{"title":"用点击器和课堂投票解决微积分中的常见错误和误解","authors":"Kelly Cline;Holly Zullo;David A Huckaby","doi":"10.1093/teamat/hrz002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Common student errors and misconceptions can be addressed through the method of classroom voting, in which the instructor presents a multiple-choice question to the class, and after a few minutes for consideration and small-group discussion, each student votes on the correct answer, using a clicker or a phone. If a large number of students have voted for one particular incorrect answer, the instructor can recognize and address the issue. In order to identify multiple-choice questions that are especially effective at provoking common errors and misconceptions, we recorded the percentages of students voting for each option on each question used in 25 sections of integral calculus, taught by 7 instructors, at 4 institutions, over the course of 12 years, on a collection of 172 questions. We restricted our analysis to the 115 questions which were voted on by at least 5 different classes. We present the six questions that caused the largest percentages of students to vote for a particular incorrect answer, discuss how we used these questions in the classroom, and examine the common features of these questions. Further, we look for correlations between question characteristics and the mean percentage of students voting for common errors on these questions, and we find that questions based on general cases have higher percentages of students voting for common errors.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/teamat/hrz002","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Addressing common errors and misconceptions in integral calculus with clickers and classroom voting\",\"authors\":\"Kelly Cline;Holly Zullo;David A Huckaby\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/teamat/hrz002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Common student errors and misconceptions can be addressed through the method of classroom voting, in which the instructor presents a multiple-choice question to the class, and after a few minutes for consideration and small-group discussion, each student votes on the correct answer, using a clicker or a phone. If a large number of students have voted for one particular incorrect answer, the instructor can recognize and address the issue. In order to identify multiple-choice questions that are especially effective at provoking common errors and misconceptions, we recorded the percentages of students voting for each option on each question used in 25 sections of integral calculus, taught by 7 instructors, at 4 institutions, over the course of 12 years, on a collection of 172 questions. We restricted our analysis to the 115 questions which were voted on by at least 5 different classes. We present the six questions that caused the largest percentages of students to vote for a particular incorrect answer, discuss how we used these questions in the classroom, and examine the common features of these questions. Further, we look for correlations between question characteristics and the mean percentage of students voting for common errors on these questions, and we find that questions based on general cases have higher percentages of students voting for common errors.\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/teamat/hrz002\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9254208/\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9254208/","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Addressing common errors and misconceptions in integral calculus with clickers and classroom voting
Common student errors and misconceptions can be addressed through the method of classroom voting, in which the instructor presents a multiple-choice question to the class, and after a few minutes for consideration and small-group discussion, each student votes on the correct answer, using a clicker or a phone. If a large number of students have voted for one particular incorrect answer, the instructor can recognize and address the issue. In order to identify multiple-choice questions that are especially effective at provoking common errors and misconceptions, we recorded the percentages of students voting for each option on each question used in 25 sections of integral calculus, taught by 7 instructors, at 4 institutions, over the course of 12 years, on a collection of 172 questions. We restricted our analysis to the 115 questions which were voted on by at least 5 different classes. We present the six questions that caused the largest percentages of students to vote for a particular incorrect answer, discuss how we used these questions in the classroom, and examine the common features of these questions. Further, we look for correlations between question characteristics and the mean percentage of students voting for common errors on these questions, and we find that questions based on general cases have higher percentages of students voting for common errors.
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.