The Impact of clicker to self confidence and class participation of students with ADHD in learning math

Final Project – The Impact of clicker to self confidence and class participation of students with ADHD in
learning math – A Case Study of special education classroom, Alexander Middle School – Albany, Ohio
Spring 2009

Abstract

The purpose of this research project is to investigate the impact of using student response

system (SRS) or clickers to students with ADHD toward their self confidence and class

participation in learning math. Given the strong connection from studies and findings between

ADHD and math learning disabilities (Mayes &Calhoun, 2006), this research project attempts to

explore the unique potentiality of clicker as motivational intervention for students with ADHD

towards their self confidence and class participation in learning math based on the approach of

ARCS model within the components of effective strategy implementation. In this manner, the

use of clicker is used to measure behavioral changes (self confidence and active participation in

class) that can be accommodated and facilitated by the use of clicker for students with ADHD in

learning math. Upon this approach, this research project aims to tie the implementation effective

instruction with the approach of ARCS model as the appropriate tactics for accommodating

students with ADHD with their major elements of motivation (self confidence and class

participation) by using student response system (SRS) or clickers to examine its motivational

intervention in learning math.

A more specific question is then raised: in what area of math that students with ADHD

often find it overwhelming even to just paying attention or actively participating answering

questions and class discussion? This is where student’s self confidence is exhibited in the low-

stimulated manner in which it is closely tied to the level of engagement that is shown by class

participation level. Engaging students without disability is indeed challenging. Yet, engaging

students with ADHD gives stronger challenges for teachers and educators due to their specific-

genetic nature. As a response to this issue, this research project is concerned to incorporate

EDCT 605 Final Project

Spring 2009

student response system as assistive technology used in the classroom as an effort to provide

motivational intervention embedded as external tactics of designing and developing effective

instruction in the area of special education where students with ADHD can benefit from.

Introduction

Motivation to learn is the strong basis for leaning sustainability as what Keller (in Reiser,

2007) has pointed out:

“Motivation to learn refers to learner’s internal characteristics combined with

external tactics and environmental factors that stimulate and sustain learner

motivation…ultimately, students do have control over their motivation, but even

motivated students will become disinterested if the instruction is boring and

disorganized, just as they may become more inspired by an enthusiastic teacher.

Therefore, teacher behavior, instructional materials, and other elements of a

learning environment all affect motivation”.

Motivation is considered as the significant source for level of engagement. Therefore, in this

context, ARCS Model is used to provide framework for the strategy of using clickers to examine

the impact on self-confidence and class participation of students with ADHD in learning math.

To that end, the use of student response system (SRS) or clickers is approached as part of

the external tactics and environmental factors developed as teachers and educators in special

education have expanded opportunities as an effort to implement effective instruction (in

compliance to classroom management) to provide beneficial and motivational intervention

towards self confidence and class participation of students with ADHD in learning math. Thus,


Spring 2009

the framework of this research project is mainly based on three underlying assumption in the

application of motivational design principles and processes: (1) people’s motivation can be

influenced by external events; (2) motivation is a means, not an end, in relation to leaning and

performance improvement where the goal is to have learners engaged in learning or work

activities, not simply entertained by them; (3) systematic design can be used to predictably and

measurably influence motivation. Following these assumptions, ARCS model is used as

approach to examine the impact of clickers in the way that (1) capturing, stimulating and

maintaining interest and attention (Attention); (2) meeting, providing, and tying learners’ needs

with appropriate experiences that influences motivation (Relevance); (3) building, enhancing,

and supporting learners with positive expectation and beliefs for success (Confidence); (4)

providing and assisting learners with meaningful opportunities and reinforcement for success

(Satisfaction) (Reiser, 2007).

However, motivation is a subjective trait where something can be motivational for one

person and cannot be for another calls for a challenge. This challenge is then needed to be

approached systematically by understanding the major elements of human motivation and

employing a design process that assists one in diagnosing leaner’s motivational requirements and

prescribing appropriate tactics (Reiser, 2007).

Given this overview as framework for this research project, the use of clickers as

motivational intervention towards self confidence and class participation is in line with the

approach of understanding the nature and characteristics of students with ADHD that coexist

with their learning disability in leaning math and how to implement effective instruction with the


Spring 2009

use of appropriate technology as classroom performance system based on the ARCS model

approach.

The nature of students with ADHD

ADHD (Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder) is one of the most common childhood

psychiatric disorders, affecting an estimated 3-7% of all school-age children where it displays

significant difficulties with inattention, impulse control, and overactive behavior (American

Psychiatric Association, 1994). In this manner, students with ADHD often exhibit prominent

characteristics as in the following:

Trouble paying attention, inattention to details and makes careless mistakes,

easily distracted, loses school supplies, forget to turn in homework, trouble

listening, trouble finishing class work and homework, trouble following multiple

commands, blurts out answers impatience, fidgets or squirms, leaves seats and

runs about or climbs excessively, seems “on the go”, interrupts or intrudes on

others (www.aacap.org)”.

As to exhibit such traits, students with ADHD bring about significant challenges to not just

educators but also to students themselves in compliance to learning disabilities that might be

coexisting with ADHD. As a result, the manifestations of this disorder in the classroom

(inattention, impulsiveness and hyperactivity) have an impact not only on the individual child's

academic performance, but also their teacher's practice, and - potentially - the learning


Spring 2009

environment of the entire class. Adding to that, most current scientific thinking holds ADHD to

be largely a genetic syndrome.

