Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

The Personal Response System (PRS) at the University of Rochester

Frank L. H. WolfsDepartment of Physics and Astronomy

Graduate Teaching Seminar, October 29, 2004

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

The Personal Response System

• The personal response system was introduced in our large lecture courses to increase the involvement of the students in these courses.

• Faculty can pose questions, students submit their answers using wireless transmitters, and the data are collected using a set of receivers connected to a computer running the PRS software which provides an immediate analysis of the results.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Personal Response SystemThe components

• Each student uses a transmitter to submit his/her answers.

• The answers can be• Multiple-choice answers (up to 9

possible answers).• Numerical answers (integers only).

• Each student can indicate his/her level of confidence by pressing the H key (high confidence) or L key (low confidence) before submitting their answer. The default confident level is M (medium confidence).

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressorare needed to see this picture.

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Personal Response SystemThe components

• The signals from the transmitters are received by several receivers.

• The signals are infra-red signals and require line of sight.

• The required processing time limits the number of users to about 40 per receiver (many receivers can be daisy chained).

• Note: the use of RF technology would increase the cost by an order to magnitude.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Personal Response SystemHow did we get started?

• The impact of PRS is well established, but cost has been the main reason not to adopt it.

• In October 2003 I attended an AAPT meeting about the introductory Physics course curriculum, and found out that Prentice Hall offered the possibility of bundling the PRS units with their text book (the cost per book increased by $15). In addition, for every 40 text books sold, I would receive one receiver.

• Since we already use books from Prentice Hall in our introductory physics courses, I decided to order the bundled version for Physics 121 for spring 2004, and Prof. Manly decided to do the same thing for Physics 114.

• I received 8 receivers from the PRS company at no charge.

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Personal Response SystemHow did we get started?

• In January 2004 four receivers were installed in Hoyt hall and connected to the built-in PC.

• The system was used successfully in both Physics 121 and Physics 114 during the spring semester (more details about the use in Physics 121 will be provided momentarily).

• The success in these courses resulted in the interest of other faculty in other courses. But …..• The cost of the PRS transmitter for students who did not buy it bundled

was significant ($35 - $40 per unit).• The tie to Prentice Hall to reduce the cost of the transmitters is not a good

thing.• Is there a market for used transmitters?

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Personal Response SystemHow do we continue?

• Planned usage of PRS for fall 2004 (700 students):• Astronomy 102• Biology 110• Physics 113• Physics 122• Physics 141

• I made an arrangement with the bookstore to have them purchase PRS transmitters. The students can rent the transmitters at a cost of $10 ($23 deposit is required).

• PRS company delivered 16 receivers which were installed in Dewey, Hubbell, and B&L 106. Note: facilities completed the installation during the second week of classes only after I threatened to do it myself.

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Personal Response SystemHow do we continue?

• In September 2004 the institute of optics equipped one of their class rooms with our spare receivers.

• Everything seems to be working fine. Minor issues related to class files remain to be addressed.

• Documentation about the use of the PRS at the U of R can be found at

http://teacher.pas.rochester.edu/PRSatUofR/PRSInfo.html

• Unfortunately, I could not get my class moved to a PRS equipped class room for fall 2004.

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Personal Response SystemExamples of its use in Physics 121.

• In Physics 121 I have used the PRS in many different ways:

• Daily quizzes at the start of lecture.

• Surveys.

• Discussion provoking concept tests.

• Attendance.

• The PRS software collects information about information send by each student. But, if you give credit for participation and/or quizzes, student need to know for sure their answer was accepted.

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Personal Response SystemThe questions

• In Physics 121 PRS was used for quizzes, surveys, and concept tests:• Quizzes are used to ensure that

students read the material to be covered in class before coming to class.

• Concept tests are used to focus on difficult concepts in the material being discussed and provides immediate feedback on the misconceptions of the students.

• Rather than reinventing the wheel, most of the quizzes and concept tests were taken from ”Peer Instruction” by Eric Mazur.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Personal Response SystemExamples of its use in Physics 121.

• Quiz at the beginning of class (based on the reading assignment):

• 3 - 4 multiple-choice questions.

• Part of the course grade.

• A group of people always leaves right after the quiz. But …. I know who they are!

• The occasional survey.

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Personal Response System.

• Sorry, you will have to work ………

• Let’s see if we can generate stimulating discussions ……

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Examples of PRS dataPeer Instruction: Correct = Answer 3

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Examples of PRS dataPeer Instruction: Correct = Answer 3

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Examples of PRS dataPeer Instruction: Correct = Answer 5

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Examples of PRS dataPeer Instruction: Correct = Answer 1

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Usage of attendance.Effect of attendance on exam 1 grade.

Grade/Attendance Correlation (Lecture 6 - 11)

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Attendance (# of Lectures)

Results Midtem Exam # 1

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Usage of attendance.Effect of attendance on pre-final course grade.

Physics 121 Attendance

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

5 15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85Current Grade (%)

Attendance (%)

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Usage of attendance.Is it workshops or lectures?

• Attendance information can be used for other studies.

• For example, students who go to workshops are also more likely to go to lecture. Do they get better grades because of the workshop or because they come to lecture?

• There is a lot of information available ……. A lot to learn from it.

Lecture Attendance

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Lecture Attendance (%)

Number of Students

WSNO WS

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

What did the students think?

• In general the in-class concept test were received well. The in-class discussion changed the class atmosphere ….. but the instructor must be willing to change focus on a moments notice based on the feedback from the students.

• Quizzes were not well received, but this is always true, independent of the method of delivery. …… But, forcing student to come to class lowers your course opinion ratings!

• Main complaints came from students who purchased the PRS transmitters separately (expensive).

Frank L. H. Wolfs Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Summary

• The use of PRS has been successfully introduced at the U of R.

• The simulating discussions that evolve as a result of the PRS system are a result of the questions being used. These discussions can take place in the recitation environment without having to rely on PRS hardware/software.

• Anything that will increase the involvement of the students in lecture/recitation/workshop will increase their impact.