UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
OFFICE OF CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT
STUDENT RESPONSE SYSTEMS OVERVIEW

Updated 12/6/07

A Student Response System is a learning technology with potential applicability in classrooms. This technology is designed to provide interactive communications between individual students in a class and the teacher. Known by various names such as Student, Personal or Group Response Systems (SRS, PRS, and GRS), Classroom Communication Systems or “Clicker” Systems, this basic technology has exciting potential as an additional pedagogical tool available to the faculty in classrooms.

This provides an overview of this emerging technology, comments on various issues relative to implementation and discusses the current status of these systems in University of Minnesota Twin Cities general purpose classrooms. We choose to use the term "Student Response System - SRS" to describe the family of interactive student-teacher communications systems.

BACKGROUND

A student response system (SRS) is comprised of individual student transmitter/input devices (via keypad, remote, PDA or laptop), receivers, a master/central/host system with software used to electronically gather and tabulate student responses, and infrastructure (sensors, wire, conduit, etc) to support the system. Additionally, the system requires administration to manage the assignment, registration, inventory and control of the student input devices, as well as resources for operations and maintenance of the system over its life cycle.

Functionally, the system allows students to respond to questions posed by an instructor, and allows instructors to view student feedback in real-time, thus allowing them to modify instruction based on individual student or group responses. Some systems also potentially allow students to send real time questions to the instructor during the presentation.

The use of a student response system can add a higher level of interaction and participation in class and allows comprehension to be assessed in real-time. The immediate feedback provided by the SRS enables the instructor to gauge the effectiveness of his or her training. This allows the instructor to alter the presentation and address problem areas for any topics that the students are having difficulty understanding.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS

The benefit for students is an increase in interactivity and class participation. It is also thought that using a student response system can increase retention when effectively integrated into teaching. The students are able to respond to questions and to have their responses evaluated while the content is still the current topic of discussion. With this system, each student keypad (often referred to as a “clicker”) sends a unique identifying signal that is associated with a particular student, and the host computer keeps track of each participant's responses. After the responses are recorded, the host computer displays a histogram of answers. The instructor is able to see the responses immediately and can comment on the results or make changes to the instruction as needed to ensure that the students fully comprehend the content.

Another potential benefit of these systems results from the reduction in paperwork and labor associated with giving quizzes and/or tests (if the student is individually identified), and the associated potential benefit of automatic attendance taking to encourage increased class attendance. SRS integration into course management systems is developing.

THREE TYPES OF SYSTEMS

There are three main types of response systems available: infrared (IR), radio frequency (RF), and WiFi wireless. System hardware requirements are dependent upon each type of system, and if it is to be installed in a classroom, the infrastructure of the room also impacts hardware requirements. A computer (installed or instructor laptop) must also be available to run the software and collect student responses, and an LCD projector is needed if results are to be displayed to the audience. There are pros and cons associated with each type of system

IR SYSTEMS:

The infrared systems use hand-held transmitters to send a signal to strategically placed receivers, and require unobstructed line-of-sight communication between transmitter and receiver within a specified viewing angle. The maximum ratio of transmitters to receivers is dependent on manufacturer but is typically from 40:1 to 80:1. As the number of receivers increases, the number of potential multiple signal collision/interferences also increases, which may result in reliability problems in accurately collecting and registering all student responses, or may  result in tabulation delays.  Some new products with two-way communication may eliminate the need for displaying student matrix charts at the front of the class to confirm reception of answers.

Interfacing IR hardware into classroom infrastructure can be costly and problematic, the level of which is dependent upon the specific room. The conduit requirements for installation and wiring of receivers might be relatively simple in a small room if existing conduit runs are available. As the room size increases, most rooms will require extensive conduit and electrical modifications. Costs, code requirements and complexity could be quite extensive.

A number of UMTC departments have experimented with IR systems, but they have frequently been problematic, and most have transitioned away from this technology.

RF SYSTEMS:

Radio frequency systems are based upon radio transmissions and are therefore not line-of-sight dependant. Single receivers now can reportedly accommodate in excess of 500 input devices. RF systems have the generally have the capability for two-way communication between the receiver and transmitter, acknowledging the reception of a response.  The potential for mutual frequency interference among nearby rooms with similar channels exists and should be researched and monitored.

Infrastructure issues with RF systems are generally less problematic than IR systems, as it is relatively easy to bring the receiver in as a portable unit. While portable units may make predicting interference problems more difficult, they do merit consideration.

RF system instructor software compatibility with multiple operating systems is dependent upon manufacturer. Mac OS compatible instructor software is being offered by most RF vendors.  The majority of SRS vendors currently offer RF systems or have them in development.  In recent months, the hardware costs of RF systems have come down and the performance has improved. A number of on-campus IR users have transitioned to RF systems, usually citing improved reliability, performance and simplicity as reasons. UMD has recently adopted an RF SRS system.