Studies indicate that it's passed on from parents to their children and there seem to be

noticeable differences in the brains of ADHD and ADD children (APA, 1994). As closely tied to

biological factors (the size and density of various brain structures), students with ADHD have

been found to have weaknesses with their working memory albeit scientist and researchers

haven’t found the precise cause of ADHD. Based on recent findings on how the brain of students

with ADHD is mechanized, it has lower amounts of neurotransmitter (dopamine). To illustrate,

neurotransmitter in this case serves as chemical messenger that carries information to and from

nerve cells where dopamine plays a key role in proper functioning of the cortex. For this reason,

having lesser amount (not enough) of dopamine could interfere with cognitive processes such as

focusing and attention in which students with ADHD are struggling with. Within this case, any

medication intended for this issue by far is giving stimulants to increase dopamine level so that

focus and attention can be gained more (McNamara, 2007).

Furthermore, it has been the focus of considerable effort to develop instructional and

treatment strategic use of technology as an educational tool that offers new option for the

expansion and development of these strategies. Parallel to this, Fitzgerald (1994) affirms that

technology offers promise because a number of inherent features are closely associated with

characteristics of effective instruction. These attributes allow the teacher to plan learning

activities for students with short attention spans, enable students to be actively involved in

learning and may even increase the student’s motivation and confidence. Therefore, the

highlighted issue that is obviously apparent in ADHD students is the inattentiveness. Admittedly,

Spring 2009

US Department of Education notes that a child with ADHD may be able to focus when he or she

is receiving frequent reinforcement or is under very strict control. The ability to focus is also

common in new settings or while interacting one-on-one. While other children may occasionally

show some signs of these behaviors, in children with ADHD the symptoms are more frequent

and more severe than in other children of the same age (2004).

The coexistence of ADHD and LD in mathematics

In the area of mathematics, students with ADHD are likely to be associated with low

academic performance, which usually worsens as the behavioral manifestations of the disorder

become more severe (Barry, Lyman, & Klinger, 2001). Adding to that, one study indicates that

71% of children with ADHD also have a learning disability/LD where this LD is broken down

into subtypes. Among these subtypes, this study finds that 26% of children with ADHD have a

specific math disability in which in the end, it suggests that a deeper understanding of the

relationship between ADHD and math disabilities must be established (Mayes &Calhoun, 2006).

Going in line with aforementioned finding above, McLeod and Armstrong also state that

students with ADHD tends to have learning disabilities in learning math, especially in the area of

basic operations, decimals and percentages, measurement, and the language of mathematics.

These issues are synchronously tied to various learning characteristics they exhibit, including

distractibility, perceptual deficits, receptive and expressive language problems, reasoning and

reading difficulties, and poor memory that might affect mathematics performance (1982).

Consequently, Glennon and Cruickshank (in Mash & Barkley) believe that attention deficits

limit the amount of information on which students with learning disabilities can focus during

instruction and that these students are more easily drawn off-task by extraneous classroom

Spring 2009

activities and irrelevant task attributes in which problems with figure ground, spatial and

temporal relationship, and visual closure may add to attending problems as the level of task

complexity increases (2006).

However, the attention deficit limits caused by working memory issue is not the only

cognitive factor that has been correlated with math disabilities and ADHD. The other significant

factor is attention difficulty in which it largely contributes to math disabilities (Martinussen &

Tannock, 2006, Fuchs et al. 2006). A case in point, one article about teaching math to students

with ADHD provides clear description about the overwhelming mechanism of students with

ADHD when it comes to Math:

“This is often what happens when a student is in the classroom. If a student is

given a worksheet with 100 math problems, he/she is immediately overwhelmed

by all 100 problems. When a child has ADHD, their mind tries to process all of

the information at once and they convince themselves that this is an impossible

task. This is why teachers and parents often find themselves frustrated because it

seems as though the students is not trying (www.brighthub.com).

For this reason, implementing classroom management techniques helps ADHD students succeed,

but this alone not is enough. Specific strategies that address academic deficits are also needed

because ADHD is so complex and addressing these needs is very difficult.

The potentiality of Student Response System (SRS)/Clicker in special education: Students
with ADHD

Clicker (SRS) have been widely used as assistive tool in classrooms because of its ability

to provide changes in classroom’s dynamic that can be beneficial to teaching and learning


Spring 2009

process. Recently, greater attention is called due to the communicative and interpretive behaviors

of students as they use clickers. Many studies reveal that clicker creates different feel, sense, and

experience in student’s learning in which it has given meaningful contribution to the dynamic of

learning in educational studies. According to Angel (2008), clicker stimulates active learning

environment where it is characterized by greater activity, cooperation, and conceptual

application compared to traditional, lecture based instruction. The capability of clicker as

Classroom Performance System (CPS) is also considered simple-but-essential:

Posing questions in the system, collecting and aggregating student responses,

and display them in a histogram or other summary form. Simple infrastructures

are only needed for this – a desktop or laptop computer, response pads (clickers)

and infrared or radio-frequency enabled receiver unit (Penuel, 2007).

