EVS by Barry Gregory, NTU (Test Upload)

1. Using TurningPoint:
Enhancing Lectures with EVS
(Electronic Voting Systems)
Marek Oledzki – Learning Technologist, EDU
Barry Gregory – Educational Developer, EDU

2. March 31, 2015 2
Electronic Voting Systems
(Polling Systems)
Today we will cover:
1. What is an Electronic Voting System?
2. Why use EVS?
3. How is voting used to enhance lectures?
4. Rationales for use: diagnostic/formative
5. Questioning strategies
6. Findings of large-scale pilot at Uni of Surrey
7. Tips for best practice
8. Logistics: how do I book and use the equipment?
9. Summary: practical pros and cons

3. March 31, 2015 3
What is an Electronic Voting System (EVS)?
1. An objective question (e.g. multiple choice) is displayed on-screen
2. Audience members respond via hand-held keypads
3. Results are displayed on-screen as a chart
An electronic system for gathering and displaying audience responses
to a question.
Think of ‘ask the audience’ in ‘Who Wants to Be a Millionaire’...

4. March 31, 2015 4
Lectures:
• Often passive learning experiences
• Hard to gauge student understanding
• Can be difficult to engage large numbers
“there is huge conceptual difference between teaching students or
‘covering’ a topic as it is sometimes referred to, and students
learning the information presented” (Exley and Dennick, 2004).
EVS (polling) systems:
• Encourage active learning and engagement
• Offer anonymity of response; immediate and shared results
• Provides diagnostic info to inform future teaching practice/course
design (response data can also be exported as a spreadsheet)
Why use EVS?

5. March 31, 2015 5
How is EVS used to enhance lectures?
• SAQs (self-assessment questions)1
:
simple questions to check understanding: gives formative feedback
to both students and lecturer.
• Discussion-based pair/group tasks1
:
generating arguments for and against alternative answers is a
powerful promoter of learning.
• Contingent teaching1
:
using responses (e.g. proportion who got it right) to switch what
you do next; teaching that is adapted on the spot to the group.
• Survey tool:
to gather information about preferences/opinions; can be used to
inform course design/delivery in future.
1
Steve Draper, 2005, http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/ilig/why.html

6. March 31, 2015 6
Rationales for use:
diagnostic, formative or both?
• Diagnostic – to find out something about your students’ learning,
e.g. working through a difficult problem, where:
– You don’t know where students are going wrong
– You know where students are going wrong but not why
(what you find out will inform the way you cover this territory in
future)
• Formative, e.g. working through a difficult problem, during which
you want to:
– make sure no-one is left behind
– be able to switch teaching strategies ‘on the fly’ to ensure that this
happens (‘contingent teaching’)
Most real-life EVS scenarios will end up addressing both.

7. March 31, 2015 7
Questioning strategies
1. One question, one (individual) vote:
– Students vote individually
2. One question, multiple (individual) votes
(“Peer Instruction” Mazur, 1997)
– Students vote individually
(a well-designed question will split the class)
– Students discuss their answer with peer(s)
– Students vote for second time, again individually
3. One question, one (pair/group) vote, discussion
(“Class-wide discussion” Dufresne et. al., 1996):
– Initial vote by pairs/groups
(a well-designed question will split the class)
– Some pairs/small groups explain their response to the class
– Class-wide discussion initiated

8. March 31, 2015 8
Effective use – findings from University of
Surrey pilot of TurningPoint
• Existing beliefs about teaching and student learning
• Willingness to experiment; openness to developing practice
• Teaching confidence and personal concerns: “The traditional power
balances shift” (Exley and Dennick, 2004)
• Suitability of physical environment e.g. acoustics; layout
• Student culture and expectations: some students “expect to switch
off in lectures” (D’Inverno, 2003)
• “Questions that target core concepts...most effective in promoting
conceptual change, especially when answer choices reflect common
student conceptions that may diverge from target understandings”
(Penuel et al, 2006)
Use of EVS ranged in effectiveness and influenced by multiple factors:

9. March 31, 2015 9
Tips for best practice
• Have a clear rationale for using EVS. For instance, do you want to:
– Work through a difficult problem to ensure students have grasped
everything?
– Work through a difficult problem to determine where students are
going wrong and tweak your teaching methods accordingly?
– Check understanding at key points to enable you to ‘backtrack’ or
explain something differently if needed?
• Announce before each lecture whether EVS will be used (experience
suggests that EVS is good for attendance)
• For each question, say what the (pedagogical) point of this question
is.
• Consider using seminars to ask for some direct feedback from
students on your EVS use in lectures.

10. March 31, 2015 10
Summary: pros and cons
• Pros:
– Improves student learning if used well
– Instant anonymous, formative feedback to students
– Instant diagnostic feedback to lecturer
– Students like it; good for attendance and engagement
• Cons:
– Logistics:
Takes time to distribute apparatus, eating into lecture time.
Handsets can go missing!
– Authoring:
Lecturer must spend time adding interactive slides to existing
PowerPoint presentations

11. March 31, 2015 11
Useful links
• Steve Draper’s Interactive Lectures Interest Group (ILIG):
http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/ilig/
• Why Use EVS – the short answer, Steve Draper, Glasgow:
http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/ilig/why.html
• Teaching metrics using EVS (Electronic Voting System)
handsets (EVS use in English teaching):
http://www.english.heacademy.ac.uk/explore/projects/archive/techn
ology/tech9.php
• ALT Newsletter article about Kingston University’s EVS pilot:
http://newsletter.alt.ac.uk/e_article000468708.cfm?x=b11,0,w
• EVS JISCmail list:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ELECTRONIC-VOTING-SYSTEMS.html

12. March 31, 2015 12
References
• Banks, D., 2006. Audience Response Systems in Higher Education:
Applications and Cases. London: Information Science Publishing.
• Exley, K and Dennick, R., 2004. Giving a lecture: From presenting
to teaching. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
• Nicol, D. and Boyle, J., 2003. Peer Instruction versus Class-wide
Discussion in large Classes: a comparison of two interaction methods
in the wired classroom. Studies in Higher Education, 28 (4), pp.457-
473.
• Simpson, V and Oliver, O., 2007. Electronic voting systems for
lectures then and now: A comparison of research and practice.
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23 (2): pp.187-208.