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

1
The Personal Response System (PRS) at the
University of Rochester

• Frank L. H. Wolfs
• Department of Physics and Astronomy
• Graduate Teaching Seminar, October 29, 2004

2
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.

3
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).

4
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.

5
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.

6
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?

7
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 BL 106. Note
  facilities completed the installation during the
  second week of classes only after I threatened to
  do it myself.

8
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/PRSInf
  o.html
• Unfortunately, I could not get my class moved to
  a PRS equipped class room for fall 2004.

9
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.

10
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.

11
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.

12
Personal Response System.

• Sorry, you will have to work
• Lets see if we can generate stimulating
  discussions

13
Examples of PRS dataPeer Instruction Correct
Answer 3

14
Examples of PRS dataPeer Instruction Correct
Answer 3

15
Examples of PRS dataPeer Instruction Correct
Answer 5

16
Examples of PRS dataPeer Instruction Correct
Answer 1

17
Usage of attendance.Effect of attendance on exam
1 grade.
18
Usage of attendance.Effect of attendance on
pre-final course grade.
19
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.

20
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).

21
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.