Publication Cover
Engineering Education
a Journal of the Higher Education Academy
Volume 4, 2009 - Issue 2
5,312
Views
9
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Lecture capture:making the most of face-to-face learning

, MSc (Learning Technologist, Staff and Departmental Development Unit) , , MA, PhD (Feedback and Assessment Officer) & , MA, PhD (Chair in Terahertz Electronics, Director of the Institute of Microwaves and Photonics)
Pages 4-13 | Published online: 15 Dec 2015

Abstract

The deployment of a new virtual learning environment (VLE), Blackboard, at the University of Leeds came with a vision of ‘the use of technology enabling better use of […] contact time’. This paper describes how a programme of lecture capture (in which the audio of lectures, video of the presenter and on-screen projected content were recorded) impacted on the delivery and student perception of face-to-face teaching and associated pedagogies in the School of Electronic and Electrical Engineering.

Two modules were involved in the pilot study: one at level 1 (on which 74 students were enrolled) and the other at level 2 (45 students). Approximately 30 lectures were captured in total, the majority of these in the level 1 module. Students were regularly polled about their interactions with the captures and their experiences were overwhelmingly positive. In addition to the teaching resources that were created and evaluation that was conducted, the project also produced a series of guides to support the use of the hardware and software used in the process.

This paper describes how the project has informed attitudes to lecture capture and practices of lecture delivery within the School against a background of current interest within higher education in this area. The paper discusses the benefits of the approach taken (using simple lecture capture technology) and some of the challenges of the project (including cost, support, training, reliability and scalability). Finally, the paper considers the reaction to calls for wider use of this technology and the implementation of a more scalable, automated lecture capture system.

Introduction

The project focussed on the level 1 modules Electronic Materials (semester 1) and Electronic Materials and Devices (semesters 1 and 2) and the linked level 2 module Transistors and Optoelectronic Devices (semesters 1 and 2), all delivered in the format of one-hour weekly lectures. The aim was to capture all audio and video of the presenter and all projected on-screen content/VGA output (including PowerPoint slides and written equations) and make the finished materials available to students via the virtual learning environment (VLE) as soon as possible after delivery (usually within three to four working days) in a variety of formats (see ). Between the two lecture series (the two level 1 modules were delivered concurrently in semester 1) just over 30 lectures were captured and delivered via Blackboard, the institutional VLE at the University of Leeds. The captured material from the level 1 module was also made available to students taking the level 2 module, thus they were able to review material they had previously learned.

Table 1 Format and content available of lectures captured

The context of the project

The project was initiated when the leader of the above modules became aware, through conversations with colleagues, of the increasing use of lecture capture technology and of the growing pedagogical debate in this area, particularly the potential impact that allowing students to revisit content post-lecture might have on teaching. He also noticed that a growing number of students were taking a ‘DIY’ [’do-it-yourself’] approach to taking their own audio recordings of lectures to supplement their notes (using dictating machines and mp3 players). He perceived that some students (particularly those for whom English was not their first language) were struggling to grasp the concepts in lectures first time round and, when questioned, seemed eager to be given the opportunity to recap later. Other drivers behind the project were students’ rising expectations for media-rich content (particularly audio and video) and the launch and rollout of the institutional VLE at the University of Leeds which brought new opportunities to host and deliver such content online. Hence there was a willingness to act to meet the learning needs of students, to exploit the opportunities offered by the VLE and to explore new technologies. It was also felt that taking action to capture entire lectures might assist in the retention of students, the materials created would have the potential to be shared with other year groups (or even more widely) and they could be used for future student recruitment.

Whilst it was recognised that there are a number of commercial and open source automated lecture capture systems available, it was felt that the initial investment and additional support required to install such systems may have been substantial and could, therefore, have delayed the start of the project. The approach described in this paper is perhaps unsuitable for widespread adoption, but it reflects the fact that this was a pilot study and that a quick start-up helped the team to carry out an evaluation and use the results to inform potential future developments.

