Classroom response system

 Classroom response system
Affordable, versatile, and no extra hardware
About us
Poll Everywhere has provided
affordable, real time
classroom response systems
to hundreds of thousands of
educators since 2008.
While our roots are in
education, we also serve over
40% of Fortune 1000
companies, allowing us to
deliver the benefits of superior
scale to teachers and their
students.
Our company philosophy
focuses on the educator and
ensuring their experience is a
delight – from creating a poll
to grading the results and
analyzing the data.
We do not have a sales force,
preferring instead to rely on
the good words of the people
who experience our service
every day.
Demonstrated impact on student achievement
Extensive, peer reviewed research has found compelling evidence that student
response systems can significantly enhance learning outcomes when utilized as an
integrated classroom tool.
Works with any device – instantly
Students can use any device – smart phones, dumb phones, or their laptop – to
respond to polls in real time. Those attending remotely can even use a desktop.
Affordable
Poll Everywhere is 1/10 the cost of clickers and owing to our scale, the greatest
value amongst BYOD student response systems.
Versatile
Teachers use Poll Everywhere in a myriad of ways…formative assessment to guide
a lecture, flipped classrooms, exam review, attendance, quizzes, participation
grades, team competitions, and much more.
We can even accommodate your LMS.
Ready data and reporting
Student response data is available in a
variety of forms, from flat data sheets to
graded scorecards to pivot tables and
correlations.
I can say, unequivocally, that using Poll Everywhere in my classroom
is one of the best decisions I've ever made.
Jessica R. Methot, Rutgers University
Selection of poll questions shown to promote deep learning
Pedagogical research – and our users’ experience – point to the following as highly effective
ways of engaging a class in real learning.
Best answer from several correct ones
Requires students to carefully weigh evidence for and against
alternative choices, all of which could be correct
Benefits: Committing to an answer in advance makes students more
invested in the subsequent discussion – and more likely to have
generated ideas to share. As the results display, close calls show that
the question is a difficult one – and worthy of debate.
Student perspective
Asks students to share their opinions and personal experiences –
anonymously or by name
Benefits: These questions help connect sometimes-abstract material
with students’ own lives. They can also help students understand
each other better and consider perspectives different than their own,
facilitating richer discussions.
Misconception question
Highlights common misunderstandings and are generally answered
incorrectly by 30-70 % of students
Benefits: These questions create an opportunity for students to
stretch their mental models. They have been shown to facilitate
learning when paired with peer instruction models (e.g., class breaks
into pairs or groups to discuss the revealed answer.)
Peer assessment
Encourages students to provide constructive feedback on each
other’s work, either qualitatively or with a letter grade
Benefits: This set-up can drive the kind of critical analysis and
constructive criticism the instructor would like to see. Students are
more able to provide honest, constructive feedback since voting
provides a degree of anonymity.
Use cases are attributable to the creativity of our users and the research of Dr. Derek Bruff.
Summary of research on classroom response systems
Extensive, peer-reviewed research supports the use of classroom response systems in furthering
student engagement and learning objectives.
Engagement
Achievement
Retention
Studies show that students
favor using classroom
response systems,
perceiving their use to be a
benefit to their learning and
a strong contributor to a
more positive and active
classroom atmosphere.
Student satisfaction has
also been shown to increase
over time, presumably as
the lecturer develops a
greater facility with the tool.
The bulk of research points
to positive improvements in
learning and student
achievement, measured in
retention and the ability to
complete similar problems.
Some findings reveal a
neutral impact. Generally,
this was the case when the
underlying pedagogy
remained unaltered even as
the new tool was
introduced.
Data on student response
behavior can aid in early
identification of at-risk
students. Research has
shown for example that
students who register their
devices early have a much
higher probability of
success than those
registering later.
This technology is an intuitive, cost-effective, user-friendly technology that can
enhance students’ learning and classroom experience,
and instructors’ effectiveness in teaching course material.
Shon & Smith, 2011
What kinds of
classrooms
employ response
systems?
Response systems are used in classes of all sizes and types. While most of
the focus is on sizes ranging from 100 to over 400, there are also many
examples of use in class sizes of 20 and below for formative assessment,
discussions classes, group tutorials, and peer assessment reviews.
What pedagogies
are used with the
technology?
Flipped Classrooms, ConcepTests, Just-In-Time Teaching, Interactive
Lectures and Cooperative Learning are perhaps the most common
pedagogies used, but instructors have also employed the technology in
classroom experiments and Interactive Lecture Demonstrations.
Select bibliography
Extensive, peer-reviewed research supports the use of classroom response systems in
furthering student engagement and learning objectives.
Caldwell, J.E. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. Life Sciences Education,
6(1), 9-20.
Fies, C., & Marshall, J. (2006). Classroom response systems: A review of the literature. Journal of Science Education and
Technology, 15(1), 101-109.
Freeman, S., et al. (2007). Prescribed active learning increases performance in introductory biology. CBE-Life Sciences
Education, 6, 132-139.
Griff, E. R., & Matter, S. F. (2008). Early identification of at-risk students using a personal response system. British
Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), 1124-1130.
Judson, E., & Sawada, D. (2002). Learning from past and present: Electronic response systems in college lecture halls.
Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 21(2), 167-181.
Kay, R. H., & LeSage, A. (2009). Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: A review of
the literature. Computers & Education, 53, 819-827.
Lantz, M. (2010). The use of clickers in the classroom: Teaching innovation or merely an amusing novelty? Computers in
Human Behavior, 26:4, 556-561.
Levesque, A. (2011). Using clickers to facilitate problem-solving skills. Cell Biology Education, 10(4), 406-417.
MacArthur, J. R., & Jones, L. L. (2008). A review of literature reports of clickers applicable to college chemistry
classrooms. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9, 187-195.
Roschelle, J., Penuel, W.R., & Abrahamson, L. (2004). Classroom response and communication systems: Research
review and theory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San
Diego, CA.
Rudolph, A., Prather, E., Brissenden, G., Consiglio, D, & Gonzaga, V. (2010). A national study assessing the teaching and
learning of introductory astronomy: Part 2: The connection between student demographics and learning. Astronomy
Education Review, 9(1).
Shon, Herb & Smith, Laurie (2011). A Review of Poll Everywhere Audience Response System. Journal of Technology in
Human Services, 29:236–245.
Simpson, V., & Oliver, M. (2007). Electronic voting systems for lectures then and now: A comparison of research and
practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(2), 187-208.
Tremblay, Eric A. (2010). Educating the Mobile Generation – using personal cell phones as audience response systems
in post- secondary science teaching. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 29(2), 217-227.
Bibliography is credited in part to the work of Dr. Derek Bruff of Vanderbilt University.