Understanding Clicker Discussions: Student Reasoning and the Impact of Instructional Cues
Previous research has shown that undergraduate science students learn from peer discussions of in-class clicker questions. However, the features that characterize such discussions are largely unknown, as are the instructional factors that may lead students into productive discussions. To explore the...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | CBE life sciences education 2013-12, Vol.12 (4), p.645-654 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 654 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 645 |
container_title | CBE life sciences education |
container_volume | 12 |
creator | Knight, Jennifer K Wise, Sarah B Southard, Katelyn M |
description | Previous research has shown that undergraduate science students learn from peer discussions of in-class clicker questions. However, the features that characterize such discussions are largely unknown, as are the instructional factors that may lead students into productive discussions. To explore these questions, we recorded and transcribed 83 discussions among groups of students discussing 34 different clicker questions in an upper-level developmental biology class. Discussion transcripts were analyzed for features such as making claims, questioning, and explaining reasoning. In addition, transcripts were categorized by the quality of reasoning students used and for performance features, such as percent correct on initial vote, percent correct on revote, and normalized learning change. We found that the majority of student discussions included exchanges of reasoning that used evidence and that many such exchanges resulted in students achieving the correct answer. Students also had discussions in which ideas were exchanged, but the correct answer not achieved. Importantly, instructor prompts that asked students to use reasoning resulted in significantly more discussions containing reasoning connected to evidence than without such prompts. Overall, these results suggest that these upper-level biology students readily employ reasoning in their discussions and are positively influenced by instructor cues. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1187/cbe.13-05-0090 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3846515</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1017240</ericid><sourcerecordid>1464910392</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-20b164dbbd7df533d9836fde8fd6bb32bb025ba58e9e694bf585f6431b2dae533</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkU1v1DAYhCMEoh9w5QbKBYlLtn79lZgDElpKWVSpEtADJ8uO3-waEmexk6767_Fqy6qcbGmeGY81RfEKyAKgqS9aiwtgFREVIYo8KU5BMahqBezpo_tJcZbSL0K4JCCeFyeUU1VTBafFz9vgMKbJBOfDulz2vv2NsfzkUzun5MeQ3pffp9lhmMpvaNIY9limy2mD5WrYmnYqx65chTTFuZ2yw_Tlcsb0onjWmT7hy4fzvLj9fPlj-aW6vrlaLT9eVy3ndKoosSC5s9bVrhOMOdUw2TlsOietZdRaQoU1okGFUnHbiUZ0kjOw1BnMhvPiwyF3O9sBXZubRtPrbfSDifd6NF7_rwS_0evxTrOGSwEiB7x7CIjjn1x80kP-Pfa9CTjOSQOXXAFhimZ0cUDbOKYUsTs-A0Tv99B5Dw1ME6H3e2TDm8fljvi_ATLw-gBg9O1RvvwKBGrK9wFvD_rGrzc7H1GnwfR9jqN6t9sB1VxLLthf2kGfVQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1464910392</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Understanding Clicker Discussions: Student Reasoning and the Impact of Instructional Cues</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Knight, Jennifer K ; Wise, Sarah B ; Southard, Katelyn M</creator><contributor>Dirks, Clarissa Ann</contributor><creatorcontrib>Knight, Jennifer K ; Wise, Sarah B ; Southard, Katelyn M ; Dirks, Clarissa Ann</creatorcontrib><description>Previous research has shown that undergraduate science students learn from peer discussions of in-class clicker questions. However, the features that characterize such discussions are largely unknown, as are the instructional factors that may lead students into productive discussions. To explore these questions, we recorded and transcribed 83 discussions among groups of students discussing 34 different clicker questions in an upper-level developmental biology class. Discussion transcripts were analyzed for features such as making claims, questioning, and explaining reasoning. In addition, transcripts were categorized by the quality of reasoning students used and for performance features, such as percent correct on initial vote, percent correct on revote, and normalized learning change. We found that the majority of student discussions included exchanges of reasoning that used evidence and that many such exchanges resulted in students achieving the correct answer. Students also had discussions in which ideas were exchanged, but the correct answer not achieved. Importantly, instructor prompts that asked students to use reasoning resulted in significantly more discussions containing reasoning connected to evidence than without such prompts. Overall, these results suggest that these upper-level biology students readily employ reasoning in their discussions and are positively influenced by instructor cues.