Similarly, clicker histograms help students to regularly discern whether they understand

the concepts. When it comes to Concept Test (CT), the histogram data helps students see when

they do not fully understand, enabling them to more effectively determine which concepts to

review in greater details, especially when they got the question wrong ( Angel, 2008).

Previous studies also note that student response system (clicker) enables students to

improve interaction they have between classmates or peers and helps to minimize anxiety in

learning new concepts as they become more engaged in the classroom activity:

Clicker-prompted discussions allow them to switch roles and play the role of

teacher. Adding to that, students help each other by evaluating each other’s

reasoning and catching each other’s mistakes. By using clickers, students


Spring 2009

discover how much they know by talking it out. In the similar fashion, the use of

clickers can minimize anxiety, especially when learning new concepts because

sometimes students share laugh and joke around with their peers during

concept test and it helps them take a laid back attitude. For this, the level of

anxiety experienced is a function of how maturely the individual deals with the

learning curve (Angel, 2007).

Student response system also constitutes a powerful catalyst for conceptual change when

combined with effective questioning, discussion, and feedback because it heightened student

engagement in class, and, because involvement and feedback for all students is equal, greater

equity in science instruction (Crouch & Mazur, 2001; Roschelle, Penuel, & Abrahamson, 2004).

Pertinently, Penuel (2007) further asserts the effect of using student responses system to

student’s learning dynamic in the classroom:

With response technology, teachers can integrate such questioning – with

universal and immediate response from all students – into instruction and use

the technology for a variety of purposes, such as elicitation of student’s initial

ideas, formative assessment, instructional decision making, polling students

about preferences and interests, and quizzing.

To put it another way, Angel (2008) agrees that clickers “affords opportunities to regularly

discuss the material, help students stay focused and generate noise that alleviates the boredom or

passivity (p. 334)”.


Spring 2009

There are various dimensions of environment used in the previous studies to discover the

impact of clicker (SRS) such as education level (elementary, secondary, higher education, etc),

student’s level (K-12, High School students, undergraduate students, etc), or even subject

knowledge (mathematics, language arts, social science, history, etc) where the findings have

brought further discussion and questions that will be beneficial to the potentiality and possibility

of clickers in the dynamic of learning. However; although a number of researchers have studied

student response systems in higher education, there has been very little research at the K-12 level.

To point out, previous studies have suggested promising application of clickers in areas

such as mathematics (Hudgins, 2001) and reading (Hartline, 1997). At the same time, case study

researchers have also raised questions about how feasible it is to implement response system in

smaller classes (Means & Olson, 1995). Adding to that, Penuel marks that the widespread use of

response systems in elementary and secondary education settings is a relatively new

phenomenon as to such robust practices can emerge quickly is promising and suggests the

scalability of practices that can improve student learning opportunities (2007, p. 340).

To that end, it is also necessary to expand the scalability of practices of clickers in wider

scope of educational environment – special education and students with ADHD – where it is

believed to provide challenging paradigm to the student’s dynamic learning. This has become the

objective of this research project – examining the effect of clicker (Student’s Response

System/SRS) on self confidence and class participation for students with ADHD in a special

education math classroom.


Spring 2009

Looking for a more diversified environment where clicker is potential to use, there are

important traits are highlighted and explored: special education teacher – students with ADHD –

learning math – the interference of clicker – student’s confidence and class participation. All of

these traits will be explored further in finding the interconnectedness where student response

system is believed to have significant effects. Unfortunately, there are still relatively few studies

and research conducted to examine the potentiality and possibility of clicker in the field of

special education. Therefore, this research project will rely much on the references from previous

studies that directly connect to the nature of learning and psychology issues of students with

AD/HD, teaching and learning math in special education in accordance with references from

previous studies about students response system in higher education and K-12 environment along

with the dynamic teaching and learning math in K-12 environment.

If clicker (SRS) happens to have significant contribution in various dynamic of learning

and environment, I deeply believe that it will be worthwhile to explore and find out more about

its use in special education classroom with special students who have special learning needs and

how significant its interference is in the nature of their learning in the classroom. With this in

mind, the use of clickers for students with ADHD provides not only a window into contemporary

educational priorities, but also an opportunity to move toward pedagogies where it incorporates

technology and its assistive role as classroom performance system (CPS) in today’s teaching and

learning paradigm. Therefore, I have chosen to conduct a research project, focusing on the on the

effect of clicker (Student’s Response System/SRS) on confidence and class participation for

students with ADHD in a special education math classroom.


Spring 2009

Instructional strategies and practices of clicker in special education setting: motivational

intervention for students with ADHD

Since implementing classroom management techniques is beneficial to help students with

ADHD in learning, US Department of Education in teaching children with ADHD suggests three

components for effective strategy implementation: (1) academic instruction, (2) behavioral

intervention, (3) classroom accommodation (2006). Within these three areas, the use of clickers

is believed as to incorporate effective academic instruction, give behavioral intervention, and to

accommodate classroom with assistive technology (2004).

