This document is a research proposal by Karin Blackwood that examines the use of clickers in a high school biology class. The proposal outlines the statement of the problem, background and need for the research, proposed methodology, and issues/limitations. The methodology section indicates that clicker use will be evaluated over one school year with 58 biology students, comparing assessment scores and GPAs before and after using clickers for review sessions. Surveys will also assess student perceptions. The proposal aims to evaluate the impact of clickers on student learning and engagement at the high school level.

1. Research Proposal
Presentation
Karin Blackwood
EDU 710
Dr. Helen Hawley
3/6/2012 Karin Blackwood, ID# 427003 1

2. The Use of Clickers in a
High School Biology Class
3/6/2012 Karin Blackwood, ID# 4270003 2

3. Statement of the Problem
• Using a device, such as a handheld clicker, might
level the playing field for the language learner and
the reluctant learner; while capturing the attention
of the tired and disengaged student.
• Educators find themselves in a very difficult time
to teach, and teach well.
– Language issues exist for many students
– Students don’t get to touch technology even though it is
all around them
– Students are difficult to engage (over-stimulation,
family issues, too many activities)
3/6/2012 Karin Blackwood, ID# 427003 3

4. Background & Need
• Response Systems have been around since the
1960s but entered the educational arena in the 80s
• Clickers today transmit a student’s response & can
instantly see it being evaluated
• It is a means of active learning while allowing the
teacher to obtain & analyze student learning
immediately
• Primarily used at the college level…most research
done at the college level
• Need to evaluate the value of the clicker for stu-
dent review sessions & its impact on summative
assessment data at the high school level
3/6/2012 Karin Blackwood, ID# 427003 4

5. Proposed Methodology
• Research Method
– Approach: Mixed-Method
– sampling strategy:
• 58 biology students will be participating from this
teacher-researcher’s 3rd & 4th period classes
– Timeframe: 1 school year
• The fall semester of assessment scores will be the
baseline data; overall GPAs will be collected as well
• The spring semester of assessment scores will be
collected after using the clickers for the review
sessions; overall GPAs will be collected.
3/6/2012 Karin Blackwood, ID# 427003 5

6. Methodology continued…
• Scope & location of research
– This study takes place at a large high school in
CA where enrollment if just over 2000 students
• All students at this site must take biology
• Classes are heterogeneous in age, ethnicity, and
intellect
– Triangulation of data? YES!!
• The overall GPAs of the individual participants will
be compared between the fall & spring semesters
• Students will also be compared by grade level (9,
10, 11, & 12)
• Students will take a perception survey
3/6/2012 Karin Blackwood, ID# 427003 6

7. Issues & Limitations
• Ethical
– Privacy: The students will remain anonymous
and will be identified by student number, not
name
– Confidentiality: The data will be shared with
the teacher-researchers content team and also
with NVUSD, but the students will remain
nameless
3/6/2012 Karin Blackwood, ID# 427003 7

8. Issues & Limitations continued…
• Limitations
– Study limited to the accessibility of a class set
of clickers
– Steep learning curve for first time users
– Most questions target factual questions that are
lower down on Bloom’s taxonomy
– Technology issues
– Cheating
– Cost & storage
3/6/2012 Karin Blackwood, ID# 427003 8

9. References
• Achievement Gap. (2011, July 7). Education Week.
• Beatty, I. (2004). Transforming student learning with classroom communication systems. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 3, 5. Retrieved from
http://www.educause.edu/LibraryDetailPage/?ID=ERB0403
• Bloom, B. 1956. Taxonomy of educational objectives: Book 1, cognitive domain. New York: Longman.
• Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. Retrieved October 9, 2011, from
http://www.lifescied.org////.full
• Dills, I. (2011, October 9). School district launches $11 million learning plan. Napa Valley Register.
• Gee, J. P. (2005). Learning by design: good video games as learning machines. E-learning, 2(1), 5-16.
• Gee, J. P. (revised, 2008). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. In Empowered learners: Problem solving,
understanding (pp. 8, 14). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Guess, A. (2008, July 18). Keeping clickers in the classroom. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com
• Herreid, C. F. (2006, October). “Clicker” cases: Introducing case study teaching into large classrooms. Journal of College Science Teaching,
36(2), 43-37. Abstract obtained from “Clicker” cases: introducing case study teaching into large classrooms, 2006, 36, Abstract No. 2.
• Johnson, C. (2007, January 24). Clickers in your classroom [Electronic mailing list message]. Retrieved from Wakonse-Arizona E-
Newsletter: http://cite.asu.edu/wakonse//idea.htm
• Lane, D., & Atlas, R. (1996, March). The networked classroom. Lecture presented at Computers & Psychology, York, UK.
• Martyn, M. (2007). Clickers in the classroom: An active learning approach. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 30, volume 30, number 2. Retrieved
from http://Volum//7458
• Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student
achievement.
• McDaniel, R. (n.d.). Motivational theory. Retrieved from http://www.ehow.com/_5010005_theories-r
• SARC data. (n.d.). Napa valley unified school district. Retrieved October 24, 2011, from NVUSD website: http://www.nvusd.k12.ca.us/
• Strom, P. S., & Strom, R. D. (2002). Collaboration integration theory: Overcoming limitations of cooperative learning among community
college students. The Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 315-331. Retrieved from http://www.public.asu.edu/~rdstrom/
3/6/2012 9
Karin Blackwood, ID# 427003