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1931-7913</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1931-7913</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1187/cbe.13-05-0090</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24297291</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Society for Cell Biology</publisher><subject>Audience Response Systems ; Biology ; Biology - education ; College Science ; Colorado ; Cues ; Discussion (Teaching Technique) ; Educational Technology ; Female ; Group Discussion ; Handheld Devices ; Humans ; Instructional Effectiveness ; Logical Thinking ; Male ; Science Instruction ; Students - psychology ; Teaching Methods ; Thinking Skills ; Undergraduate Students</subject><ispartof>CBE life sciences education, 2013-12, Vol.12 (4), p.645-654</ispartof><rights>2013 J. K. Knight © 2013 The American Society for Cell Biology. This article is distributed by The American Society for Cell Biology under license from the author(s). It is available to the public under an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons License ( ). 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-20b164dbbd7df533d9836fde8fd6bb32bb025ba58e9e694bf585f6431b2dae533</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-20b164dbbd7df533d9836fde8fd6bb32bb025ba58e9e694bf585f6431b2dae533</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3846515/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3846515/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27903,27904,53769,53771</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1017240$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24297291$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Dirks, Clarissa Ann</contributor><creatorcontrib>Knight, Jennifer K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wise, Sarah B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Southard, Katelyn M</creatorcontrib><title>Understanding Clicker Discussions: Student Reasoning and the Impact of Instructional Cues</title><title>CBE life sciences education</title><addtitle>CBE Life Sci Educ</addtitle><description>Previous research has shown that undergraduate science students learn from peer discussions of in-class clicker questions. However, the features that characterize such discussions are largely unknown, as are the instructional factors that may lead students into productive discussions. To explore these questions, we recorded and transcribed 83 discussions among groups of students discussing 34 different clicker questions in an upper-level developmental biology class. Discussion transcripts were analyzed for features such as making claims, questioning, and explaining reasoning. In addition, transcripts were categorized by the quality of reasoning students used and for performance features, such as percent correct on initial vote, percent correct on revote, and normalized learning change. We found that the majority of student discussions included exchanges of reasoning that used evidence and that many such exchanges resulted in students achieving the correct answer. Students also had discussions in which ideas were exchanged, but the correct answer not achieved. Importantly, instructor prompts that asked students to use reasoning resulted in significantly more discussions containing reasoning connected to evidence than without such prompts. Overall, these results suggest that these upper-level biology students readily employ reasoning in their discussions and are positively influenced by instructor cues.</description><subject>Audience Response Systems</subject><subject>Biology</subject><subject>Biology - education</subject><subject>College Science</subject><subject>Colorado</subject><subject>Cues</subject><subject>Discussion (Teaching Technique)</subject><subject>Educational Technology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Group Discussion</subject><subject>Handheld Devices</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Instructional Effectiveness</subject><subject>Logical Thinking</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Science Instruction</subject><subject>Students - psychology</subject><subject>Teaching Methods</subject><subject>Thinking Skills</subject><subject>Undergraduate Students</subject><issn>1931-7913</issn><issn>1931-7913</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkU1v1DAYhCMEoh9w5QbKBYlLtn79lZgDElpKWVSpEtADJ8uO3-waEmexk6767_Fqy6qcbGmeGY81RfEKyAKgqS9aiwtgFREVIYo8KU5BMahqBezpo_tJcZbSL0K4JCCeFyeUU1VTBafFz9vgMKbJBOfDulz2vv2NsfzkUzun5MeQ3pffp9lhmMpvaNIY9limy2mD5WrYmnYqx65chTTFuZ2yw_Tlcsb0onjWmT7hy4fzvLj9fPlj-aW6vrlaLT9eVy3ndKoosSC5s9bVrhOMOdUw2TlsOietZdRaQoU1okGFUnHbiUZ0kjOw1BnMhvPiwyF3O9sBXZubRtPrbfSDifd6NF7_rwS_0evxTrOGSwEiB7x7CIjjn1x80kP-Pfa9CTjOSQOXXAFhimZ0cUDbOKYUsTs-A0Tv99B5Dw1ME6H3e2TDm8fljvi_ATLw-gBg9O1RvvwKBGrK9wFvD_rGrzc7H1GnwfR9jqN6t9sB1VxLLthf2kGfVQ</recordid><startdate>20131201</startdate><enddate>20131201</enddate><creator>Knight, Jennifer K</creator><creator>Wise, Sarah