions because they have slightly different versions of the choreography or protocol I’m sharing here.

Questions where there is a correct answer

In these types of questions, more often found in STEM classes, have a choice that’s right and choices that are wrong. With this type of question, the instructor expects there will be an individual vote, peer discussions with neighbors, a second vote, and then the class-wide discussion.

This peer instruction question has one correct answer. The others are incorrect for known reasons. Question adapted from one by Derek Bruff (Vanderbilt University).
This peer instruction question has one right answer. The others are wrong for known reasons. Question by Derek Bruff (Vanderbilt University).

Questions for generating discussion

What’s special about these types of questions is that every choice is correct (well, there might be one choice that’s deliberately wrong) and the goal is the get the students to commit to one of the choices and talk about it with their neighbors. Each choice is a thought prompt or conversation starter. The instructor only expects one vote here because the peer discussion is to tell your neighbors about the evidence for your choice and then listen to their thoughts about a different choice, not to convince them your choice is right. They’re ALL right!

This peer instruction question has one correct answer. The others are incorrect for known reasons. Question adapted from one by Derek Bruff (Vanderbilt University).
All the answers are right here – the goal is to get the students to commit to one and share the evidence for that  statement with their peers. Question by Heidi Keller-Lapp (UC San Diego).

Questions where there is a correct answer

Here’s the full protocol for running this kind of question. I encourage instructors to print out the protocol, bring it to class, and put it somewhere visible like the podium or desk. There are a lot of steps, in addition to all the other parts of the lesson, so give yourself a break and keep this “cheat sheet” handy (especially on the first few days of class where everything is harder.) I go into detail about each step below.

Recommended peer instruction protocol for questions with a correct answer or answers.
Click to download a 2-page PDF with both protocols.

 


PI_correctanswer_1You work your way through your lesson and reach the peer instruction question. Say something that tells the students it’s time for peer instruction like, “And now, I’ve got a question for you…” or “Okay, let’s see what you think about this…” The slide with the question doesn’t need to be titled “Clicker Question”. The students know it’s time for peer instruction because they see the multiple choices on the slide. Why not give it a useful title related to the concept?


PI_correctanswer_2With the question on the screen, 2 things. First, do not read the question aloud:

  • the students don’t know if they’re supposed to listen to you or read the question – they can’t do both (especially students for whom English is a foreign language). Mary Jo Madda wrote a nice piece about cognitive load, Why Your Students Forgot Everything On Your PowerPoint Slides.

  • you might add extra information to the question or the choices that confuses the students
  • you might give away the answer by the tone of your voice (more enthusiastic on correct choice, monotone on incorrect) or your body language (nodding your head for correct choice, shaking your head on incorrect)
  • they’re going to have to carefully read questions like this on the exam so give them this chance to practice
  • (I’ve only heard of one good reason to read out the question, from my colleague Matthew Herbst. In his history classes, they encounter many foreign names of people and places and Matthew wants his students to hear how to pronounce those words.)

Second, remind the students to “Please answer this question on your own.” One of the key elements of peer instruction is that students first confront/confirm their own understanding of the concept. They need to know what they think so they’ll get something out of, and have something to contribute to, the upcoming discussion with their peers. If students don’t think on their own first, you’re inviting them to zone out, then listen to their loudest neighbor, and think, “Oh, yeah, that’s what I think, too.”

It’s important to remind them to think on their own every time because they soon learn that when you talk to your neighbors, you can usually figure out the right answer. And then when the students vote, almost everyone has it right. The instructor is happy (“Wow, great job everyone!”) and the students are happy (because they got it right and because they made the instructor happy) and…. Enough with the happy! You’re there to make their brains hurt, not to make them happy. Make them think! And if they insist on starting to whisper or talk with each other, try “Please answer this on your own. You’ll get a chance to talk to each other in a minute but right now, I need you to think. That’s how peer instruction helps them learn.” Another good line is, “You’re going to have to answer questions like this, by yourself, on the exam. Take this opportunity to practice.”


PI_correctanswer_3Open/start the poll. If you’re using i>clicker, try to keep the polling widget visible so the students see the timer counting up (not counting down – this isn’t a “Beat the Clock!” game show) and see how many other students have voted. Don’t announce that they have 30 or 60 seconds answer the question. How do you know it will take that long? The tricky part is deciding how long to leave the poll open to give students sufficient time to vote. What is “sufficient”? Here are some possibilities:

  • Let’s start with the best advice, courtesy of Ed Prather: Turn and look at the question on the screen – give it your full attention, just like your students should. Read each word as if you’ve never seen the question before, go through the thinking needed to arrive at the answer and (pretend to) click. That’s the MINIMUM amount of time your students need. By the way, if experts do something with their hands or bodies to answer the problem (like physicists do that hand-spinning thing for the right-hand rule) – do that, too, modeling what an expert does.
  • If you have a good idea how many students are in the classroom at that moment, keep the poll open until almost everyone has voted.
  • If this is your second, third, fourth question of the day, you know how many people voted on the previous questions so you have a target.
  • Watch the students. Typically, they read the question, think, click, and then sit back expectantly, waiting for something to happen. When almost everyone is sitting back, it’s time to move to the next step.
  • DON’T wait for every last student to vote. Who knows why the last few aren’t voting – maybe they stepped out of the classroom, maybe they just don’t want to answer. If you wait impatiently for Student #200 to click, all you’re going to do is piss off the other 199.