What is more, to accommodate students with ADHD, specifically in learning math, Ann

& Brahm agree that intervention to increase levels of attention to task and reduce disruptive and

impulsive behavior is significantly needed based on the belief that students with ADHD tend to

have an active (kinesthetic) learning style where the focus is on regulating their attention, motor

activity and tendency towards impulsiveness (2005). To put it another way, it is commonly

shown that students with ADHD is those who are more likely learn best by doing; they would

prefer to get their hands on something and figure out how it works rather than read about how it

works. This goes in hand with their kinesthetic nature. Furthermore, the very case of students

with ADHD is that major parts of the brain are not easily stimulated. This uneasiness and less

stimulation of the brain increases discrepancies that prevent them from paying attention and

focus: feeling more intense, melting down during test and quizzes, increasing boredom and

distractibility level that leads to the inability to pay attention in class, talking out f turns, being

impulsive or not being able to tune in. To describe, the mind of students with ADHD is like

having 20 TV on at the same time without the ability to tune in at one station at all. This restless


Spring 2009

and racing mind causes depression that transforms anxiety and nervousness into an account of

disruptive behavior as a means to channel it out.

Regarding the nature of students with ADHD, the use of student response system as to

incorporate effective academic instruction, give behavioral intervention, and to accommodate

classroom with assistive technology is by far shown to give positive impacts for best practice in

classroom instruction for students with ADHD outside providence of discussion about

medication intervention. To date, instruction designed for students with math disabilities may

also prove to be successful for students with ADHD.

Given that working memory and attention weaknesses are the most likely cognitive

correlates of math disabilities, many interventions have been designed to work within these

limitations. One of the approaches towards these interventions is teaching mathematical

strategies using behavioral techniques in helping to remediate the students who have both

attention and math disabilities where teachers and educators in the special education field are

expected to develop creativity with instruction and try different forms of intervention,

particularly in facilitating students with ADHD to feel more engaged with classroom activities;

develop, improve, and maintain focus and interest in learning, and improve their understanding

by feeling confident to actively participate and share thoughts in the most respective manner.

Accordingly, the use of student response system (SRS) or clickers in teaching mathematical

strategies has offered wider opportunities for teachers and educators in the special education to

face unique challenges that students with ADHD bring into classroom.


Spring 2009

Methodology

This study uses a qualitative method of classroom observation in compliance to online

survey/questionnaire from students and teacher of special education. In addition, forms of

measurement and evaluation were developed through online survey and questionnaire for

students and teacher. Survey data with students’ responses are presented in the percentage form.

Survey questions were designed to explore variation in student’s perception and attitude toward

clicker as observed in the survey data. As to present written responses, classroom

experimentations (pretest and posttest) were video-recorded.

The designs of the survey questions will mainly focus to examine the level of

engagement that is accommodated by student response system (SRS) or clicker by exploring

how confident students with ADHD can be in using clickers and how it pertinently shows their

class participation. For this, ARCS model was used as to provide framework for developing

questions to incorporate attention-relevance-confidence-satisfaction aspects if using clickers in

the classroom. Furthermore, the questions were developed as to address the attitude and behavior

of students of ADHD such as hyperactivity, distractibility, and impulsivity to tie in the

connection between the impact of clickers as motivational intervention that incorporate ARCS

model as an approach with self confidence and class participation of students with ADHD in

learning math.

From these developed questions, the observation and evaluation aims at exploring how

far student response system (SRS) or clicker’s motivational intervention to their self confidence

and class participation as to incorporate effective academic instruction, give behavioral


Spring 2009

intervention, and to accommodate classroom. The survey will be conducted prior and after the

use of clicker to teach specific topic of math in the classroom.

Sample: 17 students and 1 teacher

Sample Units: male and female students of special education class, Grade 6th; female special

education math teacher

Research and Assessment Location or Area: Alexander Middle School

Research Instrument: classroom observation rubric, video recorder, and web-based survey.

Time Budgeting:

Week 1 (Designing instruments, survey questions, and classroom experimentation plan);

discussion and consultation with special education teacher

Week 2 (Conducting literature research and continuing discussion, creating master survey online

and continuing discussion and consultation with teacher)

Week 3 (Implementing classroom experimentation, collecting data, and Drafting for project

report)

Week 4 (Constructing Report, analyzing and interpreting data, generating findings, concluding,

and finalizing report)

Data collection

Researchers will collaborate with teachers in conducting classroom experimentation and

distributing online survey on site and online.


Spring 2009

Data analysis

Classroom experimentation will be examined using classroom observation rubric that researcher

and teacher have collaborated on, teacher and students’ thoughts and perception will be

examined by filling survey online.

Procedure

The class experimentation will be conducted in two days and will be video recorded. Online

survey will be distributed and filled after teaching practices as part of the two-day plan of

classroom experimentation. Video recording will be conducted while teaching during classroom

experimentation. Teacher will assist students in filling out the survey online using classroom

computers. Technically, teacher will implement two-phase classroom experimentations: teaching

math without using clicker and teaching with using clicker. In the same fashion, the survey will

also be conducted within two-phase designs: prior to the use of clicker and when using clicker.

In details, classroom experimentation and observation will be conducted in two days with the

following structure:

Day 1 (Pre-Test) – Prior to the use of clickers: experimental teaching + videotaping part 1;

conducting classroom observation part 1 (classroom observation form); distributing prior-to-

clicker students survey at (http://www.surveygizmo.com/s/135918/studentspriortoclicker); filling

in prior-to-clicker teacher survey at(http://www.surveygizmo.com/s/135919/teacherpriortoclicker)

Day 2 (Post-Test) – When/After Using Clickers: experimental teaching + videotaping part 2;

conducting classroom observation part 2 (classroom observation form); distributing when-using-

clicker students survey at (http://www.surveygizmo.com/s/132430/studentswhenusingclicker);


Spring 2009

filling in when-using-clicker teacher survey

(http://www.surveygizmo.com/s/132435/teacherwhenusingclicker).

