John Budd

In response to Karl Smith's workshop in January 2004
August 28, 2004

The Carlson School of Management's Office of Learning Excellence held a workshop by Karl Smith in January 2004 featuring ideas to engage students in active learning. One of the techniques was the concept test. In a basic concept test students are presented with a short problem and the possibility of several answers. Students then vote for which answer they think is correct and work with a partner to verify or change their answers. Afterwards the instructor may also ask for an answer-result from the groups to verify concept understanding. This process actively involves students to solve problems during lecture sessions.

John liked this approach to engage students' critical thinking on problems while also engaging them with their peers during a problem solving session. He also had a problem of his own that he wanted to solve using this concept test idea. He noticed that when he asked for a show of hands after a concept test many students do not raise their hand for any of the choices and others raise their hand only after seeing the popularity of a choice as exhibited by others raising their hands. Inspired by Karl Smith's workshop and supported by an Office of Learning Excellence Workshop Small Grant, John created "Multipurpose Concept Quiz Response Cards." These cards are a low-tech and effective mechanism to help encourage everyone to vote by lessening the "popularity effect," i.e., engaging the students to think and participate actively in their own learning without relying on "what other students think" to decide their answer.

How does John engage students using the Multipurpose Concept Quiz Response Cards?

He prompts them to actively think on their own by constructing a process that makes them decide on an answer and also does not allow them to see what others are deciding!

John's Response cards consist of a pair of laminated 8½ 11 cards. One card is printed with "yes", "true", "A", and "legal" while the other is printed with "no", "false", "B", and "illegal". The yes side was in green and the no side was in red. At the beginning of a lecture, each student receives both a yes and a no card. When John comes to a point in the lecture to use a concept quiz, he asks the students a question with two possible answers (yes/no or true/false or A/B or legal/illegal). All of the students vote simultaneously by holding up the card that matches their answer. However, the piece to decrease the popularity effect was that all cards looked the same from the back (all the backs of the cards were blue), so the students in the rear of class could not tell what students in front answered.

In the Classroom

John used these cards with HRIR Masters students in HRIR 8071 ("Labor Relations and Collective Bargaining") where a favorite question involves legal issues and whether something is legal or illegal. He felt the students seemed more engaged in discussions when the cards were used because students had to actively think about their answer. Hesistating students had to actively think about their answer and could not rely on seeing what other students answered to avoid thinking through their decision. John further promoted everyone's engagement by only moving forward in the lecture discussion once everyone had voted.



In the past when he asked for a show of hands, many students did not vote. However, with the cards, it was easier to wait for everyone to vote and he could visually see individual students thinking about the question before holding up a card (because they had to vote). Also, because each card has the same blue backing, could not see the votes of those in front which seemed to lessen the popularity effect problem.

John favors this method of interaction in the additional following way: since everyone holds up a card and implicitly stakes out their position, he can easily call on students who voted one way or the other to give their view. He calls on someone who voted the same way to add additional explanations and calls on someone with the opposite vote to present a counterpoint to the argument. At other times he uses the "think-pair-share" active learning technique by having students compare their answers with someone sitting next to them before the class is opened up for broader discussion.

Student Feedback

The Response Cards increased student engagement by encouraging them to think about their individual response and this created richer discussions with broader participation. The students seemed to feel the cards were unique and fun way to participate in discussion. John even received several unsolicited comments on the end-of-semester SET forms expressing positive reactions to the cards and indicating that they he should use them again in future courses.

Points for Reflection

Admittedly, John notes that wireless technology tools can be used to register student responses in the same way as the Response cards, but the cards also do not require any significant hardware or set-up costs (beyond the nominal cost of lamination). Wireless technology can be used to generate anonymous responses, but John likes the personal nature of the cards because he can then upon on specific individuals to share a certain view based on their answers.

One other small inconvenienc to the cards is they can be a cumbersome to distribute at the beginning of class. Also, not all topics or cases are equally well-suited to using the cards so he chose his applications carefully for the lectures he wanted to use them in. Moreover, the novelty that may have prompted students to note the cards on the SET evaluations may indicate that selective, periodic use of the cards for lectures helped keep the cards a fresh rather than repetitive exercise. In this context, John believed the cards fostered active learning and that further processes can be used to generate unique and effective ways to vary the lecture routine and maintain a greater level of student engagement to the lecture concepts.

John mentioned "I initially did not put choices on the back because of a concern with the popularity effect, but after using the cards I am less concerned with this because I think the overt nature of visibly holding up an answer with the possibility of being called on to explain it causes students to think more deeply about their own answer before voting."