PI_correctanswer_4When you’re close to the target number of votes, get ready to close the poll. Don’t just shut it, unannounced. That will only invite groans and pleas from the few students who were just about to vote and you didn’t give them a chance. Instead, give them a countdown. I always say something like, “Okay, it looks like just about everyone so I’m closing the poll in 3… 2… 1…. Thank-you.”

The goal of the next step – peer to peer discussion – is to give the students an opportunity to “try out” their thinking about the question, in a low-stakes, just-between-friends conversation. Except for a few special cases I’ll give below,  you will short-circuit that conversation if you show the students the distribution of votes. Why? Because if there’s one answer that’s more popular than the others, students will try to convince each other that that answer is correct, even if it’s not.

Okay, there are a couple of special cases described below where showing the distribution of votes might – might – help. In order to make the decision whether or not to show the distribution, the instructor should glance at the i>clicker receiver to see the votes. You don’t have a lot of time, though: you closed the poll and the students are waiting. Make the decision. Make it now. Now. Make it NOW! Ack, too much pressure! My recommendation: keep it simple, especially if you’re new to peer instruction, and let your students talk to each other.


PI_correctanswer_5Here’s something that always works: You look at the distribution (so you begin preparing for the up-coming, class-wide discussion) and say,

Hmm, interesting. You’re not agreeing with each other. Please turn to your neighbors and convince them you have the right answer. Oh, and if you chose the same answer, check you chose it for the same reason.

Notice the prompt, “convince your neighbor you have the right answer.” Students aren’t experts in the field yet – that’s why they’re in your class – so  “discuss this with your neighbors” doesn’t mean much:

Student 1: What’d you pick?
Student 2: A
Student 1: Yeah, me, too.

Help them practice thinking and talking like experts by giving them the task of convincing their neighbors.

There are two alternatives here, depending on the distribution of votes in the individual vote. If you’re comfortable with peer instruction and able to react in real-time to the distribution of votes shown on the i>clicker receiver (remember, the students haven’t seen that distribution), you might consider these:

  • if the correct choice is overwhelmingly popular, your students have already solved this problem. You’ve got better things to do that spend 5 minutes going over the answer. Show the distribution, confirm the answer, perhaps give them a little praise (“Great to see so many of you got that.”) and move on. And after class, make yourself a note: DO NOT USE THIS QUESTION NEXT TIME: it’s too easy.
  • if there’s a roughly even split between the top 2 choices, you know there could be a  great discussion (especially if one choice is correct and the other is a common misconception.) Show the graph and say something like, “Wow, you’re really split between A and D [or whatever] on this one. Turn to your neighbors and convince them you’ve got the right answer.” By showing the distribution, you’re re-assuring the students that they’re not the only one thinking like that. If a student thinks other in the room are thinking the same things, they may be more confident to share their thinking with their peers.
  • remember, if you have any doubt that showing the distribution will hinder the peer-to-peer conversation, or if you’re not comfortable or quick enough to make the decision, you can always rely on the standard, “Hmm, interesting…” and not showing the graph.

At this point, the room should get loud. There should be conversations going on all over the place. Take this opportunity to LEAVE YOUR STUDENTS ALONE. This is their chance to practice talking like experts. Take this opportunity to

  • wander back to the podium, get a drink of water, check your phone is silent, put down the keys that have been jingle-jangling in your pocket
  • circulate around the room. Get up close to your students, especially the ones towards the back of the room. Don’t walk up to them and look them in the eye, though. That’s a signal they should stop talking and look at you because you have something wise and important to say. Instead, just wander around, listening in on their conversations. One of my favorite tricks is to walk up the aisle, stop, and suddenly become deeply, deeply engrossed in the instructor’s remote I’m carrying. I give it my full attention, usually popping open the battery compartment. But I’m listening intently to the conversation going on next to me. Here are some things to listen for:
    • who’s giving the correct reasoning for the question?
    • who’s displaying the common misconception that you made sure you included as one of the choices?
    • who’s having the conversation(s) you want them to have?

    Try to remember where these people are sitting so you can invite them to speak up in the upcoming class-wide discussion. If you suspect those students might not be comfortable speaking up, consider talking to them (once their conversation is done) and say, “I really liked what you were saying in this group. Would one of you be willing to share that with the class during the discussion?” This little bit of praise and affirmation from the instructor might encourage students who normally don’t contribute to speak up.