The classroom observation will incorporate assessment rubric that observe students’

classroom behavior as a whole, while individual observation will address student’s individual

behavior. Adding to that, the classroom experimentation will be recorded as to enable the

researcher to do the re-observation.

For this purpose, this research will only exhibit one form of determiners that is “Yes/No”

responses for survey questions. Moreover, in order to provide a thorough and synchronized

observational data, this research project will design questions from the perspective of both

students and teacher in which it examines the level of hyperactivity, distractibility, and

impulsivity that are occurring during classroom experimentation prior to using clickers and when

the clickers is used to examine its impact to self confidence and class participation.

Limitation of Study

The scope of the study is going to be limited because it intends or aims to collect data from

Alexander Middle School only. This will limit the generalization of the findings of this study.

Sample size is going to be another factor because the sample size will not be large enough to

generalize to the whole population. Also, the nature of the study will produce subjective

conclusions rather than objective conclusions.


Spring 2009

Why this is important

This research project performs as a basis to obtain enlightening experience as an attempt to see

the potentiality and possibility of clicker in a wider dimension of environment as in special

education environment.

Foundation of this study

This study is important to examine the impact of clicker as motivational intervention towards self

confidence and class participation of students with ADHD in learning math.

Findings/Discussion/Result

Findings from Students’ online survey (Obtaining data through students’ perception/inner

thoughts & feeling/responses)

There were 20 questions developed for this survey (as attached in this project report).

These 20 questions incorporated possibilities of behavioral and perceptual inquiries of students

with ADHD in learning math. In doing so, I implemented the ARCS model to investigate its

connection as to how clicker served as motivational intervention to students with ADHD in

learning math. There were 17 students participated in filling out the online survey. This online

survey was mainly directed to obtain data from students’ perception/inner thoughts &

feeling/responses. Meanwhile, the data of students’ behavior, attitudes, and traits/characteristics

while using clickers in learning math were mainly observed through classroom observation and


Spring 2009

re-observation through video tape of classroom experimentation (crossing method/double

checking).

The data obtained from online survey showed major improvements in giving students

motivational intervention, especially improving their level of self confidence and class

participation. The data was interpreted and analyzed based on the comparison from online survey

that students took on day one (before using clicker – Pretest) and on day two when students’

responses were gathered when/after clicker was used (after classroom experimentation). As

additional information, students were took the online survey as they were instructed and assisted

by teacher by accessing the link (provided through email) using classroom’s computers.

As to compare the findings from students’ responses through online survey, the following

figure below (figure 1.1) showed the major changes and differences that were prominently

affected by the use of clickers as motivational intervention for students with ADHD in learning

math. The blue bar described what happened to students when they were learning math without

using clickers on the first day of classroom experimentation. Whilst, the red bar described what

happened to students when they were learning math with clickers. The context of what had

happened were limited to students’ attitudes, behavior, characteristics, and perspectives that

generated the level of their self confidence and class participation in learning math.


Spring 2009

Students' Responses of the impact of clickers in
learning Math
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
Prior To the use of clickers (PreTest)
0
Do you take a long…
Are you hesitant to…
When your answer is…
When your answer is…

Do you pay attention…
Do you like having…
Do you feel sleepy or…
Do you ask more…
Do you like to learn…

Do you understand…
Do you like to move…
Do you feel that you…

Do you feel tired to…
Are you afraid to…

Do you feel happy…

Do you feel frustrated…

Do you feel that your…
When/After Using Clickers (PostTest)
Do you like math class?

Figure 1.1

From Figure 1.1 above, there are major findings analyzed and interpreted regarding the impact of

using clickers as motivational intervention to self confidence and class participation level of

students with ADHD in learning math.

1. There is an increased level of likeliness among students with ADHD in learning math as

marked by increasing percentage from 47% to 100%), responding to the question: Do you

like Math Class?

2. Students’ fear level of answering questions is decreased as marked by the dropping

percentage from 41% to 12%), responding to the question: Are you afraid to answer

questions?


Spring 2009

3. Students’ focus in paying attention to the lesson is gained more by acknowledging that

they needed less time to think and respond to the questions as opposed to spending longer

time without using clicker. This is marked by the falling percentage from 53% to 18%,

responding to the question: Do you take a long time to answer questions?

4. Students’ level of hesitation in answering/responding is mitigated. This is marked by the

decreasing percentage from 59% to 6%, responding to the question: Are you hesitant to

answer questions?

5. At some points, students are less embarrassed in giving answers, even when their answers

are wrong. This is marked by the falling percentage from 47% to 18%, responding to the

question: When your answer is wrong, do you feel embarrassed?

6. The happiness level is also increased when students are answering questions. This is

marked by the raising percentage from 65% to 88%, responding to the question: Do you

feel happy when answering question?

