College is frustrating. Buying $700 dollars worth of textbooks you’ll probably never open is frustrating. Trying to get homework done when MyASU isn’t working — surprise, surprise — is frustrating.

The last thing students need is something else to compound the stress they already experience on a daily basis. However, if they are lucky enough to be in a majority of introductory-level lectures, that is exactly what they get.

Behold: the clicker.

These handheld devices connect students directly to an interactive database during class, and are intended to promote student participation and attendance by receiving instantaneous feedback on in-class questions. Initially, they seem like a great idea — and they probably would be, if they weren’t so annoying.

First, you have the added expense of buying a piece of equipment you will probably never use again. Then, you’re instructed to attempt to navigate a Bermuda Triangle-esque Web site to buy a registration code — since buying the clicker itself wasn’t enough. Finally, you spend two class periods pressing buttons aimlessly while trying to get the stupid thing to work.

As for promoting student participation, these clickers succeed. They successfully get nearly 400 students simultaneously ripping their hair out while trying to figure out why a seemingly idiot-proof device is making them feel like, well, an idiot.

Clearly, new technology doesn’t always mean better technology.

In my experience with the ever-frustrating and consistently malfunctioning clicker system, more time was spent trying to get them to work than using them for actual work. So, while my focus was meant to be on the microbial life cycle, my thoughts primarily consisted of “What does it mean, no connection found?!”

My professor — who shall remain nameless — was just as clueless as we in the class were. So, after devoting nearly 10 minutes of what was only 50 minutes of class time to clicker troubleshooting, he/she gave up.
Mission: Definitely not accomplished.

While our clicker ineptitude was eventually conquered — three full weeks later, mind you — our exasperation at the uselessness of such a technology is still looming. You can almost hear the grinding teeth every time another “pop clicker quiz” pops up on the screen.

The notion of promoting class participation and fostering an engaging learning environment is admirable. Doing it by digging further into college students’ already shallow pockets? Not as much.

At the end of the day, participation and attendance should be determined by homework and exams, because the point of the lecture is, quite simply, to know the material. If students want to do well, they will show up. If they don’t, they won’t.

Seeing as college is essentially an extended prep class for careers, students should be expected to hold themselves accountable for their participation in class. It’s simple — corporations expect employees to show up without any additional incentive beyond their own sense of commitment. As far as I know, they don’t offer extra points for attendance.

As for me, I had no problem with the original system for student evaluation. I am pretty sure that when it came to figuring out whether or not students knew the information, Scantrons worked just fine.

Reach Karen at khewell@asu.edu.