Audience Response System

Audimax of the University of Rostock

As Audience Response Systems technical and electronic devices are referred to in the framework of courses or lectures with numerous participants the interactivity between teacher (or speaker) is expected to increase and the audience. The use of such systems is mostly guided by concrete didactic concepts and is therefore to be understood as a sub-area of e-learning . Examples of audience response systems are, on the one hand, classic “ clickers ” and, on the other hand, modern, web-based solutions that work with the participants' internet-enabled mobile devices.

general description

Audience Response Systems (ARS) are interactive learning tools that are used to increase the interaction between audience and speaker in teaching and lecture situations. Most of these systems are based on wireless hardware and presentation software . The traditional systems often rely on so-called clickers, with the help of which the audience can take part in collective voting processes. Modern systems often do not require any additional hardware, as coordination and interaction takes place via smartphones, laptops or tablets. ARS allow large groups to vote on certain aspects or answer questions. Depending on the system used, each participant receives or has a technical device (clicker, smartphone / tablet ) that enables participation.

The majority of the traditional systems available currently still rely on the use of special wireless hardware. The data transmission takes place either via infrared or radio transmission. In addition, there have been web-based systems for some time whose data transmission between sender and receiver takes place via the Internet . Usually, smartphone-based systems are also used in this context, as these are cheaper and easier to use. Hardware-based systems cost around 10 times as much as a software / cloud solution.

Classic electronic voting systems

Commercial clicker

Commercial clicker

The predecessors of today's feature-rich ARS are electronic voting systems (so-called "clickers") which usually only have one function: They enable anonymous voting in courses or meetings to be carried out with the help of clickers previously distributed in the audience. The audience's inputs are wirelessly transmitted to the voting software and can then be projected onto the wall using a video projector. By integrating the voting system, in addition to classic voting questions ( multiple-choice question / forced-choice question), domain-specific task types can also be used in courses. In the run-up to the voting, clickers are often distributed to the audience present, which are then collected again after the survey.

Types of ARS

Hardware-based ARS

Using a computer and presentation software, the lecturer asks the auditorium questions with several possible answers ( multiple-choice questions). The listeners use previously distributed clickers to give their respective answers, e.g. A, B or C, by pressing the appropriate button. The answer is sent wirelessly to a receiver that is connected to the speaker's computer. The ARS software evaluates the answers and then displays them graphically. Depending on how the system is equipped, the clicker, yes / no or numeric answers can be given with different buttons.

Software / cloud based ARS

Software or cloud solutions are often web-based and take advantage of the widespread use of smartphones / laptops and WiFi connections. The lecturer directs questions to the audience, who - depending on the system - see them either as part of the speaker's presentation or directly in the web browser on their mobile devices. The question is voted on or answered, also via the website or the app of the respective system.

maintenance

• Hardware such as clickers etc. must be maintained and repaired if necessary.
• The software required for the systems must be configured and kept up to date.
• The functionality of all systems also depends on the conditions on site, such as WiFi equipment or architectural peculiarities.

Areas of application of ARS

• School and university teaching
• Public lectures and presentations
• Conferences and major events
• Political campaigns
• Cooperative training
• Voting and decision making
• Market research

Benefits of ARS

1. Improved awareness: In a study at four universities in Wisconsin , university staff and students who participated in ARS-supported teaching situations were asked about the effects of these systems. 94% of the faculty surveyed agreed with the claim that “clickers have increased student engagement”. The remaining 6% of respondents were neutral to the claim. At the same time, 69% of the 2,684 students surveyed said that “clickers helped to get more involved than usual”. 13% disagreed with this statement.
2. Increased knowledge transfer: In the same study, 74% of the students surveyed agreed with the statement that “clickers have added value for the student's learning success”. In agreement, 59% of the students stated that “clickers have added value for their own learning”; only 19% disagreed with this claim. Furthermore, Catherine Crouch and Eric Mazur examined the effects of “Peer Instruction” and ARS on student teacher success. Lecturers who work with "Peer Instruction" first convey specific information to the students, then a question is asked in order to record the success of the teaching among the students. The students answer these questions with the help of ARS before discussing their previously given answers in small groups. The lecturer then asks the question again to measure possible changes in response behavior. The study showed that students who were taught using “Peer Instruction” and ARS achieved significantly better learning success than students who were taught using traditional teaching methods. A study by Miller et al. however, could not show any significant differences in learning success between students who used the ARS and those who were taught traditionally.
3. Anonymity: In contrast to displaying by hand or verbally, voting with the help of a clicker or smartphone is anonymous. Thanks to the decreasing likelihood of social sanctioning measures due to incorrect or deviating answers and views, this can lead to an increased willingness to participate. Furthermore, some ARS allow the audience to address (formulated) questions directly to the lecturer completely anonymously.
4. Recording of individual progress: Depending on the system, users have the option of objectively viewing their individual learning progress (e.g. using recurring multiple-choice questions) using unique identification numbers and permanently stored data.
5. Real-time feedback: Most ARS allow the results of the survey to be presented to the audience as a graphic or table immediately after the voting process has ended - either as part of the lecturer's presentation or directly on the audience's mobile devices.
6. Creation of interactive and entertaining teaching environments: Due to its novelty, the use of ARS can lead to an increase in individual interest in class and teaching. The possibility of comparing oneself and one's results with those of other participants creates a new form of interactivity, which leads to a changed teaching situation.
7. Immediate feedback: ARS empowers lecturers and students alike to gain immediate certainty about which knowledge and which concepts have been captured and which have not. The studies mentioned above show that this advantage is recognized and valued on both sides.
8. Data acquisition and analysis: Due to their technically digital character, ARS enable - in contrast to voting by hand signal - the permanent storage, display and analysis of the results. Depending on the system, lecturers can record developments over time or students can view their individual progress.

Individual evidence

1. ↑ Kollmann, Fritjof: " Using mobile devices to integrate economic simulations in teaching approaches based on direct instruction. ( Memento of the original from July 28, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to instructions and then remove this note. "In: ITEC. January 14, 2004, accessed July 23, 2014. 
2. ↑ Kaleta, Robert, and Joosten, Tanya. "Student Response Systems: A University of Wisconsin System Study of Clickers." Educause Center for Applied Research Research Bulletin. Vol. 2007, Issue 10, May 8, 2007, pp. 4-6.
3. ↑ Kaleta, Robert, and Joosten, Tanya. "Student Response Systems: A University of Wisconsin System Study of Clickers." Educause Center for Applied Research Research Bulletin. Vol. 2007, Issue 10, May 8, 2007, pp. 6-7.
4. ↑ Crouch, Catherine H., and Mazur, Eric. " Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results. ( Memento of the original from January 26, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. " At the. J. Phys. Vol. 69, No. September 9, 2001. 
5. ↑ Crouch, Catherine H., and Mazur, Eric. " Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results. ( Memento of the original from January 26, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. " At the. J. Phys. Vol. 69, No. September 9, 2001. pp. 971-72. 
6. ^ Miller, Redonda G., Ashar, Bimal H. and Getz, Kelly J .: Evaluation of an audience response system for the continuing education of health professionals. In: Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions. Vol. 23, No. 2, 2003. pp.109-115.
7. ^ Beatty, Ian. "Transforming Student Learning with Classroom Communication Systems." Educause Center for Applied Research Research Bulletin. Volume 2004, Issue 3 (February 3, 2004), p. 5.