PI_correctanswer_6When it sounds like the conversation is quieting down (they’ve said all they can say to each other) but before it starts to get loud again (when they’re bored and start to talk about movies, sports, next week’s essay,…) invite them to vote again. You have to be pretty loud to get their attention. If I’m wearing a lav mic, I tap it with my finger. I have a colleague who brings a big tuning fork to class and he bongs the tuning fork to get their attention. Usually it goes like this:

Okay, great conversations everyone. Please vote again. Yes, on the same question.


PI_correctanswer_7This vote shouldn’t take long, usually only 10-20 seconds since everyone is already familiar with the question and which choice they’re going to make. Watch the vote counter as it approaches the count from the first vote and, as before, give them a countdown.

You’re not done with peer instruction yet. The upcoming class-wide discussion is critical. You don’t want to waste a potentially rich discussion. If you show the distribution, you’re likely losing the the possibility that anyone will advocate for an unpopular choice. On the other hand, if there was a big swing from a split vote the first time to consensus on the second vote, you might show the graph and say, “Well, you were really split on the first vote but now it looks like most of you have chosen B. Let’s figure out why….” If in doubt, don’t show the distribution.


PI_correctanswer_8By now, the students have had a chance to think on their own, to practice explaining their thinking to their peers, and to get feedback from their peers. Now they’re ready to share their revised or reinforced thinking with the class and especially with you, their instructor. Don’t deny them that opportunity by having a “class-wide discussion” where you do all the talking. Your job now is to invite and welcome students into the discussion. Here are a few discussion-starters:

  • “It looks like almost everyone picked the correct answer on the second vote. Can someone tell me why C [say] is correct?”
  • “Even after two votes, you’re still split between A and B. Let’s figure this out together. Does anyone who picked A want to tell us why?” When the student starts to speak, be careful you don’t turn it into a 1-on-1 conversation that excludes everyone else. Signal to the student that they’re addressing the entire class, not just you. In large lecture halls, it works really well if you can get a couple of wireless handheld microphones from your Edtech Services team. When you identify the student who will explain choice A, your teaching assistant runs up the aisle and hands the student the microphone. When the student speaks and their voice booms out through the speakers, it’s clear that student is addressing the entire class.
  • Don’t be surprised if you ask for input about choice A, students put up their hands, you pick someone, and they say, “Well, we started with A but then we decided B is correct because….” If you interrupt and cut them off (“Sorry – uh, sorry – I’m looking for answer A right now. We’ll get to B in a moment”) that student probably won’t contribute much for the rest of this class. Or the next. They felt they had something interesting to say and were so confident about it, they took a risk and volunteered to talk to the entire class. THAT experience and success is way more important than your decision to go through the choices in a particular order. Just go with it, proving to your your students you value their contributions, and double-back to the other choices later.
  • If you’re hoping to get another student to advocate for a different choice, be careful to neither confirm nor deny that the first student has the right or wrong answer. Listen with a neutral voice and finish with, “Thank-you, that’s an interesting explanation. Now, who can tell us about choice B?” I worked with an instructor once who always started with one of the incorrect choices. As a student explained their thinking, the instructor would unconsciously droop his shoulders and slowly shake his head as he listened to an incorrect explanation. Then when he asked for someone to advocate for the correct answer, he’d straighten up and subtly nod his head. And when he asked the students which explanation they thought was correct, surprise surprise, they picked the second one.
  • If there’s an incorrect answer, and it’s incorrect for a good reason (for example, it’s based on a common misconception or a common error), after you’ve gone over the right answer, ask your students, “Can someone tell me why C is wrong?” Another really good follow-up like this is, “How could I change the question so C is the CORRECT answer?”
  • If you identified any group with an excellent answer while you were circulating around the room during the peer discussion, invite them to share their thinking with the class (especially if you spoke to them privately and they agreed to talk to the class. If you made that arrangement and then don’t ask them to speak, they’ll be pretty disappointed.)
  • If all else fails and you’re not sure how to drive the discussion, you can always ask, “What did your group talk about?” Notice it’s “your group” not “you” — students are likely to feel more confident about sharing their group’s thinking (“In my group, we talked about….”) Kind of like, “Well, I’ve got this friend and he thinks…”

PI_correctanswer_9Okay, almost done. First, you need to confirm the correct answer. You want to be absolutely sure that when you’re finished with peer instruction and you’re transitioning to the next part of your lesson, there aren’t students whispering to each other, “So, uh, what was the right answer again?” Second, if it didn’t happen during the discussion, model how an expert would answer the problem. I’ve heard colleagues say things like, “Those were terrific answers – I think you just about answered everything. Here’s how I thought about it…” or “Let me tell you how a physicist [or whatever] would approach this…”


And now you’re done with peer instruction. In those 2 to 5 to 10 minutes, your students have practiced expert-like thinking and behavior. Segue into your next mini-lecture by highlighting they’ve learned something that confirms they understood the preceding mini-lecture or something that prepares them for what they’re about to hear. Don’t forget: students can learn new things during peer instruction. It’s not just a way to test if they understand what you’ve been talking about.


