Effects of Classroom Performance Systems (CPS- Clickers) on Student Achievement on the Mitosis and Meiosis unit in two 9th grade Honors Biology

Classes

Carol-Ann Pryor

Queens College

Spring 2009

http://www.slideshare.net/capryor25/cps-thesis-presentation-1393483

Science for All Reform

The “science for all” reform has changed the purpose of biology education. Today the purpose is to make all students, not just a select few, biologically literate (Meyer, 1995 p. 14).

Challenge of Science for All

In order to get all students to actively construct their own knowledge of the Biology content teachers need to develop new ways to encourage all students to participate in class.

Standard Class Participation: students raising their hand to a practice or discussion question.

This study was performed in order to see if CPS devices improve class participation for all students, and improve their test score performance.

The goal of the study was to address four main questions:

1. Do CPS devices provide for a significant difference in test score performance when comparing classes taught with and without the devices?

2. Do CPS devices encourage all students to participate during lecture?

3. Does the instant feedback application, provided by the CPS software, allow for clarification of misconceptions?

4. Does the instant feedback application, provided by the CPS software, allow for appropriate pacing of the lesson?

Questions were established based on two previous studies.

Use of CPS at Georgia State University in Library Instruction (Petersohn, 2008)

Use of CPS at The United States Military Academy in Chemistry (Blackman, 2002)

Study

Freshmen level Communication and English classes in a Library Instruction class.

Classes were selected at random and placed into CPS and non-CPS groups.

Treatment = CPS devices

Pre-test was administered consisting of five multiple choice question. (CPS and paper)

Class discussion continued based on the quiz

Post-test was administered

Test scores were compared.

Study

Second Semester Chemistry Course

Eight out of the 46 sections of the course were taught using CPS devices.

Treatment = CPS devices

Non CPS classes started with cadets’ questions about the day’s assignments. The instructor then guided a Socratic Method discussion to draw the answers out of the class itself.

CPS classes were presented with five or six quiz questions that were used to measure cadet preparation. Discussion occurred based on the CPS feedback.

Grades at the end of the semester were collected

Grades were compared

Results

No Significant improvement in Test Results

Instructors felt as if the instant feedback provided by the CPS software allowed them to appropriately pace the lesson, and allowed for valuable class discussion.

CPS Devices

“Classroom performance systems (CPS), also called personal response systems, audience response systems, or clickers, are presentation tools that immediately record and graph audience responses to a question that are transmitted with a hand-held keypad to a PC with a receiver. CPS aggregate and present this collected feedback and, through presentation software, project it on screen” (Petersohn, 2008 p. 313).

Quasi-Experimental Design Notation for Mitosis and Meiosis Lessons

In this limited study classes were already established. Participants were not selected at random.

Mitosis Lesson

Second Period (n=20): Pretest Experimental Treatment Post Test

Fourth Period (n=19): Pretest (no treatment) Post Test

Second Period O X1 O

Fourth Period O X2 O

Meiosis Lesson (Reversal)

Second Period (n=20) Pretest (no treatment) Post Test

Fourth Period (n=19) Pretest Experimental Treatment Post Test

Second Period O X2 O

Fourth Period O X1 O (Cambell, 1966)

Data Collection

Pre-Test and Post-Test Results for the Mitosis and Meiosis Units were collected.

Likert scale surveys with short answers were given to students.

Teacher Reflection Worksheets were completed after each lesson.

Question 1: Do CPS devices provide for a significant difference in test score performance when comparing classes taught with and without the devices?

Test Score Comparison

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Mitosis Pre-Test

Mitosis Post-Test

Meiosis Pre-Test

MeiosisPost-Test

Test

Test

Mea

n Period 2 Test Scores(Treatment: Mitosis)

Period 4 Test Scores(Treatment: Meiosis)

Question 1: Do CPS devices provide for a significant difference in test score performance when comparing classes taught with and without the devices?

Question 2: Do CPS devices encourage all students to participate during lecture?