7. Students also pay more attention to the questions and teacher when they are learning in

the classroom. This is marked by the amplified percentage from 76% to 88% and 65% to

82%, responding to the questions: (1) Do you pay attention more to the question? And (2)

Do you pay attention more to the teacher?

8. Students’ level of preference of having tests, quizzes, and class discussions is also

increased. This is marked by the raising percentage from 24% to 88%, responding to the

question: Do you like having tests, quizzes, and class discussion?

9. Students’ feeling of sleepiness and laziness is also mitigated. This is marked by the

decreasing percentage from 71% to 12%, responding to the question: Do you feel sleepy

or lazy?

Spring 2009

10. In the major scope, the use of clicker has made students are more interested in learning

math. This is marked by the increasing percentage from 47% to 71%, responding to the

question: Do you like to learn math more?

11. Students’ level of frustration is also minimized as marked by the declining percentage

from 41% to 6% as to respond to the question: Do you feel frustrated to learn math?

12. Students’ level of understanding is improved as marked by the increasing percentage

from 53% to 82% as to respond to the question: Do you understand better?

13. Students happen to be less fidgety by having less temptation to leave the seats while

learning in class. This is marked by the decreasing percentage from 53% to 12% as to

respond to the question: Do you like to move from your seat while you are studying?

14. Students’ level of self significance is enhanced because they felt that their answers they

are giving to respond using clickers give important contribution to the class dynamic.

This is marked by the raising percentage from 29% to 53% as to respond to the question:

Do you feel that you (and your answers) are important?

15. The most significance result coming from the complete absence of students’ level of

tiredness in following activity (or answering questions) to learn math in the classroom. In

the Post Test survey (when/after using clicker), all respondents (students) gave a “No”

answer to the question: Do you feel tired to answer questions? This is marked by the

utterly increasing percentage from 41% to 100%.

Following the findings from students’ perception about the use of clickers through online survey,

elements of ARCS model are evident as the use of clickers influences students self confidence

and class participation.


Spring 2009

1. The elements of Attention (A) are evident in the findings number 3 where students’ focus

is increased; number 7 as more attention is obtained; number 9 where sleepiness and

laziness are decreasing; number 10 where interest is gained more to learn math; and

number 13 as students’ temptations to leave the seats is mitigated. These findings reflect

the motivational intervention of clickers as to implement the element of attention in

ARCS model: capturing, stimulating and maintaining interest and attention.

2. The elements of Relevance (R) are evident in the findings number 1 where the increasing

likeliness enhances students’ preference to like learning math and number 8 where

students’ increased preference of having test, quizzes, and class discussion will support

students’ learning in math. These findings reflect the motivational intervention of clickers

as to implement the element of relevance in ARCS model: meeting, providing, and tying

learners’ needs with appropriate experiences that influences motivation

3. The elements of Confidence (C) are evident in the findings number 2 where students are

no longer to feel fear in answering questions; number 4 where students’ level of hesitance

is decreased; number 5 where students are no longer embarrassed in answering questions

even when their answers are wrong; & number 11 where students’ level of frustration is

minimized. These findings reflect the motivational intervention of clickers as to

implement the element of Confidence in ARCS model: building, enhancing, and

supporting learners with positive expectation and beliefs for success.

4. The elements of Satisfaction (S) are evident in the findings number 6 where the feeling of

happiness gives positive reinforcement to further learning experience; number 12 where

students’ level of understanding is improved to provide stronger basis for further learning

challenges; number 14 where students’ feeling of self importance is increased as to give

Spring 2009

them positive reinforcement and rewards to take on further decision; number 15 where

the absence of tiredness will mark for better opportunities in further learning. These
further

findings reflect the motivational intervention of clickers as to implement the element of

Satisfaction in ARCS model: providing and assisting learners with meaningful

opportunities and reinforcement for succes
success.

In compliance to students’ responses, this study also elicited students’ changes of attitudes,
s’

behaviors, characteristics, and perception from teacher’s perspective as described by figure 1.2

below:
Student's behavioral changes from Teacher's perspective

The Impact of clickers to student's behavioral changes from teacher's
perspective

1

0.5

0
Do your students like your…
Are your students afraid to…
Do your students take a…
Are your students hesitant…
When your students’…
When your students’…
Do you see your students…
Do your students pay…
Do your students like to…
Do you see your students…
Do your students ask more…
Do you see any frustration…
Do your students…
Do you see that your…
Do you see that your…
Do you see any tiredness…

Prior to using clickers (PreTest)

When/After using clickers
(PostTest)

Figure 1.2


Spring 2009

After analyzing teacher’s online survey, there are major findings from teacher’s perspective

that directly correlate and go along the way with the findings from students’ side.

1. Students are not afraid anymore to answer questions.

2. Students’ focus is retained more by quickly answering/responding to the questions.

3. Students’ level of hesitance is lessened.

4. Students are no longer feeling embarrassed when answering questions even when their

answers are wrong.

5. Students are eager to be questioned more.

6. Students are able to pay attention more to the questions and teacher while learning math.

7. Students’ previous traits such as laziness, sleepiness, and tiredness are able to be

mitigated.

8. Students like to learn math more.

9. Students’ temptation of moving around and leaving the seats while studying in the class

can also be minimized.

