<p>Professors who use clickers to take attendance may be surprised if they take a headcount of the the number of people in the room. It is often less than the number of clickers in the room. One person can easily operate more than one clicker.</p>
<p>
I love this description.</p>
<p>
I heard of a professor whose TA had the job of checking for multiple-clicker users!</p>
<p>Isn’t it nice that in the US there is higher education for nearly everyone. Rather than questioning the choices people make it would be so nice to celebrate the options our system has provided.</p>
<p>On the opinions are like bellybuttons vein, When my D chose her school over 2 higher ranked options there were plenty of gobsmacked folk with both. In our conversation last night it is clear that she has not looked back or regretted choosing what felt right to her over what looked right to others.</p>
<p>Mom2collegekids</p>
<p>Haha – You stated a reason to choose a BIG U over small LAC that was my exact reasoning to choose a LAC over a Big U – “if a kid changes his mind, he doesn’t have to change schools.”</p>
<p>I THOUGHT changing major in the larger U was next to impossible. Shows how much I need to learn & it is a good thing I have CC folks here to correct my mis-information!</p>
<p>Thanks all for the enlighting posts.</p>
<p>mom2collegekids, you are right…S1’s clicker class was Physics II for engineering.</p>
<p>A LOT of kids at big state u’s change their majors (including S1 and his roommate).</p>
<p>Am I the only one who thinks taking “roll” in college is worthless?</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>I think there has been a “return” to taking roll for a few reasons…</p>
<p>The prof can document that a kid wasn’t in class, therefore the kid’s bad grade is no fault of the prof.</p>
<p>Taxpayers don’t want to subsidize the tuition at state schools where kids won’t show up for class (waste of taxpayers’ money)</p>
<p>BTW…at a job, don’t they take “roll” so to speak?</p>
<p>IMHO, psych, you can find a well-repeated bias on cc against every type of college. I guess the ones (biases) that stand out to individual readers are the ones that sting a little. Don’t let it bring you down.</p>
<p>Completely OT. </p>
<p>Oh, BTW, I do hate the idea that a kid would rather use a electronic device rather than speak up in class. (I had no idea this clicker thing existed.) First they can’t be bothered to talk to someone in person, then not on the phone, now this? Jeebus. How terribly, terribly, sad. Are we really gaining more than we are losing?</p>
<p>curmudgeon, mom2collegekid wrote a nice example upthread showing where clickers are a force for good. You can have a class where kids don’t raise their hands in class because they think they understand what’s being taught, but mini clicker polls can show the prof if the class really understands a concept or not. It might even encourage more students to raise their hands because they see that they’re not the only ones in class who have “dumb” questions.</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Absolutely. I have a very smart but rather shy son. He’d rather die than raise his hand and say, “I don’t understand that.” The clickers not only tell the prof what the kids have learned, but it also gives the students the “power” to speak up when they see that many chose the same wrong answer that they did.</p>
<p>And, really, older adults aren’t much different. Usually it takes one brave person to first speak up at a meeting, before the others will do so, too. </p>
<p>The need for clickers isn’t because of the texting generation. It’s normal for many people to feel nervous about speaking up. And, the teachers love them, because the clickers give insight into what they’re students have absorbed/learned.</p>
<p>ST, we read the same post. I just found this part sad
I wasn’t commenting on the use of the device for taking roll or other purposes mentioned.</p>
<p>Again, sorry OP. This will be my last OT post. Promise. </p>
<p>If it benefits the kids, use it. </p>
<p>(Big edit. TMI 
)</p>