Question 3: Does the instant feedback application, provided by the CPS software, allow for clarification of misconceptions?

Likert Scale Surveys

Three statements were analyzed:

1. Using CPS units improved your performance on the Unit Test.

2. Instant Feedback provided by the CPS system clarified your understanding of the practice questions.

3. Using CPS units in the classroom distracted you.

Question 2: Do CPS devices encourage all students to participate during lecture?

Question 3: Does the instant feedback application, provided by the CPS software, allow for clarification of misconceptions?

Question 2: Do CPS devices encourage all students to participate during lecture?

Question 3: Does the instant feedback application, provided by the CPS software, allow for clarification of misconceptions?

“The first day using the CPS units allowed for a very interesting discussion. I provided the students with a question that asked them to identify different structures of a chromosome (Chromatids, Centromere). ~60% of the students said that chromatids are identical copies. ~40% of the students said that the chromatids are the copy from mom and the copy from dad (this is a common misconception made by students in the Mitosis unit). When the feedback showed the results a student provided a real world application which seemed to clear up the confusion. He compared chromatids to socks. Both feet need "identical copies". He made a connection that I would have never thought of. If the feedback did not present the division in understanding I don't know if I would have addressed it and I don't know if the student would have been encouraged to voice his analogy.” - Teacher

Question 4: Does the instant feedback application, provided by the CPS software, allow for appropriate pacing of the lesson?

“I was able to monitor all students’ level of understanding of the material. Due to the instant feedback provided by the system. I was able to gauge the understanding of all students and appropriately pace the lesson. The feedback allowed me to instantly address misconceptions, prompt further questioning, and elaborate in order to make sure the majority of the class gained a level of understanding. The discussions that followed allowed for a higher level of confidence when moving on to new material.” – Teacher

Question 4: Does the instant feedback application, provided by the CPS software, allow for appropriate pacing of the lesson?

“The CPS units did present some down time in the classroom. Sometimes the receiver did not register with computer creating distractions and side conversations. Students were more focused on being the first to respond. Instead of actually thinking about the questions, they would press any button just to be the "first to answer".” –Teacher

Results

No Significant improvement in Test Results

Students felt that the devices increased participation of all students and preferred using the devices over standard class participation.

The teacher felt as if the instant feedback provided by the CPS software allowed for the appropriate pacing the lesson, and valuable class discussion.

Limitations ( Campbell, 1963)

Selection: Classes were already established. They were not selected at random. Sample sizes were small.

History: Mitosis and Meiosis is a topic taught in Middle School. Students attended two different Middle Schools with five different life science teachers. Prior knowledge may have varied.

Testing: the Post-test was the same as the Pre-test. Responding to the Pre-test may have impacted the scores of the Post-test.

Absences

Multiple Treatment Interference: Starboards, PowerPoint, Brain Pop, and group work were also used to deliver the content. Although the same lesson plans were implemented discussions that followed and questions that were asked were not consistent between groups.

Biases: The teacher was also the experimenter. Unintentional biased delivery may have occurred in treatment groups.

Further Studies

Implement the CPS devices in all Living Environment classes.

– Honors, Regents, Inclusion

Implement the CPS devices as a daily practice and see if it significantly impacts Regents test scores.

Compare the use of the CPS devices to the Eduware wands.

Works Cited

Blackman, Merrill S. “It Worked a Different Way.” College Teaching 50.1 27-28, 2002

Meyer, R. G. (1995, July). Teaching Secondary School Biology for Social Relevance. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED390641)

Petersohn, B. “Classroom Performance Systems, Library Instruction, and Instructional Design: A Pilot Study” Libraries and the Academy, 8.3 313-324, 2008

Campbell, D. T. et al. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1966.

Campbell, D. 1963, From Description to Experimentation: Interpreting Trends as Quasi-Experiments, In C.W. Harris, Problems in Measuring Change, Univerisity of Winsconsing Press