As to obtain findings of students’ changes of behavior, attitudes, and traits/characteristics, the

main source of the data generated from classroom experimentation with implementing classroom

observation rubrics in the pretest and posttest phase. Additionally, data from classroom

observation rubric will be re-observed with video tape of classroom experimentation to provide a

more thorough observation.


Spring 2009

Below is figure 1.3 that describes comparison and the findings/result from both classroom

observation and the video tape of classroom experimentation.

Traits/Characteristics Rubric Prominent traits on Pretest Prominent traits on Posttest

Daydreaming - -

Always moving around - -

Talking to other students - -

Fidgeting - -

Teasing & annoying other students - -

Playing with stationery - -

Less attention to subject - -

Less attention to class - -

Refusal/long delay to answer question V -

Ignorant/careless - -

Sleepy, lazy - -

Quiet, passive V -

Whining, complaining, grumpy - -

Figure 1.3

Based on the rubrics presented in the classroom observation sheet and re-observation

from the video tape, students experienced significant changes in the way they behave and react to

the use of clickers that affect their self confidence and class participation. The significant

changes appeared in the pacing where students answering questions. On pretest, students were

likely to have longer pacing to answer questions; teacher has to give stronger encouragement for

students to answer questions. In the similar way, students were likely to be more passive and

quieter on pretest when answering questions. As in the opposite, when clicker was being used,


Spring 2009

there were changes in the way students answering questions – students were more reactive, the

pacing was shorter.

Additionally, at the end of the class, the evaluation of using clicker for quizzes was taken

to get inputs from students. The evaluation was in the form of verbal inputs. Teacher asked the

students about the pros and cons of using clickers. Below are several direct responses students

said about using clickers:

1. “Using clicker is fun, it reminds me of remote control”

2. “It is more economical and ecological, means paperless. We don’t need to cut trees and

use more paper, it’s environmental friendly”

3. “I don’t need to write anything or use any pencils or pen. It’s good that way”

4. “Well, it sort of time consuming. We need to wait till everybody put their answers to see

the right answer”

As to with teacher, she expressed her concern regarding the issue of cheating temptation. If you

happen to see others press A, B, or C, there’s temptation to click the same answer.

Moving onto teacher’s perspective about using clickers in special education environment,

an online questionnaire for the teacher had been developed. This questionnaire implemented

question from teacher’s experience and expertise in teaching math for students with ADHD. This

questionnaire investigated more about the implementation of clickers as part of teacher’s strategy

in motivating students with ADHD in learning math. There are important findings from this

questionnaire:


Spring 2009

1. Using the clicker will help me assess which level of understanding my students are

functioning at.

2. Using a clicker accurately shows me what concepts need more emphasis and which

concepts are mastered.

3. The students enjoy using them. It may remind them of video games and it may help them

to take ownership over their own learning as they feel their answers are assessed.

4. Other benefit of using clicker is that the students enjoy using them. It may remind them

of video games and it may help them to take ownership over their own learning as they

feel their answers are assessed.

5. One minor pitfall that should be a consideration when using clicker is that If the

information is not made confidential, some students may become embarrassed if they

answer incorrectly in front of their peers.

6. Teaching Math is enjoyable for students with AD/HD because it is fast paced and there

are many opportunities for growth and practice of incorporating clickers in this field.

Activities are hands-on and questions are welcomed.

7. One of the constraints of teaching math to students with ADHD is that occasionally,

students will get off topic. Using the calculator is sometimes problematic for students

with AD/HD. Therefore, incorporating clickers is by far ideal to motivate students with

ADHD in learning math

It is clear that the issue of hyperactivity, distractibility, and impulsivity that become

major traits of students with ADHD are successfully mitigated with the use of clickers. This

showed that as motivational intervention, using clickers for teacher to teach math and for the

Spring 2009

students with ADHD to learn math is effective. In addition, the impact of using clickers to self

confidence and class participation of students with ADHD is positively improving and

enhancing.

Conclusion

The objective of this study is to investigate the impact of using student response system

(SRS) or clickers to students with ADHD toward their self confidence and class participation in

learning math with the approach of ARCS (Attention-Relevance-Confidence-Satisfaction) Model.

The findings showed that the issue of hyperactivity, distractibility, and impulsivity that

become major traits of students with ADHD are successfully mitigated with the use of clickers.

Furthermore, the use of clickers for students with ADHD confirmed that the promising future of

implementing and incorporating clickers opening up to an opportunity to move toward

pedagogies where it incorporates technology and its assistive role as classroom performance

system (CPS) in special education field. Thus, from the findings of this study, the use of clickers

as motivational intervention showed positive and significant impact in improving student’s self

confidence and class participation as to incorporate the motivational elements of ARCS model

that significantly evident when it is used by teacher to motivate students with ADHD in learning

math.

The elements of Attention (A) are evident where students’ focus is increased; attention is

obtained; sleepiness and laziness are decreasing; interest is gained more to learn math; and

students’ temptations to leave the seats is mitigated. These findings reflect the motivational


Spring 2009

intervention of clickers as to implement the element of attention in ARCS model: capturing,

stimulating and maintaining interest and attention.

