 |
 |
Fascinating discussion both as a topic area and a methodological issue! Other commentators have focused under what circumstances but I think that the "for whom" is equally important here. You have those who attend versus those who do not attend. Those who attend may want it for reinforcement, to review what was missed through a lapse in attention or unclear, as a method of revision at exam times etcetera. Those who do not attend want it as a form of substitution. As Janet points out the time distinction is also important - there is a big difference between what students say they would like (hypothetical - in advance of use) and what they actually use. For me this is a similar issue to student demand for 24/7 opening hours for university libraries. They all say that they want it and then hardly any of them use it when available. This is the "Just in case" mentality employed by many businesses when perhaps what students often want is actually "just in time". In the case of lecture capture "in time" for assignments, quizzes etcetera. Although your question is about lecture capture for face to face students as Geoff indicates above this is very relevant to elearning as many courses offer capture of elearning broadcasts. For example our rveiew of workplace based elearning showed some of the "demAnd" factors for elearning students: *Carroll C*, Booth A, Papaioannou D, Sutton A, Wong R. UK Healthcare professionals’ experience of e-learning techniques: a systematic review of qualitative data. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions *2009*; 29(4): 2135-2141 *Carroll C*, Booth A, Papaioannou D, Sutton A, Wong R. Experiences of e-learning and its delivery among learners who work: A systematic review, in: Supporting Workplace Learning: Towards Evidence-based Practice eds. Poell R & Van Woerkom M. *2011*: Springer; New York: pp.47-67. Booth A, Carroll C, Papaioannou D, Sutton A & Wong R (2009) Applying findings from a systematic review of workplace-based e-learning: implications for health information professionals. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2008.00834.x>. Health Info Libr J, 26(1), 4-21. Best wisheds Andrew On 27 August 2015 at 12:37, Geoff Wong <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Dear Melanie, > > One way of thinking about the recorded lectures may be by using a modified > version of Rogers' diffusion of innovation theory. > We used such a theory this in our paper looking at the use of the Internet > in medical eduction: > http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/10/12 > > The topic is not the same, but the beauty of taking a realist approach is > that the same mechanisms may be in operation and that an existing > substantive theory 'just' needs to be specified for your context. > > So, off the top of my head, some lecturers may be using their recorded > lectures in such a way as to 'trigger' the relative advantage mechanism in > students. This may be (for example) by linking it to assessments. > > Good luck! > > Geoff > > > On 27 August 2015 at 12:00, Melanie King <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Hi Gill and Janet, >> >> I thought I would start this investigation with the assumption that if >> more captures were provided then the students would be accessing them more. >> (This being the program theory). The whole intervention was initially a >> ground-up, ‘innovator led' and organically used system. However, the top >> down policy came for last academic year, which provided a campus steer on >> its use from the PVC-T and an intervention that relied on ‘persuasion’ and >> ‘guidelines’ which would ‘motivate’ a change in academics behaviour. So, >> I’ve been looking at this from the academics behaviours initially. >> >> So I focused on the take-up in different departments as my original >> theory was that the context of ‘better communication, a vocal and >> persuasive department champion and greater usage across whole programmes’ >> would lead to greater take-up by staff and the outcome would be consistent >> viewing habits by students. This has been the case for several departments >> where it seems that a critical mass of early adopters have provided the >> ‘persuasion’ for colleagues and the greater use across programmes have >> indeed enabled this more consistent viewing habits. It also appears that >> the ‘persuasion’ mechanism directly from learners has also persuaded new >> staff to try it. >> >> However, the overall institutional average % that have viewed is still >> quite low (around 30% of the class) with a few staff pulling up these >> averages with consistently higher % of their classes viewing all of their >> course material (across multiple different programmes). There are 18 out >> of 124 staff with significantly higher % of viewers (> +1SD). So I have >> focussed on these staff and their behaviours. This is not discipline or >> dept specific. It is not (as much of the literature suggests) because the >> staff member has english as a second language or where attendance in class >> is generally lower (although this is true for one case). What is common is >> that most of these staff feel that captured lectures are an important >> resource and actively promote it as such on a regular basis to their >> students. They consistently check viewing figures and take action to >> notify and remind their class of the importance of the resource. One staff >> member actually provides quizzes on regular basis that is directly related >> to a different week’s lecture content and they therefore have 100% of the >> cohort as viewers because the students need to review it to answer the >> quiz. Most of these staff started using LC because they were concerned >> about providing a high quality learning experience for their students. A >> number of them have also used it as a tool to reflect and enhance their own >> teaching practice as they feel the need to refresh and update their >> pedagogy. A number of them also are now worried that they are raising >> expectations in the students as a whole though and feel pressure from their >> colleagues who do not use LC about this. >> >> I am starting to think that LC will benefit a % of learner styles who >> value this additional resource, and provide reassurance to those who >> ‘think’ they may need it in the future (although this will need to be >> synthesised from existing literature). It will also benefit a small % of >> staff who are actively engaged in teaching development and interested in >> the student experience and reacting to ‘consumer demand'. However, it >> costs a fortune to capture and store all of this content. Almost 80% of >> which has never be viewed. >> >> A question I’m struggling with is where do I stop with my investigation! >> Is my next step to find out which sub-group of students actually >> demonstrate the need for more ‘reassurance’? Or perhaps, look at consumer >> demand theory ( >> http://www.amosweb.com/cgi-bin/awb_nav.pl?s=wpd&c=dsp&k=consumer+demand+theory) >> and see if there is a pattern of viewing that correlates to this theory. >> If I do this …. Is this realistic evaluation if I don’t actually ask the >> students ‘why’ but just infer it from the pattern in the data that might be >> explained by consumer demand theory? >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Melanie >> >> -- >> Melanie King >> Head >> Centre for Engineering and Design Education >> Loughborough University >> Tel: 01509 227198 >> Twitter: @mrnking and @lboro_cede >> http://cede.lboro.ac.uk >> >> >> From: "Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving >> Standards" <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Janet Harris < >> [log in to unmask]> >> Reply-To: "Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving >> Standards" <[log in to unmask]>, "[log in to unmask]" < >> [log in to unmask]> >> Date: Thursday, 27 August 2015 07:11 >> To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> >> Subject: Re: Potential theories for demand, supply and take-up >> >> Hi Melanie >> To add to Gill's suggestion, it would also be important to think about >> 'at what point in time'. I'd ask students why they asked for lecture >> capture, because although lobbying may appear universal, it doesn't >> necessarily reflect the views of individual students. This should reveal >> some mechanisms ( such as anxiety about course content). For the next stage >> of 'watching behaviour', I'd ask if they'd ever watched one, when and why. >> Followed by reactions to watching, because some may view and decide it's >> not a useful way to learn. Or, useful if you missed class. Or, useful right >> before exams. (That's the ' in what circumstances' bit) >> >> It would be really interesting to hear what you find! >> Janet >> >> >> On 27 Aug 2015, at 00:18, Gill Westhorp <[log in to unmask]> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Melanie >> >> I can’t help in terms of formal theories for that area but I’m curious >> about what you’ve done already in terms of ‘highly viewed’ materials. For >> example – are you able to identify from your *who* watches *what?* If >> so – have you done interviews with students who do watch the 20% to find >> out why they watched that but not other things? >> >> >> >> Cheers >> >> Gill >> >> > -- Dr Andrew Booth BA MSc Dip Lib PhD MCLIP Reader in Evidence Based Information Practice School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR) Regent Court, 30 Regent Street SHEFFIELD S1 4DA Tel: 0114 222 0705 Fax: 0114 272 4095 Email: [log in to unmask]