dorsal/arxiv
View SchemaPeer Instruction: Comparing Clickers to Flashcards
| Authors | Nathaniel Lasry |
|---|---|
| Categories | |
| ArXiv ID | physics/0702186 |
| URL | https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0702186 |
Abstract
Peer Instruction (PI) is a student-centered instructional approach developed at Harvard by Eric Mazur (1997). The method has been welcomed by the science community and adopted by a large number of colleges and universities, due among other reasons to its common sense approach and its documented effectiveness. In PI, the progression of any given class depends on the outcome of real-time student feedback to ConcepTests: multiple-choice conceptual questions. In the early 1990s, students responded to ConcepTests using flashcards showing their answer. Instructors would then estimate the proportion of students holding each alternative conception. A few years later Mazur began using wireless handheld devices - colloquially called clickers- to replace the flashcards. Previous users of clickers in university classrooms had reported benefits such as increased rates of attendance and decreased rates of attrition (Owens et al., 2004; Lopez-Herrejon & Schulman, 2004). This paper empirically measures the specific contribution of clickers to conceptual learning and traditional problem solving skills as compared to low-budget flashcards. Results show that clickers do not provide any learning advantage when compared to flashcards. Nevertheless, clickers offer many advantages from a teaching perspective which should be considered.
{
"annotation_id": "e95c22f2-56bb-48c1-b09c-b202750662b6",
"date_created": "2026-03-02T18:01:17.955000Z",
"date_modified": "2026-03-02T18:01:17.955000Z",
"file_hash": "05a6dbef16b0dc12cd534545fdb5bd9d9ea7a71a22a89f3ee44f3df7368cb4f9",
"private": false,
"record": {
"abstract": "Peer Instruction (PI) is a student-centered instructional approach developed\nat Harvard by Eric Mazur (1997). The method has been welcomed by the science\ncommunity and adopted by a large number of colleges and universities, due among\nother reasons to its common sense approach and its documented effectiveness. In\nPI, the progression of any given class depends on the outcome of real-time\nstudent feedback to ConcepTests: multiple-choice conceptual questions. In the\nearly 1990s, students responded to ConcepTests using flashcards showing their\nanswer. Instructors would then estimate the proportion of students holding each\nalternative conception. A few years later Mazur began using wireless handheld\ndevices - colloquially called clickers- to replace the flashcards. Previous\nusers of clickers in university classrooms had reported benefits such as\nincreased rates of attendance and decreased rates of attrition (Owens et al.,\n2004; Lopez-Herrejon \u0026 Schulman, 2004). This paper empirically measures the\nspecific contribution of clickers to conceptual learning and traditional\nproblem solving skills as compared to low-budget flashcards. Results show that\nclickers do not provide any learning advantage when compared to flashcards.\nNevertheless, clickers offer many advantages from a teaching perspective which\nshould be considered.",
"arxiv_id": "physics/0702186",
"authors": [
"Nathaniel Lasry"
],
"categories": [
"physics.ed-ph",
"physics.gen-ph"
],
"title": "Peer Instruction: Comparing Clickers to Flashcards",
"url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0702186"
},
"schema_id": "dorsal/arxiv",
"source": {
"execution_id": "bddfd163-37ac-4a25-93d2-4047333c2c18",
"id": "arXiv Dataset IDs",
"type": "Model",
"variant": "snapshot-2026-03-01",
"version": "0.1.0"
},
"user_id": 1000002
}