MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1512970432 · doi:10.22329/celt.v1i0.3184

15. Clicker Lessons: Assessing and Addressing Student Responses to Audience Response Systems

2008· article· en· W1512970432 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Tim Pelton, Leslee Francis Pelton, Mary Sanseverino

Bibliographic record

VenueCollected Essays on Learning and Teaching · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClickerSample (material)Audience responsePsychologySet (abstract data type)Mathematics educationPerceptionBaseline (sea)Computer sciencePolitical scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This project began in response to a perceived need to assess students’ perceptions with respect to the emerging use of audience response systems (clickers) in several mid- to large-size undergraduate courses at the University of Victoria. We developed and validated a “Clicker Use Survey” to gather students’ opinions with respect to clicker utility and the impact of clicker use on their learning. With the collected data we generated a set of baseline distributions to support assessment of various clicker use protocols and created a self-evaluation tool to share with instructors to support teacher reflection on the efficacy of their clicker practices. We also provided a sample self-evaluation to model the use of the tool. Links to the survey instrument, baseline data and self-evaluation tool, and sample self-evaluation are provided.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.063
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.063
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.120
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.336 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCollected Essays on Learning and TeachingSame topicInnovative Teaching MethodsFrench-language works237,207