Questions to Generate Discussion

[Note: a lot of what follows is identical to the “correct answer” protocol above. It’s repeated so you get the complete story in one place.]

Here’s the full protocol for running questions where every answer is correct and you’re only expecting one vote, not two. I encourage instructors to print out the protocol, bring it to class, and put it somewhere visible like the podium or desk. There are a lot of steps, in addition to all the other parts of the lesson, so give yourself a break and keep this “cheat sheet” handy (especially on the first few days of class where everything is harder.)

By the way, this structured approach to generating a discussion seems to mesh well with Jay R. Howard’s Discussion in the College Classroom: Getting Your Students Engaged and Participating in Person and Online as summarized by James Lang’s post Building a Better Discussion in The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Recommended peer instruction protocol for questions where every choice is correct and you’re only expecting one vote. Click to download a PDF.

 


You work your way through your lesson and reach the peer instruction question. Say something that tells the students it’s time for peer instruction like, “And now, I’ve got a question for you…” or “Okay, let’s see what you think about this…” The slide with the question doesn’t need to be titled “Clicker Question”. The students know it’s time for peer instruction because they see the multiple choices on the slide. Why not give it a useful title related to the concept?


With the question on the screen, 2 things. First, do not read the question aloud:

  • the students don’t know if they’re supposed to listen to you or read the question – they can’t do both (especially students for whom English is a foreign language). Mary Jo Madda wrote a nice piece about cognitive load, Why Your Students Forgot Everything On Your PowerPoint Slides.

  • you might add extra information to the question or the choices that confuses the students
  • you might give away the answer by the tone of your voice (more enthusiastic on correct choice, monotone on incorrect) or your body language (nodding your head for correct choice, shaking your head on incorrect)
  • they’re going to have to carefully read questions like this on the exam so give them this chance to practice
  • (I’ve only heard of one good reason to read out the question, from my colleague Matthew Herbst. In his history classes, they encounter many foreign names of people and places and Matthew wants his students to hear how to pronounce those words.)

Second, remind the students to “Please answer this question on your own.” One of the key elements of peer instruction is that students first confront/confirm their own understanding of the concept. They need to know what they think so they’ll get something out of, and have something to contribute to, the upcoming discussion with their peers. If students don’t think on their own first, you’re inviting them to zone out, then listen to their loudest neighbor, and think, “Oh, yeah, that’s what I was thinking, too….”

If they insist on starting to whisper or talk with each other, try “Please answer this on your own. You’ll get a chance to talk to each other in a minute but right now, I need you to think. That’s how peer instruction helps them learn.” Another good line is, “You’re going to have to answer questions like this, by yourself, on the exam. Take this opportunity to practice.”


Open/start the poll. If you’re using i>clicker, try to keep the polling widget visible so the students see the timer counting up (not counting down – this isn’t a “Beat the Clock!” game show) and see how many other students have voted. Don’t announce that they have 30 or 60 seconds answer the question. How do you know it will take that long? The tricky part is deciding how long to leave the poll open to give students sufficient time to vote. What is “sufficient”? Here are some possibilities:

  • Let’s start with the best advice, courtesy of Ed Prather:: Turn and look at the question on the screen – give it your full attention, just like your students should. Read each word as if you’ve never seen the question before. Think about what kind of evidence you have for each statement and decide which one interests you the most. That’s the MINIMUM amount of time your students need. By the way, if experts do something with their hands or bodies to answer the problem (like physicists do that hand-spinning thing for the right-hand rule) – do that, too, modeling what an expert does.
  • If you have a good idea how many students are in the classroom at that moment, keep the poll open until almost everyone has voted.
  • If this is your second, third, fourth question of the day, you know how many people voted on the previous questions so you have a target.
  • Watch the students. Typically, they read the question, think, click, and then sit back expectantly, waiting for something to happen. When almost everyone is sitting back, it’s time to move to the next step.
  • DON’T wait for every last student to vote. Who knows why the last few aren’t voting – maybe they stepped out of the classroom, maybe they just don’t want to answer. If you wait impatiently for Student #200 to click, all you’re going to do is piss off the other 199.

When you’re close to the target number of votes, get ready to close the poll. Don’t just shut it, unannounced. That will only invite groans and pleas from the few students who were just about to vote and you didn’t give them a chance. Instead, give them a countdown. I always say something like, “Okay, it looks like just about everyone so I’m closing the poll in 3… 2… 1…. Thank-you.”

