1 the UNIVERSITY of GREENWICH Ask the Audience Making lectures more interactive using electronic...
-
date post
22-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of 1 the UNIVERSITY of GREENWICH Ask the Audience Making lectures more interactive using electronic...
1
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
Ask the Audience
Making lectures more interactive using electronic voting systems
Patrick McGurk, University of Greenwich
Teaching and Learning Conference
July 2009
2
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
Overview
1. Introduction (5 mins)
2. Practical demonstration (10 mins)
3. Presentation and discussion of student feedback (10 mins)
4. Discussion of value and application of technology (10 mins)
5. Final Q&A (5 mins)
3
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
Why electronic voting systems?
Large lectures Less contact time Falling attendance over the course of lecture
series Evidence of shallow, rather than deep
understanding
4
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
Personal Response System (PRS)
PRS was developed by Professor Nelson Cue at Hong Kong University of Technology and has now been adopted by hundreds of educators worldwide
5
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
Turning Point – Response Card
•powered by a small watch battery•uses portable USB radio receiver •up to 83,000 responses within a 400 ft range •can be fixed to lecture theatre desks•can be bought/borrowed by students •can be used as a mobile kit with smaller groups
6
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
Practical Demonstration
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
7
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
Student Feedback from Pilot Project
Electronic voting systems used on 15-credit courses, September-December 2008 BA Business Management & BA Hons Human Resource
Management, Yr1 (approx 150 students) BSc Biosciences, Yr2 (approx 50 students)
Business School pilot Average 135 responses to 7 questions Data collected using the Turning Point technology on 2
December 2008 Report generated using the Turning Point software
8
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
The use of electronic voting handsets made lectures more
enjoyable56.30%
24.60%
6.30% 2.80%9.90%
StronglyAgree
Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
9
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
The use of electronic voting handsets was pointless
9.70% 6.70% 8.20%
40.30%35.10%
StronglyAgree
Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
10
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
The use of electronic voting handsets made me follow the
lecture more closely
21%
41.30%
26.80%
9.40%1.50%
StronglyAgree
Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
11
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
The use of electronic voting handsets challenged me to think
more deeply about how well I understood the topics
27.20%
44.10%
10.30% 10.30% 8.10%
StronglyAgree
Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
12
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
The use of electronic voting handsets made me read more to
make sure I understood the topics
17%
36.40%
23.30%15.50%
7.80%
StronglyAgree
Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
13
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
The use of electronic voting handsets made me discuss the
topics with colleagues more than I normally would
21.20%
38.60%
16.70% 16.70%6.80%
StronglyAgree
Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
14
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
The use of electronic voting handsets was too disruptive
5.30%11.30%
24.80%
36.80%
21.80%
StronglyAgree
Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
15
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
Discussion
1. Would the use of electronic voting systems be desirable in your own teaching?
2. What would be the main issues for you / your colleagues / your institution?
Q&A
16
theUNIVERSITYofGREENWICH
Contacts
Paul Dyer Senior Lecturer in Biomedical Science
Room: Grenville 210A (Medway)Email: [email protected]: 020 8331 9046Fax: 020 8331 9805
Patrick McGurk Senior Lecturer in Human Resources and Organisational Behaviour
Room: QA157Email: [email protected]
Tel. 020 8331 9060Fax. 020 8331 9005