Key requirements for the lecture capturing system were identified at the start of the project as the following:

  • to capture and synchronise audio of the lecture content; PowerPoint slide content; video of the presenter’s body language and explanatory gestures and equations which had traditionally been written onto acetates and projected using an OHP

  • to be as easy as possible to set up and use

  • to produce content for the VLE that allowed students to navigate to chosen points of the content in order to recap a specific topic or demonstration.

The last point was considered to be especially important since the project sought from the outset to facilitate active learning by making the captured materials interactive and by giving the students a level of active control. Through completed questionnaires and focus groups, students indicated that they used the materials for active learning in a number of different ways:

  • self-assessment to recap examples: students re-attempted the worked examples set in the lectures and used the captures to provide feedback on answers. Students reported pausing examples at key moments, endeavouring to complete the next section or answer by themselves and then returning to the capture to check their answers

  • to support the completion of past papers or new example questions: students followed worked examples in the captures, paused them at key moments and applied their learning to new example questions or to past papers

  • to recap earlier materials in face-to-face events: one student in a focus group reported how during a lecture he used a portable device to revisit the lecturer’s explanation given in a previous class in order to clarify points he could not grasp.

Comments on the pedagogy of capturing lectures

Current pedagogical research points to some of the main advantages and potential drawbacks of the use of rich media, such as lecture capture output, to support learning. In much of the academic writing reviewed, student responses to projects where lectures have been captured and made available digitally is generally positive, and the perception is that teaching and learning have been improved (CitationLavelle, 2006; Sher and Gajendran, 2008; Nortcliffe and Middleton, 2008). According to CitationPrensky (2001), one of the main reasons for the enthusiasm of students for this type of material is the attitude of the ‘digital native’ (i.e. students who are used to accessing multimedia content online and on demand). A recent CIBER study commissioned by JISC and the British Library (CitationUCL, 2008) looks at some myths and realities associated with the idea of the ‘google generation.’ Whilst questioning a number of widespread notions, the authors of the report say it is ‘generally true’ that young people today prefer interactive systems and are turning away from being passive consumers of information.

CitationBalfour (2006) stated that the availability of recorded lectures for review changes the way that students act in face-to-face sessions and ‘allows students to concentrate on the material being presented and to participate in any discussion that takes place.’ This is in contrast to students spending their time in class ensuring that all notes are fully comprehensive when the lecture is the one and only opportunity that they will have to hear the information. This argument is supported by CitationBiggs (2003) who has stated that students struggle with comprehending the message of the lecture whilst simultaneously recording its gist through note-taking.

CitationBalfour (2006) listed a number of advantages of lecture capture to staff and students. Some of the main benefits to staff have been illustrated by this project and include:

  • professional development opportunities arising from lecturers being able to critically review their own performance

  • increasing student engagement and retention

  • giving students a new way of resolving problems, meaning that face-to-face interactions can be ‘spent on more complex issues’ than those already covered.

Many of the benefits to students that Balfour highlights arise from the fact that students have the option to access captured materials at a time, place, pace and volume that suits them. Specific benefits for students highlighted by Balfour include:

  • the ability to catch up on missed materials through non-attendance

  • increased accessibility for hearing impaired and non-native speaking students

  • the facility to access lectures as often as is required in their own time in order to maximise clarity and understanding

  • the opportunity to revisit material, the importance of which becomes apparent when doing revision or coursework.

CitationAsensio et al. (2004) found that the ‘Three I’s framework (image, interactivity and integration) provides a ‘useful framework to interpret the ‘added value’ of the media in an educational context.’ Asensio et al. state that ‘interactivity’ in this context originally included access (availability of material asynchronously and independent of location), choice (a library of materials to view on demand) and control (ability to start, stop and review material). On ‘integration’ (with, for example, slides, supporting texts, discussion boards, resource links, self assessment quizzes) they say that the assumption is that ‘adding an additional channel of communication to transmit a message will increase the quality of the communication itself.’ On ‘image’ they comment that the image adds ‘visual richness’ to learning resources.