The goal of the next step – peer to peer discussion – is to give the students an opportunity to “try out” their thinking about the question, in a low-stakes, just-between-friends conversation. Except for a few special cases I’ll give below, you will totally short-circuit that conversation if you show the students the distribution of votes. Why? Because if there’s one answer that’s more popular than the others, students will try to convince each other that that answer is correct, even if it’s not.

Okay, there are a couple of special cases described below where showing the distribution of votes might – might – help. In order to make the decision whether or not to show the distribution, the instructor should glance at the i>clicker receiver to see the votes. You don’t have a lot of time, though: you closed the poll and the students are waiting. Make the decision. Make it now. Now. Make it NOW! Ack, too much pressure! My recommendation: keep it simple, especially if you’re new to peer instruction, and let your students talk to each other.


Here’s something that always works: You look at the distribution (so you begin preparing for the up-coming, class-wide discussion) and say,

Hmm, interesting. Please turn to your neighbors and explain to your neighbor why you chose your choice. Use evidence from the [readings, textbook, etc.] to support your position. Oh, and if you chose the same answer, compare your evidence and reasoning.

Notice the prompt, “use evidence from the readings.” My colleagues in History, for example, remind me they’re not interested in memorized names, dates, or facts. Learning history is about making a statement and then supporting it with evidence. That’s what this kind of peer instruction is about – giving students opportunities to practice finding and sharing evidence.

There are two alternatives here, depending on the distribution of votes in the individual vote. If you’re comfortable with peer instruction and able to react in real-time to the distribution of votes shown on the i>clicker receiver (remember, the students haven’t seen that distribution), you might consider these:

  • if there’s a roughly even split between the top 2 choices, you know there could be a great discussion (especially if one choice is correct and the other is a common misconception.) Show the graph and say something like, “Wow, you’re really split between A and D [or whatever] on this one. Explain to your neighbors why you selected your choice.” By showing the distribution, you’re re-assuring the students that they’re not the only one thinking like that. If a student thinks other in the room are thinking the same things, they may be more confident to share their thinking with their peers.
  • if one choice is overwhelmingly popular, for some reason, no one feels confident about explaining and/or supporting the other options. Why not? Was the popular choice to easy or obvious? Are they unable to support the other choices? Whatever the reason, there won’t be much opportunity for students to discuss different aspects of the question. You’ve got better things to do that spend 5 minutes going over the answer. Show the distribution, ask one or two people to explain their choice and the evidence. And after class, make yourself a note: DO NOT USE THIS QUESTION NEXT TIME: it’s not rich enough, doesn’t have enough flexibility to support multiple conversations, the students are unable (unprepared?) to answer it, etc.
  • remember, if you have any doubt that showing the distribution will hinder the peer-to-peer conversation, or if you’re not comfortable or quick enough to make the decision, you can always rely on the standard, “Hmm, interesting…” and not showing the graph.

At this point, the room should get loud. There should be conversations going on all over the place. Take this opportunity to LEAVE YOUR STUDENTS ALONE. This is their chance to practice talking like experts. Take this opportunity to

  • wander back to the podium, get a drink of water, check your phone is silent, put down the keys that have been jingle-jangling in your pocket
  • circulate around the room. Get up close to your students, especially the ones towards the back of the room. Don’t walk up to them and look them in the eye, though. That’s a signal they should stop talking and look at you because you have something wise and important to say. Instead, just wander around, listening in on their conversations. One of my favorite tricks is to walk up the aisle, stop, and suddenly become deeply, deeply engrossed in the instructor’s remote I’m carrying. I give it my full attention, usually popping open the battery compartment. But I’m listening intently to the conversation going on next to me. Here are some things to listen for:
    • who’s giving the correct reasoning / evidence for their choice?
    • who’s displaying the common misconception that you made sure you included as one of the choices?
    • which students are having the conversations you want them to have? (This can be a good way to create the question and choices in the first place: what conversations do you want to hear about this concept/content? Create choices that direct students into those conversations.)

    Try to remember where these people are sitting so you can invite them to speak up in the upcoming class-wide discussion. If you suspect those students might not be comfortable speaking up, consider talking to them (once their conversation is done) and say, “I really liked what you were saying in this group. Would one of you be willing to share that with the class during the discussion?” This little bit of praise and affirmation from the instructor might encourage students who normally don’t contribute to speak up.


PI_manyanswers_6 You’re not done with peer instruction yet. The upcoming class-wide discussion is critical. You don’t want to waste a potentially rich discussion. If you show the distribution, you’re likely losing the the possibility that anyone will advocate for an unpopular choice. On the other hand, students are more likely to share their understanding / interpretation if they see they’re not the only one who made that choice. If in doubt, don’t show the distribution.