B</creator><creator>Southard, Katelyn M</creator><general>American Society for Cell Biology</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20131201</creationdate><title>Understanding Clicker Discussions: Student Reasoning and the Impact of Instructional Cues</title><author>Knight, Jennifer K ; Wise, Sarah B ; Southard, Katelyn M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-20b164dbbd7df533d9836fde8fd6bb32bb025ba58e9e694bf585f6431b2dae533</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Audience Response Systems</topic><topic>Biology</topic><topic>Biology - education</topic><topic>College Science</topic><topic>Colorado</topic><topic>Cues</topic><topic>Discussion (Teaching Technique)</topic><topic>Educational Technology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Group Discussion</topic><topic>Handheld Devices</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Instructional Effectiveness</topic><topic>Logical Thinking</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Science Instruction</topic><topic>Students - psychology</topic><topic>Teaching Methods</topic><topic>Thinking Skills</topic><topic>Undergraduate Students</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Knight, Jennifer K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wise, Sarah B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Southard, Katelyn M</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>CBE life sciences education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Knight, Jennifer K</au><au>Wise, Sarah B</au><au>Southard, Katelyn M</au><au>Dirks, Clarissa Ann</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1017240</ericid><atitle>Understanding Clicker Discussions: Student Reasoning and the Impact of Instructional Cues</atitle><jtitle>CBE life sciences education</jtitle><addtitle>CBE Life Sci Educ</addtitle><date>2013-12-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>645</spage><epage>654</epage><pages>645-654</pages><issn>1931-7913</issn><eissn>1931-7913</eissn><abstract>Previous research has shown that undergraduate science students learn from peer discussions of in-class clicker questions. However, the features that characterize such discussions are largely unknown, as are the instructional factors that may lead students into productive discussions. To explore these questions, we recorded and transcribed 83 discussions among groups of students discussing 34 different clicker questions in an upper-level developmental biology class. Discussion transcripts were analyzed for features such as making claims, questioning, and explaining reasoning. In addition, transcripts were categorized by the quality of reasoning students used and for performance features, such as percent correct on initial vote, percent correct on revote, and normalized learning change. We found that the majority of student discussions included exchanges of reasoning that used evidence and that many such exchanges resulted in students achieving the correct answer. Students also had discussions in which ideas were exchanged, but the correct answer not achieved. Importantly, instructor prompts that asked students to use reasoning resulted in significantly more discussions containing reasoning connected to evidence than without such prompts. Overall, these results suggest that these upper-level biology students readily employ reasoning in their discussions and are positively influenced by instructor cues.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Society for Cell Biology</pub><pmid>24297291</pmid><doi>10.1187/cbe.13-05-0090</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1931-7913 |
ispartof | CBE life sciences education, 2013-12, Vol.12 (4), p.645-654 |
issn | 1931-7913 1931-7913 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3846515 |
source | MEDLINE; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Audience Response Systems Biology Biology - education College Science Colorado Cues Discussion (Teaching Technique) Educational Technology Female Group Discussion Handheld Devices Humans Instructional Effectiveness Logical Thinking Male Science Instruction Students - psychology Teaching Methods Thinking Skills Undergraduate Students |
title | Understanding Clicker Discussions: Student Reasoning and the Impact of Instructional Cues |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-25T03%3A12%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Understanding%20Clicker%20Discussions:%20Student%20Reasoning%20and%20the%20Impact%20of%20Instructional%20Cues&rft.jtitle=CBE%20life%20sciences%20education&rft.au=Knight,%20Jennifer%20K&rft.date=2013-12-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=645&rft.epage=654&rft.pages=645-654&rft.issn=1931-7913&rft.eissn=1931-7913&rft_id=info:doi/10.1187/cbe.13-05-0090&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1464910392%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1464910392&rft_id=info:pmid/24297291&rft_ericid=EJ1017240&rfr_iscdi=true |