Clicking for grades? Really? Investigating the use of clickers for awarding grade-points in post-secondary education

Abstract

Using classroom response systems (clickers) to accumulate grade-points has become a controversial practice as response systems have become more widely used in the last decade. Although some instructors opt to use clickers on a non-grades basis, it has become quite common to reward students for (a) correct answers, (b) participating in clicker questions regardless of whether their answer is correct or incorrect, and (c) a combination of participation and correctness. Here, we discuss the appropriateness of using clickers for accumulating grade-points in academia and address two of the most common concerns raised with such practices: technology failure and cheating. The paucity of literature on clicker technology failure suggests that it is more sensationalized than real. Cheating remains a real issue, but can be minimized by educating students about clicker-related cheating policies and by staying away from high-stakes clicker-based testing. Research and expert opinion leads us to believe that the appropriateness of using clickers for accumulating grades depends on how they are used. We recommend rewarding students for giving correct answers or for participating in high-value constructivist learning activities. Rewarding students with participation grade-points for incorrect answers to trivia-style or simple-factual questions should be avoided because it primarily serves to reward students for their attendance in class.

Indicators of satisfaction in clickers-aided EFL class

“…In addition, formative and summative assessment and feedback methods led to different findings. Awarding merits for clicker answers would possibly result in cheating (White et al, 2011 ), which was echoed by Han and Finkelstein ( 2013 ) who argued that use of formative feedback could increase student engagement and participation, but it was not true of summative feedback. However, clicker answers could also contribute to participation marks instead of right answers (FitzPatrick et al, 2011 ).…”

“…However, clicker answers could also contribute to participation marks instead of right answers (FitzPatrick et al, 2011 ). Therefore, it is worth further studies on how awarding merits for clicker answers could impact learning outcomes (White et al, 2011 ).…”

“…A number of researchers and institutions acknowledged the value of technology use in teaching and learning (e.g., White et al, 2011 ; Yu and Liu, 2014 ; Yu et al, 2014 ). Advanced technologies have been proved to provide learners and teachers with a convenient medium in learning and instruction.…”

Using Interactive Response Systems in Economics: utility and factors influencing students’ attitudes

“…With respect to the drawbacks of implementing the IRS in the teaching methodology, the main disadvantages are the training needed for setting up the software and for its use by teachers; the time spent on the acquisition of these skills, and the acquisition cost of the equipment. Furthermore, it is a time-consuming activity because instructors should examine if this kind of experiences are properly awarded to students (White et al 2011).…”

The Psychometric Properties of Classroom Response System Data: A Case Study

“…If the instructor can identify which student submitted which answer, the percentage of correct responses increases (Poole 2012). Another implementation detail is whether or not to assign points for participation, only for correct answers, or for a combination of both (White et al 2011). While the quality of individual answers may increase in such partial credit scenarios, there is evidence that the quality of peer discussions might suffer, as strong students tend to dominate in grade-conscious discourse (James 2006).…”