PI_manyanswers_7 By now, the students have had a chance to think on their own, to practice explaining their thinking and evidence to their peers, and to get feedback from their peers. Now they’re ready to share their revised or reinforced thinking with the class and especially with you, their instructor. Don’t deny them that opportunity by having a “class-wide discussion” where you do all the talking. Your job now is to invite and welcome students into the discussion. Here are a few discussion-starters:

  • “Every one of these is a possible interpretation so let’s work our way through them. Who can tell me about choice A?”
  • When the student starts to speak, be careful you don’t turn it into a 1-on-1 conversation that excludes everyone else. Signal to the student that they’re addressing the entire class, not just you. In large lecture halls, it works really well if you can get a couple of wireless handheld microphones from your Edtech Services team. When you identify the student who will explain choice A, your teaching assistant runs up the aisle and hands the student the microphone. When the student speaks and their voice booms out through the speakers, it’s clear that student is addressing the entire class.
  • Don’t be surprised if ask for input about A, students put up their hands, you pick someone, and they say, “Well, I started with A but then switched to B because….” If you interrupt and cut them off (“Sorry – uh, sorry – I’m looking for answer A right now. We’ll get to B in a moment.”) that student probably won’t contribute much for the rest of this class. Or the next. They felt they had something interesting to say and were so confident about it, they took a risk and volunteered to talk to the entire class. THAT experience and success is way more important than your decision to go through the choices in a particular order. Just go with it, proving to your your students you value their contributions, and double-back to the other choices later.
  • You should have an idea of the evidence / reasoning behind each choice. If you didn’t get enough about choice A from that student, ask if anyone has anything new to add before moving onto the next choice.
  • If you identified any group with an excellent answer while you were circulating around the room during the peer discussion, invite them to share their thinking with the class (especially if you spoke to them privately and they agreed to talk to the class. If you made that arrangement and then don’t ask them to speak, they’ll be pretty disappointed.)
  • Sometimes a question can have a choice that sparks an important discussion but no one picked it because they don’t want to be seen as supporting that choice. For example, I once heard someone discussing a question about the roles and responsibilities of the guards in the Nazi concentration camps. One choice was, “they were just doing their jobs.” Few students would pick that choice because they don’t want others to think that’s what they believe. But it’s an important conversation to have. In a situation like this, the instructor can ask, “What might someone be thinking if they selected this choice?” This way, students can talk about a hypothetical person without any appearance that they agree with the statement.
  • If all else fails and you’re not sure how to drive the discussion, you can always ask, “What did your group talk about?” Notice it’s “your group” not “you” — students are likely to feel more confident about sharing their group’s thinking (“In my group, we talked about….”) Kind of like, “Well, I’ve got this friend and he thinks…”

Okay, almost done. You created this question and gave the students this list of thought prompts because everyone prompt was important (and if there was a choice that was superfluous or off-track, well, there shouldn’t be.) Before you move onto the rest of your lesson, decide if everything you wanted covered was, in fact, covered. My colleague Heidi Keller-Lapp has an excellent approach here. The next slide in her presentation is a bullet list of all the things that should have been discussed via the peer instruction question. She goes down the list, “Yep, yep, yep we talked about that, yep, yep, oh wait, we didn’t mention this: recall such-and-such because of this-and-that. Then yup, yep, yep, okay, great conversation everyone!”


And now you’re done with peer instruction. These “generate discussion” questions can take 10 minutes or more. That’s not a waste of class time, though, it’s time when your students practice expert-like thinking and behavior. With your help, they discuss important aspects/interpretations, not (just) you. It’s not that peer instruction reinforces concepts/content you’d already discussed – peer instruction replaces the mini-lecture you used to give. Now segue into your next mini-lecture by highlighting new content or skills they’ve acquired and prepares them for what they’re about to hear. Don’t forget: students can learn new things during peer instruction. It’s not just a way to test if they understand what you’ve been talking about.


Whew, this is a long post, isn’t it? Honestly, it’s a way for me to get my understanding and recommendations for peer instruction into a format I can share and reference.

As I wrote way, way up there, these recommendations are not The Right Way To Run Peer Instruction With Clickers ™. I’d be really interested to hear your variations and rationale. Hmm…

My brief encounter with iclicker2 ranking tasks

As I’ve mentioned before, the folks at i>clicker lent me a set of the new i>clicker2 clickers. I had a chance to try them out this week when I filled in for an “Astro 101” instructor. I sure learned a lot in that 50 minutes!