The value of image to the production of lecture capture materials in the project at the University of Leeds was recognised early on in our discussions about what should be made available to students. As much of the delivery in the lectures revolved around the lecturer writing equations or referring to visual aids on slides, it was decided that reproducing the on-screen image for students would be vital to producing authentic captures of the face-to-face delivery. Whilst other approaches have made pre-prepared slides available to accompany audio captures, only real-time animated capture of projected content would allow students to re-live the experience of the construction of equations that feature strongly in the lectures. As explained by CitationThornhill et al. (2002), ‘a moving image can help the student to visualise a process or see how something works, moves or performs.’ They also state that even low quality video of a presenter accompanying a series of slides, talking with ‘expertise and enthusiasm’ can support learning. As the lecturer in the project at the University of Leeds makes extensive use of body language and gestures to illustrate and make points during lectures, it was decided that video of him should be captured along with on-screen content.

Arguments advising cautionon lecture capture

Whilst many are excited by the potential benefits of lecture capture, it is important to recognise that not everybody is a supporter of this approach. One of the most common concerns raised by academic staff is the potentially adverse impact that the production of the resources might have on lecture attendance. The argument that if students can access lectures online they will not bother turning up for the live event has been brought into question by a number of authors, including CitationRussell and Mattick (2005) and CitationWilliams and Fardon (2005). CitationDeal (2007) examined a number of studies on lecture capture and lecture webcasts, and found that ‘overall, these studies indicate that the availability of lecture webcasts has only a slight impact, if any, on class attendance rates.’ The experience of the project at the University of Leeds seems to support these studies, as attendance rates were similar to previous years and did not drop off throughout the semester as students became aware of the availability of the online lectures. Additional factors that may have countered non-attendance in this project were the repeated warnings to students that resources were not designed to replace attendance in person and that all attendance was being recorded on signed registers. Of more significance was the type of experience and interactions that students got from attending the face-to-face session that were not replicated with the online captures. Students in a focus group reported that they regarded the face-to-face sessions as being more valuable than the captures, saying that they were ‘not equal to lectures’; ‘I would not consider them to be a substitute for the live event. Because you can’t ask questions; there is no actual interaction’; that ‘you couldn’t teach yourself from the recordings’ and that ‘if you attended all the lectures and didn’t look at any of the recordings you would get a better grade than if you looked at all the recordings and didn’t go to any of the lectures.’

The lecturer in this project has reinforced the argument for the value of the live event, saying that ‘one can also do far more interactive work, since if the students don’t keep up fully at the time (or don’t write down full notes), then they will be able to complete their notes later.’ The fact that the lecturer involved utilises his lecture time in both an active and interactive manner has been crucial to this project and matches the University of Leeds’ five year vision for the VLE which calls for better use of face-to-face time.

CitationBennet and Maniar (2007) have expressed their opposition to lecture capture by arguing that videoed lectures ‘make learning uninteresting’ by failing to effectively convey enthusiasm for a subject and by making it repetitive, as students are essentially accessing the same content twice or more. This argument is not borne out by the way that students reported accessing materials in this project. From the outset of the project it was crucial that students should easily be able to navigate to sections of the online lectures that they felt were of most relevance to them. Indeed, in our student evaluations (method discussed below), we found that students were actively choosing specific sections of content to review rather than passively revisiting entire lectures. They did see value, however, in being able to access the captured lecture in its entirety because, as pointed out by one student, ‘every bit is going to be important to a different person […] I like having the whole lecture and then if you want to you can search through.’ It was interesting to find, moreover, students in a focus group concurring that it is the ‘little extra bits [i.e. things which are not essential knowledge, which wouldn’t normally be taken down in notes, but provide background information] which are really helpful and which help your understanding.’

