“Given a choice, would college students prefer to pay for more than one type of remote-controlled in-class voting device, a.k.a. “clicker”; carry more than one clicker with them from class to class; or neither of the above?
At California State University, the systemwide student government has picked the third option. Last fall, it passed aresolution calling for each California State campus to choose a single brand of classroom clicker, thus becoming one of a growing number of institutions to pursue clicker standardization as a way of curbing redundant costs for students. The system has responded by instructing those campuses that have not standardized clickers to do so. This spring, the Pennsylvania State University System went one step further, announcing that it would deploy a single brand of clicker across its 20 campuses.”
Clicker standardisation is a sensible idea. At least it would have been 2 years ago and maybe even last year, but with the proliferation of personal wireless enabled devices, I wouldn’t recommend spending any money on new clickers.
We have wireless access on our campuses (yes, the capacity needs improving). The majority of our students have some form of wireless enabled device (and rest will probably get one this Christmas).
The software is everywhere – twitter and Poll Anywhere are 2 common examples. Chuck in a campus voip system that hooks into mobile phones (apparently we have this – I need to check it out) and you have pretty much covered all the bases.
On top of all that if you’re a Monash person we have MeTL (which is also a reason to throw away your iPad and buy a Win 7 slate – whenever a good one comes onto the market) . MeTL is an rebuilt version of the University of Washington’s Classroom Presenter. The people in our eEducation centre are beyond clever.
Check it out here.
I like clickers, I think they can be used to improve student learning but the asteroid has struck and the dinosaurs are on borrowed time.