(image: Peter Newbury)

Just to refresh your memory, the i>clicker2 (or “ic2” as it’s also called, which is great because the “>” in “i>clicker2” is messing up some of my HTML) unit has the usual A, B, C, D, E buttons for submitting answers to multiple-choice questions. These new clickers (and receiver and software) also allow for numeric answers and alphanumeric answers. That last feature is particularly interesting because it allows instructors to ask ranking or chronological questions. In the old days, like last week, you could display 5 objects, scenarios or events and ask the student to rank them. But you have to adapt the answers because you have only 5 choices. Something like this:

Rank these [somethings] I, II, III, IV and V from [one end] to [the other]:

A) I, II, V, III, IV
B) II, I, IV, III, IV
C) IV, III, IV, I, II
D) III, I, II, IV, V
E) V, II, I, III, IV

These are killer questions for the students. What are they supposed to do? Work out the ranking on the side and then check that their ranking is in your list? What if their ranking isn’t there? Or game the question and work through each of the choices you give and say “yes” or “no”? There is so much needed to get the answer right besides understanding the concept.

That’s what’s so great about the ic2 alphanumeric mode. I asked this question about how the objects in our Galaxy appear to be moving relative to us:

The alphanumeric mode of the ic2 allows instructors to easily ask ranking tasks like this one about the rotation of the Galaxy.

(Allow me a brief astronomy lesson. At this point in writing this post, I think it’ll be important later. Oh well, can’t hurt, right?)

The stars in our Galaxy orbit around the center. The Galaxy isn’t solid, though. Each star moves along its own path, at its own speed. At this point in the term [psst! we’re setting this up so the students will appreciate what the observed, flat rotation curve means: dark matter] there is a clear pattern: the farther the star is from the center of the Galaxy, the slower its orbital speed. That means stars closer to the center than us are moving faster and will “pass us on the inside lane.” When we observe them, they’re moving away from us. Similarly, we’re moving faster than objects farther from the center than we are, so we’re catching up to the ones ahead of us. Before we pass them, we observe them getting closer to us. That means the answer to my ranking question is EDCAB. Notice that location C is the same distance from the center of the Galaxy as us so it’s moving at the same speed as us. Therefore, we’re not moving towards or away from C — it’s the location where we cross from approaching (blueshifted) to receeding (redshifted).

As usual, I displayed the question, gave the students time to think, and then opened the poll. Students submit a 5-character word like “ABCDE”. The ic2 receiver cycles through the top 3 answers so the instructor can see what the students are thinking without revealing the results to the students.

I saw that there was one popular answer with a couple of other, so I decided enough students got the question right that -pair-share wouldn’t be necessary and displayed the results:

Students' answers for the galaxy rotation ranking task. The first bar, EDCAB, is correct. But what do the others tell you about the students' grasp of the concept?

In hindsight, I think I jumped the gun on that because, and here’s what I’ve been trying to get to in this post, I was unprepared to analyze the results of the poll. I did think far enough ahead to write down the correct answer, EDCAB, in big letters on my lesson plan. But what do the other answers tell us the students’ grasp of the concept?

In a good, multiple-choice question, you know why each correct choice is correct (yes, there can be more one correct choice) and why each incorrect choice is incorrect. When a student selects an incorrect choice, you can diagnose which part of the concept they’ve missed. The agile instructor can get students to -pair-share to reveal, and hopefully correct, their misunderstanding.

I’m sure that agility is possible with ranking tasks. But I hadn’t anticipated it. So I did the best I could on the fly and said something like,

Good, many of you recognized that the objects farther from the center are moving slower, so we’re moving toward them. And away from the stars closer to the center than us.

[It was at this moment I realized I had no idea what the other answers meant!]

Uh, I notice almost everyone put location C at the middle of the list – good. It’s at the same distance and same speed as us, so we’re not moving away from or towards C.

Oh, and ABCDE? You must have ranked them in the opposite order, not the way I clumsily suggested in the question. [Which, you might notice, is not true. Oops.]

[And the other 15% who entered something else? Sorry, folks…]

Uh, okay then, let’s move on…

What am I getting at here? First, these ranking tasks are awesome. Every answer is valid. None of that “I hope my answer is on the list…” And there’s no short-circuiting the answer by giving the students 5 choices, risking them gaming the answer by working backwards. I know there are lots of Astro 101 instructors already using ranking tasks, probably because of the great collection of tasks available at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, but using them in class typically means distributing worksheets, possibly collecting them, perhaps asking one of those “old-fashioned” ranking task clicker questions. All that hassle is gone with ic2.

But it’s going to take re-training on the part of the instructor to be prepared for the results. In principle, there are 5! = 120 different 5-character words the students can enter. Now, of course, you don’t have anticipate what each of the 119 incorrect answers mean. But here are my recommendations:

  1. Work out the ranking order ahead of time and write it down, in big letters, where you can see it. It might be easy to remember, “the right answer to this question is choice B” but it’s not easy to remember, “the correct ranking is EDCAB.”
  2. Work out the ranking if the students rank in the opposite order. That could be because they misread the question or the question wasn’t clear.  Or it could diagnose their misunderstanding. For example, if I’d asked them to rank the locations from “most-redshifted” to “most-blueshifted”, the opposite order could mean they’re mixing up red- and blue-shift.
  3. Think about the common mistakes students make on this question and work out the rankings. And write those down, along with the corresponding mistakes.
  4. Nothing like hindsight: set up the question so the answer isn’t just 1 swap away from ABCDE. If you had no idea what the answer was, wouldn’t you enter ABCDE?

