What’s all the Clicking About? A Study of Classroom Response System Use at the University of Toronto

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by awa

Classroom response systems (clickers) are used across the University of Toronto to support interactive pedagogy, improve lecture feedback, and strengthen student engagement. The study examines clicker use in multiple courses and includes interviews with 30+ instructors and surveys of students from classes totaling over 5,000 enrolments. It evaluates implementation logistics, pedagogical value, teaching strategies, and learners’ perceived effectiveness, highlighting both successes and failures.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages8

Reading Time20 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Handheld classroom response systems

Procedures for using clickers

Pedagogical method and outcomes

Advantages and disadvantages

University of Toronto adoption and usage

Faculty and student surveys

Logistics

Assigning marks and assessment use

Preparing questions and spontaneous use

20 What’s all the Clicking About? A Study of Classroom Response System Use at the University of Toronto Jason Harlow, Lena Paulo Kushnir, Charly Bank, Scott Browning, Jim Clarke, Anne Cordon, David Harrison, Karen Ing, Cecilia Kutas, & Ruxandra Serbanescu Faculty Learning Community University of Toronto Classroom response systems (clickers) are used in many courses at the University of Toronto (U of T), primarily to introduce interactive pedagogy and to engage students in lecture courses. We examined the use of clickers in various courses at U of T and interviewed over 30 instructors about their use of clickers in classes with a total enrolment of over 5,000 students. Students in these classes were surveyed about their perception of the value of this technology. The objectives of our study were to evaluate the logistics of using clickers, the pedagogical value and associated teaching strategies, and students’ perception of its efficacy in their learning. We discuss some of the successes and failures of using clickers as a teaching and learning tool. Introduction Handheld classroom response systems ers) have become increasingly popular (clickin un- dergraduate teaching as a tool for engaging students and enriching learning environments (Beatty, 2004; Carnevale, 2005; Crouch & Mazur, 2001; Duncan, 2005) . Used during lectures, clickers provide prompt feedback on student comprehension and help clarify course topics (Beatty, 2004; Brueckner & MacPherson, 2004; Burnstein & Lederman, 2003; Dufrense et al., 1996; Mazur, 1997) . There are a variety of procedures for using clickers reported in the literature, but generally, the instructor presents students with a conceptual multiple-choice question (Reay et al., 2005) and allots a specific amount of time for students to answer the question before closing the voting. Typically, a discussion follows, and on occasion one or more post-questions are posed to check if students understand the concepts (Beatty, 2004; Crouch & Mazur, 2001; Mazur, 1997; Rao & DiCarlo, 2000) . The pedagogical method surrounding clicker use is described as a process that encourages and advocates“peer instruction”(Mazur, 1997), improves students’problem solving abilities and performance on traditional quizzes (Rao & DiCarlo, 2000; Ruhl, Hughes & Schloss, 1987), and improves student engagement and learning outcomes (Beatty, 2004; Brueckner & MacPherson, 2004; Crouch & Mazur, 2001) . It is also said to improve interactive classroom discourse, increase students’ active participation, and increase ownership of their learning (Beatty, 2004; Dufresne et al., 1996; Rao & DiCarlo, 2000), while it decreases student anxiety (Owens & Walden, 2001), lower level learning, and passive rote memorization of lecture material (Rao & DiCarlo, 2000) . There are a number of advantages and disadvantages of clicker use reported in the literature, but the most common reported advantage is that of increased student engagement, and the most common reported disadvantage is the administrative burden associated with the technology (for example, see Beatty, 2004; Burnstein & Lederman, 2003; Carnevale, 2005; Crouch & Mazur, 2001; Dufresne et al., 1996; Fies & Marshall, 2005; Mazur, 1997; and Rao & DiCarlo, 2000) . A systematic review of different clicker models suggests that many of the commercially available clickers are very similar (Burnstein & Lederman, 2003) . In 2006, the University of Toronto (U ofT) adopted a single clicker vendor for its three campuses, encouraging all instructors to use the same system.1 This decision enables students to purchase one clicker for multiple classes, and it allows the university to offer resources and training to faculty on one system. By the spring of 2008, over 60 instructors at U ofT were using these clickers as part of their teaching, and the U ofT bookstores were reporting sales of over 10,000 clickers per year. We surveyed U ofT faculty and students in order to determine

FAQs

What is the main purpose of using clickers at the University of Toronto?

Clickers are used to introduce interactive pedagogy, provide prompt feedback on comprehension, and engage students during lectures.

How was the study conducted regarding instructors and students?

The study interviewed 30+ instructors about clicker use across courses and surveyed students in classes with total enrolment exceeding 5,000.

What logistical factors were evaluated in the study?

The study evaluated how instructors assign marks for clicker use, the role of clickers as assessment tools, and practices for preparing or generating clicker questions during class.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by awa