The elements of Relevance (R) are evident where the increasing likeliness enhances

students’ preference to like learning math and students’ increased preference of having test,

quizzes, and class discussion will support students’ learning in math. These findings reflect the

motivational intervention of clickers as to implement the element of relevance in ARCS model:

meeting, providing, and tying learners’ needs with appropriate experiences that influences

motivation

The elements of Confidence (C) are evident where students are no longer to feel fear in

answering questions; students’ level of hesitance is decreased; students are no longer

embarrassed in answering questions even when their answers are wrong; & students’ level of

frustration is minimized. These findings reflect the motivational intervention of clickers as to

implement the element of Confidence in ARCS model: building, enhancing, and supporting

learners with positive expectations and beliefs for success.

The elements of Satisfaction (S) are evident where the feeling of happiness gives positive

reinforcement to further learning experience; students’ level of understanding is improved to

provide stronger basis for further learning challenges; students’ feeling of self importance is

increased as to give them positive reinforcement and rewards to take on further decision; the

absence of tiredness will mark for better opportunities in further learning. These findings reflect

the motivational intervention of clickers as to implement the element of Satisfaction in ARCS

model: providing and assisting learners with meaningful opportunities and reinforcement for


Spring 2009

success. As to sum up, both special education teachers and students with ADHD in Alexander

Middle School confirmed that using clicker is beneficial to the dynamic of learning and that

contributing prospective improvement to the field of special education, specifically as

motivational intervention to self confidence and class participation in learning math.

Appendices

- Sample Online Survey Questions & Questionnaire for students and teacher

-Obtained data from teacher’s observation in the classroom (Checklist and Notes)

- Figure table obtained from analyzed data


Spring 2009

References

American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP). Retrieved on May 3, 2009
from
http://www.aacap.org/cs/adhd_a_guide_for_families/common_signs_and_symptoms.

American Psychiatric Association (APA) (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders. 4th edition. Text revision. Washington DC: Author

Angel, Hoekstra. (2008). Learning, media and technology: Incorporating education,
communication & information (ECi). Vol 33 (4). MA: Routledge. Vibrant student voices:
exploring effects of the use of clickers in large college courses, 329-341

Barry, T.D., Klinger, L.G., Lyman, R.D., Bush, d., & Hawkins, L. (2001). Visual selective
attention versus sustained attention in boys with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.
Journal of Attention Disorders, 4, 193-202.

C. H. Crouch and E. Mazur, (2001), “Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results”
American Journal of Physics 69, pp. 970

Classroom arrangement for ADHD students. Retrieved on May 1, 2009 from
http://www.brighthub.com/education/special/articles/25004.aspx

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Ed. (DSM-IV). (1994). American
Psychiatric Association.

Fitzgerald, G.E. (1994). Using the computer with students with emotional and behavioral
disorders. Technology & Disability, 3(2), 87-99. (Theme issue: Special education) UMI.

Hartline, F. (1997). Analysis of 1st semester of Class talks use at McIntosh elementary school.
Yorktown, VA: Better Education, Inc.


Spring 2009

Hudgins, B. (2001). Leveraging handheld technology in the classroom. T H E Journal, 29(5), 46.

Keller, John. M., (2007). Motivation and Performance. In R.A. Reiser & J.A. Dempsey (Eds.),
Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 82-92). Saddle River, NJ:
Merrill/Prentice-Hall.

Lewis, Ann., Norwich, Brahm. (2005). Special teaching for special children? Pedagogies for
inclusion. New York: open University press.

Martinussen, R, Tannock, R, McInnes, A, Chaban P (2006). Teach ADHD: Teacher’s Resource
Manual. Toronto, Canada: TV Ontario.

Mash, Eric, J. & Barkley, Russel. A., (2006). Treatment of childhood disorders (3rd ed). New
York: Guilford Press.

Mayes and Calhoun, 2006 S.D. Mayes and S.L. Calhoun, Frequency of reading, math, and
writing disabilities in children with clinical disorders, Learning and Individual
Differences 16 (2006), pp. 145–157

Mayes. S.D., & Calhoun, S.L. (2006). Frequency of reading, math and writing disabilities in
children with clinical disorders. Learning and Individual Differences.16, 145-157.

McLeod, T., & Armstrong, S. (1982). Learning disabilities in mathematics-skill deficits and
remedial approaches at the intermediate and secondary level. Learning. Disability
Quarterly, 5, 305-311.

McNamara, Barry Edwards. (2007). Learning Disabilities: Bridging the gap between research
and classroom practice. New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Means, B., & Olson, K. (1995). Technology and education reform. Menlo Park: SRI
International.


Spring 2009

Penuel, W.R., L. Abrahamson, and J. Roschelle. 2007. A sociocultural interpretation of the
effects of audience response system in higher education. In audience response systems in
higher education: Applications and cases, ed. D.A. banks, 187-208. Hershey, PA:
information Science

Reiser, Robert A & Dempsey, John. V., (2007). Trends and issues in instructional design and
technology. Upper saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Teaching Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: Instructional Strategies and
Practices, 2004. US Department of Education. Retrieved on May 2, 2009 from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1
b/9c/61.pdf


The Impact of clicker to self confidence and class participation of students with ADHD in learning math

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie The Impact of clicker to self confidence and class participation of students with ADHD in learning math

Ähnlich wie The Impact of clicker to self confidence and class participation of students with ADHD in learning math (20)

Mehr von artatipratiwi

Mehr von artatipratiwi (7)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

The Impact of clicker to self confidence and class participation of students with ADHD in learning math