Students also reported using the content for active learning in other ways, particularly to help with practical written example tasks: ‘you can pause it [video of example equations], do those calculations and then see if you’re right, and because it’s a full answer and you can see the working out as well rather than just a numerical final answer it’s a lot more helpful than just doing a past paper with a marking scheme.’ Examples of independent active learning like this can be used to counter the contention by CitationBennet and Maniar (2007) that reliance on repeating lectures ‘may hinder the development of students as independent learners’ and that students should not be encouraged to see ‘a lecture, or indeed the lecturer, as the only source of knowledge about the subject area.’ We agree with this last statement but consider that a pervasive research-led learning and teaching ethos, such as the one at the University of Leeds, encourages students across all subject areas to carry out their own independent thinking and research, and that the environment discourages students from viewing the lecturer as the only source of knowledge in a subject area.

Equipment and training

In order to get up and running quickly and minimise support requirements the project used readily available hardware and software that would be as easy as possible to set up and use. Ease of use was particularly important for the lecture capture solution as it would have to be set up and made ready to use by the lecturer (without technical support) in the short and hectic period between classes in a busy multi-use lecture room. It would also need to be dismantled and put away in the equally short handover period at the end of a lecture. It was felt that the hardware selected needed to be good enough for the task, but not over-specified . The project followed the advice of CitationThornhill et al. (2002) on this point, considering ‘the appropriateness of the image for the educational message it is carrying […] a talking head supporting a slide presentation […] where the message is expertise and enthusiasm may not require the same level of quality [as other forms of video]’, therefore the project decided that a webcam of reasonable quality would suffice in this instance.

The lecture capture and postproduction was carried out using screen capture software, Camtasia Studio 5, and hardware which met the needs of the project and captured the required inputs (audio, video and mouse movements). All of the peripheral hardware (webcam, wireless USB microphone and AirMouse to take the role of a laser pointer) was ‘plug and play’, supported by troubleshooting guides to help with set up. Once the equipment was set up at the start of the lecture, Camtasia’s integration with PowerPoint allowed captures to be started from within the familiar PowerPoint interface and automatically stopped at the end of the lecture. All hardware and software ran on a 2.4Ghz dual core Toshiba Portégé M70 tablet PC with 4GB of RAM.

Once a lecture had been captured, a copyright statement was appended to the raw capture files and some basic audio enhancement was applied in Camtasia before being produced in the four different formats described earlier. The quality and other media settings were saved into predefined production settings within Camtasia, ensuring consistency and removing some of the technical barriers to production that may have arisen for the lecturer involved. Given that the lecturer was a novice in this area, he was also provided with a number of simple step-by-step guides.

Problems/drawbackswith the approach taken

While the process of lecture capture and postproduction were distilled into a step-by-step approach, there nevertheless remained potential setbacks at nearly every stage of the process. At-desk training, bespoke printed guides and support in the room were all used to help the lecturer involved to overcome the obstacles listed below:

  • preparation of slide content - PowerPoint slides needed to be formatted correctly to automatically create a table of contents

  • set up of equipment - it was necessary to ensure that all hardware had been turned on and detected by the tablet PC

  • delivery of lecture - failure to set up correctly resulted in screen orientation inverting when switching between using the mouse to move between slides and the tablet PC stylus to annotate them

  • end of lecture delivery - raw capture files needed to be saved (on at least two occasions the computer crashed before the captured data could be saved to disc, meaning that students had to rely on a backup audio version that had been recorded on a standalone digital recorder in case of failure. The issue was resolved by turning off anti-virus software and updating all drivers.)

  • production in multiple formats and upload to the VLE - this took time to complete. The delay meant that the materials could not be used to support small group sessions following lectures later in the week

  • delivery - large video files were not recommended for storage and delivery from within the VLE. Although Blackboard’s Content Collection (the repository that accompanies the VLE) worked for the downloadable items (audio and video podcasts) it was not suitable for the delivery of the more popular flash video which was hosted on Faculty servers and linked into the VLE.

These problems mainly arose during the process of capturing live events and would not have been significantly reduced by capturing only the recognised “difficult concepts”. Indeed, this would place greater demands on staff time (for editing and post-production tasks) and would make it necessary to interrupt classroom delivery in order to stop and start capture when key concepts were being addressed. Although they did not necessarily use recordings in their entirety, evaluation shows that the students appreciated the availability of the whole lecture. The process of allowing the students to select the key concepts for review themselves does in itself constitute an active learning activity and provides them with additional control and interaction with the material.

