What are the benefits of in-class voting?

Classroom voting has many benefits, both for the teacher and the students. The first advantage for the teacher is to have the answers of the whole class and not only of one or two people. It allows the teacher to detect misunderstandings directly in class and to address them. This can be very rewarding for teachers, as Wood recounts about his developmental biology class (Wood, 2004, p. 797):

"For me it was a revelation. I was not so much disappointed by the result as overjoyed to realize that for the first time in 20 years of teaching I knew immediately (rather than after the next intermediate test) that more than half the class had not understood."

Voting in class also increases student involvement and attention (see for example this exploratory study). Indeed, since the students' answers are anonymous (except perhaps for the teacher in certain cases), there is no fear of making a mistake in front of others. Moreover, students are not influenced by the votes of their peers. In addition, it is a good way to generate interaction. And most importantly, voting in class is an excellent way to increase student learning and understanding. This is especially the case when voting is coupled with a short peer discussion. Many studies have shown the positive impact of this method (see Nilson, 2010).

What technology should I use?

There are two technologies available for in-class voting:

• online systems where students log in with their smartphone or tablet
• clickers or voting boxes.

The advantage of online systems is that it is not necessary to buy new devices since almost all students are "equipped" (and for those who are not, we can simply ask them to vote with one of their colleagues). Many systems exist, we will describe here two that are freely available.

• Pingo

pingo.upb.de
This system was developed by the University of Paderborn, Germany. It allows you to ask single and multiple choice questions as well as questions with free text. It also allows you to ask questions with numerical answers.
With Pingo, you ask one question at a time and the system is very convenient for asking questions directly in class (without necessarily having entered them into the system in advance). You can have your questions in your PowerPoint (or write them on the board). It also allows you to ask a question again (e.g. for peer instruction) and to compare the results. Finally, it supports the TeX language.

• Votamatic

votamatic.unige.ch or elearning.unifr.ch/vote
This is the system that was developed by the University of Geneva and the University of Fribourg. The latter gives the possibility, in addition to multiple choice questions, to ask questions with free text. This system works well for questions that have been prepared in advance. It should also be noted that with this system all questions are asked at the same time.

Other systems include Socrative (free for up to 50 students) and SpeakUp (which also allows students to ask questions live).

Besides online voting systems, there are also voting boxes or clickers. In concrete terms, each student votes using a box that looks like a remote control. The teacher receives the results directly on his or her computer. Here again, many systems exist such as i>Clicker or TurningPoint. The main difference with the previous system is that you have to buy the clickers or have them bought by the students (in some cases, you also need an annual license).

How to implement voting in the classroom?

Two uses of voting in the classroom are described in more detail here: voting to adjust the pace of one's class and peer instruction.

1. Adjusting the pace of the class

At some point during the course, students have to answer a question (usually multiple choice) posed by the teacher. The teacher sees the answers live and, depending on the rate of correct answers, decides whether to continue or to give more explanations or additional examples of the topic.

It should be noted that a plenary discussion can also be created by asking, after the first vote, a few students to "defend" their answer in front of the whole class.

2. Peer-instruction

In order to make the students more active, it is possible to slightly modify the previous approach according to the rate of correct answers to a vote. First, a question is asked to the class and the students vote. If the rate of correct answers is:

• low (<30%): take some time to re-explain the concept or make an additional example;
• high (>70-75%): give the right answer, explain why it is right, and move on;
• between 30% and 70%: students are asked to discuss in groups of 2-3 and convince their classmates that their answer (and their reasoning!) is correct. They are given a few minutes to discuss in small groups. Afterwards, the vote is repeated. There is usually an increase in the number of correct answers in the second vote. Students can be asked to vote at different times during the course.

Some references for further reading

• Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in large classrooms: Current research and best-practice tips. CBE-Life sciences education, 6(1), 9-20. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.06-12-0205. Also available at this link.
• Nilson, L. B. (2010). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors. John Wiley & Sons.
• On clickers, see pages 120-122. Overview here.
• Wood, W.B. (2004). Clickers: a teaching gimmick that works. Dev. Cell 7, 796-798.
• DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2004.11.004. Also available at this link.