WIRELESS SYSTEMS:

Wireless /WiFi based systems use a recognized wireless standard, such as the existing campus-wide 802.11b/g wireless network, to communicate with wireless student devices. Wireless student devices range from wireless PDAs, to wireless laptops and tablet PCs. A web browser on the student device is used to interact with the SRS.  In the future there will likely be further convergence with text messaging capable and web-enabled cell phones. The management software may be hosted on the instructor's computer or on a server somewhere on the network. A sophisticated server based system can authenticate and log on all devices with passwords and support paperless testing applications with security assurance.

The WiFi based applications require no additional infrastructure as the wireless connectivity is already in place and available in all projection capable general purpose/central classrooms on the Twin Cities campus.

Two programs on campus are using WiFi based systems, Education Policy and Administration and Pharmacy.

The Discourse SRS is currently being used in classes offered by the Education Policy and Administration department.  The classes use the ETS Discourse SRS with either WiFi-equipped laptop computers or PDAs.  The students’ computers/PDAs use the classroom’s wireless network to link up to the instructor’s computer, which runs the Discourse software.  The instructor software is currently only available on the Windows platform, but may be usable on a Mac OS X computer using Virtual PC.  The student device merely has to have Internet access and a web browser, opening up the possibility of virtually any Internet-connected computer, whether it is a laptop, PDA, or even a cell phone, to use the system.  Besides being able to use a wide variety of computing devices, this system allows for open-ended questions and discussions.  Questions and discussion material can be modified during class and the software can generate summaries of the class session. The EDPA department has been using Discourse in graduate-level classes with 25 students at a time in a number of different classroom spaces, including a general purpose classroom.  They have reported good success using this system in their classes.

The College of Pharmacy has used a Wi-Fi based system:  the Numina SRS.  Numina is a web-based SRS that works much like the IR and RF proprietary systems, but uses handheld or laptop computers in place of a dedicated student transmitter or “clicker.”  It is platform independent in that it only requires the student to have a computer with internet access, be it a Palm OS PDA, Pocket PC PDA, or a laptop.  While further evaluation is planned, this system does seem to have potential for greater use in classrooms.  For more information, visit the Numina homepage.

Other SRS systems reportedly based on generic wireless devices that communicate over the existing campus network are available from these products:  TurningPoint, TI-Navigator, and ClassInHand.

TurningPoint offers the vPad Software client which allows users with Internet-connected devices to interact with the traditional TurningPoint SRS system.  This software requires a Windows PC or a PDA running the Palm or Windows Mobile operating systems.

System Comparison

ISSUES/OBSERVATIONS

The student response system concept has great potential as an additional pedagogical tool available to faculty in classrooms. The technology to implement this concept continues to evolve, and there are rapid changes occurring regarding the technology, hardware, software and vendors involved. There is turbulence among SRS vendors as companies are being rapidly acquired and spun off by others. The marketplace has not yet settled on a system that is mature enough to implement on a large scale, such as the UMTC campus.

At this time there is not one IR or RF hardware/software solution that can be scaled from small to large classrooms without significant costs, performance, and other inherit limitations. In addition, the University has not yet addressed compatibility issues among multiple vendors and units or the impact and issues involved in standardization of systems on campus.

IR systems require installing receivers and conduit in classrooms, involving cost, infrastructure, code and maintenance issues. RF systems can generally serve a large class without permanently installed receivers, but must have a receiver connected to the instructor’s computer.  Wireless student response systems using standard protocols (802.11b/g) require no additional infrastructure and can be rapidly implemented in central classrooms that already support wireless student networking. However, wireless student response system development lags RF/IR products, and these systems are only now coming on the market.

Keypad transmitters are typically purchased by each student (or by the department and assigned to individual students). The cost for each student transmitter goes beyond the price of the system. Ongoing administration, registration, management and maintenance of these devices require staffing and resources. The cost of clicker administration/management is frequently not fully recognized by departments when they contemplate adopting SRS technology.

It is impractical for students to have to carry around multiple devices for multiple systems. Students may view the cost of the devices as problematic.

The University must be cautious about installing systems that may inadvertently reduce or compromise our standards of affordability, usability, or reliability of its general purpose projection capable classrooms. We also must be mindful that unique and specialized installations in general/central classrooms may reduce functionality or usability for all users. Specialized technology applications may be best suited for departmental classrooms or as a cart-based, modular add-on unit.

OCM is the Provost's agent for managing all aspects of general purpose/central classrooms. Individual departments, staff, faculty or others may not modify the physical environment, technology or cosmetics in central classrooms without prior coordination and approval by OCM. Any unapproved modifications made in central classrooms may result in charges to the department involved.