I hope to try, and write about, some other types of questions with my collection of ic2 clickers. I’ve already tried a demo where students enter their predictions using the numeric mode. But that’s the subject for another post…

Do you use ranking tasks in your class, with ic2 or paper or something else, again? What advice can you offer that will help the instructor be more prepared and agile?

Effective professional development, Take 1

The other day, I participated in a webinar run by Stephanie Chasteen (@sciencegeekgirl on Twitter. If you don’t follow her, you should.) It was called, “Teaching faculty about effective clicker use” and the goals was to help us plan and carry out meetings where we train faculty members to use peer instruction and clickers. Did you get that subtle difference: it was not about how to use clickers (though Stephanie can teach you that, too.) Rather, this webinar was aimed at instructional support people tasked with training their colleagues how to use peer instruction. This was a train the trainers webinar. And it was right up my alley because I’m learning to do that.

And if you think that’s getting meta-, just you wait…

In the midst of reminding us about peer instruction, Stephanie listed characteristics of effective professional development. She gave us the bold words; the interpretation in mine:

  • collaborative: it’s about sharing knowledge, experiences, ideas, expertise
  • active: we need to do something, not just sit and listen (or not!)
  • discipline-oriented: If we want to be able to share, we need some common background. I want to understand what you’re talking about. And I hope you give a damn about what I’m talking about. Coming from the same discipline, like physics or astronomy or biology, is a good start.
  • instructor-driven: I take this to mean “facilitated”. That is, there’s someone in charge who drives the activity forward.
  • respectful: So open to interpretation. Here’s my take: everyone in the room should have the opportunity to contribute. And not via the approach, “well if you’ve got something to say, speak up, dammit!” It takes self-confidence and familiarity and…Okay, it takes guts to interrupt a colleague or a conversation to interject your own opinion. Relying on people to do that does not respect their expertise or the time they’ve invested by coming to the meeting.
  • research-based: One of the pillars of the Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative (CWSEI) that I’m part of at UBC, and the Science Education Initiative at the University of Colorado where Stephanie comes from, is a commitment to research-based instructional strategies. We care about the science of teaching and learning.
  • sustained over time: We’d never expect our students to learn concepts after one exposure to new material. That’s why we give pre-reading and lectures and peer instruction and homework and midterms and…So we shouldn’t expect instructors to transform their teaching styles after one session of training. It requires review and feedback and follow-up workshops and…

Alright, time to switch to another stream for a moment. They’ll cross in a paragraph or two.

(image: Peter Newbury)

I’ve got a big box of shiny new i>clicker2 clickers to try out. I’m pretty excited. I’m also pretty sure the first thing instructors will say is, “What’s with all the new buttons? I thought these things were supposed to be simple! Damn technology being shoved down our [grumble] [grumble] [grumble]” I want to be able reply

Yes, there are more buttons on the i>clicker2. But let me show you an amazing clicker question you can use in your [insert discipline here] classroom…

 

Good plan. Okay, let’s see: Clickers? Check. Amazing clicker questions? D’oh!

We use a lot of peer instruction here at UBC and there are CWSEI support people like me in Math, Chemistry, Biology, Statistics, Earth and Ocean Sciences, Computer Science. If anyone can brainstorm a few good questions, it’s this crew. And guess what? We get together for 90-minute meetings every week.

Can you feel the streams are coming together. Just one more to add:

My CWSEI colleagues and I frequently meet with instructors and other faculty members. We’re dance a delicate dance between telling instructors what to do, drawing out their good and bad experiences, getting them to discover for themselves what could work, (psst: making them think they thought of it themselves). Their time is valuable so when we meet, we need to get things done. We need to run short, effective episodes of professional development. It’s not easy. If only there was a way to practice…

A-ha! Our weekly meetings should be effective professional development led by one of us getting some practice at facilitating. The streams have crossed. I’ll run the next meeting following Stephanie’s advice, modeling Stephanie’s advice, to gather questions so I will be able run an effective workshop on taking advantage of the new features of the i>clicker2. It’s a meta-meeting. Or a meta-meta-meeting?

It’s not like I made any of this up. Or I couldn’t find it if I talked with some people whose job is professional development. Well, I guess I did kind of talk with Stephanie. But there’s a lot to be said for figuring it out for yourself. Or at least starting to figure it out for yourself, and failing, and then recognizing and appreciating what the expert has to say.

And you’ve read enough for now. Watch for another post about how it went.

Navigation