Gang,
Thanks for the thoughts and responses. I actually asked Derek privately about right after I posted to the list, and this is his response (he OK'ed me to forward it here):
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruff, Derek O [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 11:51 AM
> To: Sweet, Michael S
> Subject: RE: More clicker responses than students in the room
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Yeah, this is a question I hear a lot, unfortunately. Assuming that
> there's not a class next door using clickers on the same RF channel as
> yours, then you probably have some cheating going on.
>
> Some clicker systems have a "pick a random student" feature that
> selects one student at random from those that just voted on a question.
> If your system has this feature, then you can use it every now and then
> to "cold call" a student. ("Okay, the system has picked Jason Smith.
> Jason, what was your answer to this question and why did you select
> it?") If the system picks a student who isn't in the room, then you've
> caught a cheater. And the threat alone of being caught this way might
> do the trick.
>
> That does assume that Jason's friend Nick doesn't answer your cold
> call, pretending to be Jason. However, that's a much more egregious
> instance of cheating than simply brining Jason's clicker to class and
> voting for him.
>
> Of course, if your clicker system doesn't have the "pick a random
> student" feature, then you'll have to take another approach. I usually
> answer this question by saying that this is a classroom management
> issue, not a technological issue. When you're not able to spot clicker
> cheaters yourself, you might enlist TAs to sit around the room and spot
> them. You can also make clear to students that this kind of cheating
> isn't allowed. A warning might reduce this kind of cheating, but
> probably won't eliminate it. Some schools have included statements
> about clicker cheating in their honor codes, which helps, since that
> usually means the punishment for getting caught is greater, which
> deters cheating.
>
> I often recommend that instructors worried about cheating use low-
> stakes clicker questions so that even if some cheating happens, it
> won't give students a significant advantage. Grading on effort, not
> accuracy of answers, is one way to do this, as is making the clicker
> quiz grades a relatively small component of students' overall class
> grades.
>
> In a TBL context, however, the individual student quizzes are
> relatively high stakes, right? One of the components of TBL is that
> students earn some of their points on individual quizzes and some on
> team quizzes. If the individual quizzes don't count for much, the
> pedagogy doesn't work the same.
>
> Here's an idea that might work. What if you asked the following
> clicker question: "What's the last digit of your social security
> number?" Assuming you have a record of each student's social security
> number, you could check the clicker responses to your records. If Nick
> brought Jason's clicker to class and if Nick doesn't know Jason's
> social security number (a safe assumption), then there's a 90% chance
> he'll answer this question incorrectly. That will flag Jason as a
> cheater. It won't flag Nick as a cheater, but perhaps you can get
> Jason to turn on his conspirator. That works on "Law & Order" all the
> time.
>
> What do you think? Might this work? And if social security numbers
> wouldn't work in your context, perhaps there's some other student ID
> number you could use.
>
> I'm going to post this on my blog and see if any of my readers have
> additional ideas.
>
> Derek
>
>
>
>
> --
> Derek Bruff, Ph.D.
> Assistant Director, Center for Teaching
> Senior Lecturer, Department of Mathematics
> Vanderbilt University
> www.vanderbilt.edu/cft/
> www.derekbruff.com/teachingwithcrs/
> twitter.com/derekbruff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sweet, Michael S [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 11:20 AM
> To: Bruff, Derek O
> Subject: More clicker responses than students in the room
>
> Hey Derek,
>
> We are using clickers for a large TBL class, and yesterday we had more
> clicker responses than students in the room. I fear this means someone
> in the room has an absent friend's clicker and is cheating for them.
>
> Have you run into this?
>
> Got any clever, low-hassle methods for identifying the culprits with
> classes of 100-300?
>
> You literally "wrote the book" so any ideas are more than welcome!
>
> -M
>
>
>
> Michael Sweet, Ph.D.
> Faculty Development Specialist
> Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment (DIIA)
> University of Texas Austin
> MAI 2206 * (512) 232-1775
>
> "Teaching is the profession that makes all other professions possible."
> - Todd Witaker
|