Textbook vendors are offering low cost bundled SRS systems with their products as incentives. It is worth noting that the SRS acquisition cost is minimal when compared to the cost of administering and maintaining the system over its life cycle, or the cost of installation (if not a completely portable system). Faculty members contemplating using such a system in a central classroom are asked to contact OCM as far in advance as possible to discuss specific requirements and possibilities.

The success of using a student response system is dependent upon the time invested in administering and managing the system. A department that works through the pedagogical, technical, resource and operational issues usually finds that providing local support staff is essential.

Some SRS vendors such as Turning Technologies and InterWrite (PRS) offer software compatibility with course management systems such as WebCT.  This software allows students to register clickers within the system and associates the clicker with the student’s ID.  WebCT integration is currently used by other institutions but the WebCT Vista system currently in use on the Twin Cities campus is not configured to allow SRS use.

The U of MN Office of Information Technology (OIT) has recommended that a WebCT Vista Powerlink be installed for the TurningPoint SRS product.  OIT has recommended central support of the TurningPoint system for users on the UMTC campus.

General purpose classrooms are designed to support the requirements of a broad range of departments. The projection capable standard that the University has implemented in general purpose classrooms is a proven, reliable and faculty-friendly system that meets the requirements of faculty and students. This standard includes a fixed data projector, laptop interface, easy-to-operate control system, various input devices, and add-on modules for special requirements. This add-on modular flexibility includes the ability to support future systems such as SRS.

It is important to note that all projection capable general purpose classrooms on the Twin Cities campus currently have wireless networking in place (using the campus-wide 802.11b/g standard) and are ready to accommodate a wireless networked response system. No additional classroom hardware or infrastructure is needed.

CURRENT STATUS

OCM is currently partnering with several departments who are conducting trials with student response systems. These trials are providing valuable information on different systems, as is the ongoing coordination between OCM's Classroom Tech Services (CTS) unit and SRS vendors.

To date, the OCM assessment is as follows:

• There are significant pedagogical opportunities in SRS use in classrooms. We see this capability in the future of general purpose classrooms, and we are investigating the value and possible future implementation of such a system.
• We believe that such a capability can be interfaced into the "projection capable classroom" standard - either as an application resident in instructor and student computing devices, or as an add-on module to the standard system.
• SRS technology is still not mature, and has not reached a level where installation on the large scale of UMTC classrooms or with the large student population, is feasible.
• Currently available SRS system usability, reliability, and maintainability do not meet OCM standards for installation in central classrooms.
• IR based systems have significant performance and infrastructure downsides, and use of these systems is not recommended by OCM. RF based SRS systems have fewer infrastructure issues, but do carry some performance downsides.
• Wireless/WiFi based SRS systems require less infrastructure, and can theoretically be readily implemented because all projection capable general purpose classrooms are currently covered by wireless student networking using the 802.11b/g campus-wide standard.
• In the future, it seems preferable (and likely) that student response software will be a resident application on secure ubiquitous wireless student computing devices (laptop/notebook/PDA/smart cell phones) and will be usable throughout the campus. This is the type of future generation student response system that makes sense in general purpose classrooms. In any case, these systems must scale across the campus as standard systems.
• The general purpose classrooms on campus cannot support different departmental student response systems from the perspective of multiple classroom infrastructure installations, from the standpoint of faculty usability, or from the standpoint of students having to use multiple remotes/clickers for different rooms.
• SRS changes are rapidly occurring. WiFi SRS is emerging on the market. The current use of the early adopter wireless systems have shown to be beneficial in on-campus testing. While further evaluation is planned, a wireless system does seem to have potential for greater use in classrooms.
• The administration, management and high life cycle costs of clickers make any current clicker-based system too resource intensive and impractical for implementation when scaled to the size and scope of general purpose classrooms.
• For early adopter departments who desire to use SRS in central classrooms, OCM does not restrict use of portable RF SRS technology in general purpose classrooms so long as it is a departmentally administered system and there are no RFI/EMI interference issues with other classroom electronics.

SUMMARY

UMTC's 300 general purpose classrooms are designed to support the requirements of a broad range of departments. The projection capable standard that the University has implemented in general purpose classrooms is a proven system that meets the requirements of faculty and students. Before selecting a single SRS system for installation and use on a broad scale, the University must first address compatibility issues among the multiple vendors and units and the impact and issues involved in standardization of systems on campus. We are working toward that end. However, at this time, there have been no commitments made to install or support student response systems in central classrooms.

We are very interested in talking with faculty and/or support staff that are using a response system now, or considering one for use in the near future. Please contact our Classroom Instructional Technology Coordinator John Knowles at 612-626-8650 to discuss SRS in greater detail.