Are you interested in contributing to HLWIKI International? contact Using clickers (CCSs) during lectures
To browse other articles on a range of HSL topics, see the A-Z index.
- This entry is out of date, and will not be updated, August 2018
See also Information technology topics | Social media in undergraduate medical education | Teaching library users
Clicker systems (also classroom communication systems (CCSs)) are handheld remote devices, receivers and software that allow students to send their responses (typically multiple-choice) to questions that are monitored on a computer by an instructor. The premise of clicker systems is to engage audience members in a form of two-way interaction or discussion of sorts. The results are collected and tabulated in real-time. Responses are transmitted wirelessly to a receiver attached to a computer and tabulated by its software. CCSs also include shared display of results.
How are they used in classrooms?
The main benefit of clicker technology in classroom is the potential to increase interactivity with the students. Those students who are more engaged during class have been found to be even better students due to clicker systems. For those students who are reluctant to speak in class, recent research shows that increasing the peer-to-peer and student-teacher interaction improves their learning and course effectiveness (Hake, Mazur, etc.). Some specific applications or strategies using clickers include:
- question and answer formats
- unit reviewing
- collaborative work (pairs, groups)
- debating points or issues
- voting and peer evaluation
- data collection (survey, statistical analyses)
- customized instruction (based on understanding)
- informal assessment
Should librarians use them?
UBC continues to investigate clicker technology and its classroom applications; so too academic librarians. CCSs and the relationship between publishers and providers is in transition. Librarians should know that they can achieve some real benefits of classroom interaction without the use of CCSs; proceed with caution and/or consult your colleagues before making any investment in clickers. Further evaluation is clearly needed.
- Cost - publishers provide clickers bundled with textbooks; one of the driving forces behind clicker adoption. Cost of the remote is passed on to the students, while cost of base hardware and software for instructors varies
- Technology - some manufacturers are moving to RF (radio frequency) remotes; infrared clickers may be obsolete shortly. One should consider this point especially if an up-front investment is required by either instructor or students
- Support - there are a number of competing systems and UBC has not standardized a clicker system; it is not possible to provide full central support for these systems. Publishers will provide some training and support, but this varies from company to company.
- Teaching & learning - this technology may be useful in increasing interactivity, especially in large classrooms but it must be applied thoughtfully.
CCSs should be used to address specific learning needs and “contingent teaching” where learning is adjusted ‘on the fly’ (Draper). Some techniques will increase interactivity and engagement without the use of the technologies so individuals must determine whether this technology is really necessary to meet the learning needs of participants. The use of clickers for formal assessment is not recommended in the literature due to the limited functionality of the response systems (e.g., no confirmation of answer or receipt).
Should clicker tech be used in classrooms?
- A computer is not a tool or prosthesis that helps us to accomplish something; rather, it is the medium in which we work. (Oliver Grau, MediaArtHistories, 2007)
- Text is any form of information by which we communicate an idea, feeling, or concept. (Mats Dahlstrom, “When Is a Text Text?,” 2002)
- The medium affects the message. (Marshall McLuhan, The Medium Is the Massage, 1967)
- Digital media are material texts. (N. Katherine Hayles, Writing Machines, 2002)
- The artifact of new media is just as important as the process it took to produce it. (Jan Van Looy & Jan Baetens, Close Reading New Media, 2003)
- Making is not separate from thinking. (Stephano Vannotti, “Let Us Do What We Do Best: But How Can We Produce Knowledge by Designing Interfaces?,” 2008)
- The design of information is a conversation about ideas––not about persuading people to do things. (Robert Jacobson, “Information Design,” 2000)
- Criticism of digital media should be specific to digital media and relies on the sensory modalities of the body for that critique rather than abstract ideas or theories. (N. Katherine Hayles, Writing Machines, 2002)
- Digital media involves an interdisciplinary/transdisciplinary study of art, science, and technology (Edward Shanken, Telematic Embrace, 2003) & the Humanities
- The hallmark of a digital scholarship is “collegiality,” “openness,” and “collaboration” (Tom Scheinfeldt, “Why Digital Humanities Is Nice,” 2012)
See also Clicker technology in health and medicine
- Beatty I. Transforming student learning with classroom communication systems. Educause. Center for Applied Research Bulletin. 2004;(3):1–13.
- Bruff D. Teaching with classroom response systems: creating active learning environments. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2009.
- Bruff D, Vanderbilt University, Center for Teaching. Classroom response systems (“Clickers”); 2009. http://www.vanderbilt.edu/cft/resources/teaching_resources/technology/crs.htm
- Broussard BB. To click or not to click: learning to teach to the microwave generation. Nurse Educ Pract. 2012;12(1):3–5.
- Cheung SL. Using mobile phone messaging as a response medium in classroom experiments. J Econ Ed. 2008;39(1):51–67.
- Corcos E, Monty V. Interactivity in library presentations using a personal response system. Educause Quarterly. 2008;31(2):53–60.
- Dangel HL, Wang CX. Student response systems in higher education: moving beyond linear teaching and surface learning. J Ed Tech Development & Exchange. 2008;1(1):93–104.
- Deleo PA, Eichenholtz S, Sosin AA. Bridging the information literacy gap with clickers. J Acad Librarianship. 2009;35(5):438–44.
- DeBourgh GA. Use of classroom "clickers" to promote acquisition of advanced reasoning skills. Nurse Educ Pract. 2008;8(2):76–87
- Draper S. Increasing interactivity in lectures using an electronic voting system. May 2003. http://evs.psy.gla.ac.uk/papers/draperbrown.html
- Educause Learning Initiative. 7 things you should know about clickers. May 2005. http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7002.pdf
- Garner J, O'Sullivan H. Facebook and the professional behaviours of undergraduate medical students. Clin Teach. 2010;7:112–15.
- Gilchrist D, Oakleaf M. An essential partner: the librarian’s role in student learning assessment. Champaign: National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment, 2012.
- Hoekstra A. Vibrant student voices: exploring effects of the use of clickers in large college courses. Learning, Media, & Technology. 2008;33(4):329–41.
- Jensen JV, Ostergaard D, Faxholt AK. Good experiences with an audience response system used in medical education. Dan Med Bull. 2011;58(11):A4333.
- Kay RH, LeSage A. Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: a review of the literature. Computers & Education. 2009;53:819–27.
- Martyn M. Clickers in the classroom: an active learning approach. Educause Quarterly. 2007;30(2).
- Mastoridis S, Kladidis S. Coming soon to a lecture theatre near you: the 'clicker'. Clin Teach. 2010;7:97–101.
- Matesic MA, Adams JM. Provocation to learn: A study in the use of personal response systems in information literacy instruction. Partnership: Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research. 2008;3(1).
- Nagy-Shadman E, Desrochers C. Student response technology: empirically grounded or just a gimmick? Int J Sci Ed. 2008;30(15):202366.
- Nicholson BT, Bassignani MJ. Radiologist/Educator knowledge of the audience response system and limitations to its use. Acad Radiol. 2009;16(12):1555–60.
- Patry M. Clickers in large classes: From student perceptions towards an understanding of best practices. Int J Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 2009;3(2).
- Solecki S, Cornelius F, Draper J. Integrating clicker technology at nursing conferences: an innovative approach to research data collection. Int J Nurs Pract. 2010;16:268–73.
- Trees AR, Jackson MH. The learning environment in clicker classrooms: student processes of learning and involvement in large university-level courses using student response systems. Learning, Media & Technology. 2007;32(1).
- Weerts SE, Miller D, Altice A. "Clicker" technology promotes interactivity in an undergraduate nutrition course. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2009;41(3):227–8.