Student evaluation

Students enrolled on the two level 1 modules (Electronic Materials and Electronic Materials and Devices) were surveyed one month into the start of term, mid-way through term and in the last lecture of term, and students enrolled on Electronic Materials and Devices were surveyed for the final time after the January exams (in February). Students taking the level 2 module were surveyed in the second half of the first term (in November) and after the January exams (in February). The surveys were anonymous and took place either during lecture time or online. In addition, five level 1 students attended a student focus group (with the aim of providing detailed qualitative data) in May 2009.

Findings from the initial survey of 47 level 1 students (64% of a total cohort of 74), prior to the delivery of captured content, are summarised in below:

Table 2 Summarised responses to initial survey of level 1 students

Responses to the same set of questions received from 45 level 2 students (87% of a total cohort of 52) showed broadly the same set of results. For both level 1 and level 2 students it was observed that:

  • the majority of students had not accessed recorded lectures online before but said they were keen to do so

  • students saw revision and reinforcement of learning as key benefits of accessing captured materials

  • a minority indicated that they thought the availability of lecture recordings would affect their attendance at lectures. This perception was slightly higher amongst level 2 students (22% of level 2 students against 13% of level 1 students).

The second evaluation of level 1 students showed emerging trends of use and attitudes to the materials. Findings are summarised in . Responses were collected from 49 students (66% of a total cohort of 74).

It was clear from the surveys up to this point that the majority of students had accessed the captured lectures online and had found them useful. It is interesting to note that, due to the fact that the VLE was the only means of accessing the lecture capture material, more students used the VLE for this module than for others on which they were studying. Lecture captures are therefore an effective way of increasing student traffic through the VLE.

A third survey of level 1 students, conducted at the end of term, shows that the usage of lecture capture materials had continued grow and provides an insight into the students’ motivation for usage. Findings are summarised in . Responses were collected from 28 students (38% of a total cohort of 74). It is proposed that the lower response rate is due to a change in the way in which the survey was conducted.

Table 3 Summarised responses to midpoint survey of level 1 students

The results of this survey are supported by the final surveys of level 1 and level 2 students carried out after the January exams. 50% of the level 1 cohort and 62% of the level 2 cohort responded to the survey. These surveys show that:

  • the majority of students had accessed lecture capture material online

  • almost all of those who had accessed the materials found them useful

  • the most popular uses of the materials were for revision or to recap on difficult concepts

  • the availability of lecture captured material did not cause a significant change in lecture attendance

  • the resources were popular with a majority of students, with many saying that they would like similar resources for other courses.

The student focus group supported these conclusions:

  • the materials had been useful and popular, especially for revision. One student said they had been ‘a massive help […] when it comes up to exams and you start to stress it’s definitely a lot more useful to have that and be able to refer to it, rather than just trying to recall it from memory. Even from your notes, there’s some things you’re going to miss’

  • students understood how to use the materials and adapted them for independent active learning. One student commented that ‘it lets you be more independent. You don’t have to come and ask questions all the time’

  • the materials reinforced rather than replaced the face-to-face event. A student remarked that he asked a question during the lecture and then listened again to the lecturer’s response to remind himself of exactly what had been said: ‘a lot of your actual use of them is to sit and think “Right I can’t remember this bit", it’s not the sort of thing where you think “Right I’ve got to sit here for an hour and learn this” — I don’t think you could teach yourself from it.’

Table 4 Summarised responses to end of term survey of level 1 students

Impact of lecture capture

Lecture capture has the potential to alter the way in which face-to-face teaching is delivered and received. It can free-up time in teaching sessions, enabling a move from didactic delivery to discussion of material. Released from note taking, students have greater opportunities to interact with lecturers and materials and can recap information or augment their notes at a later date. In this study we have also observed that captured lectures were used by students for active learning activities, such as completing problems (or inventing new problems), whilst using the captures for guidance.

Despite reported concerns from some sections of the academic community, this project indicated no impact of the availability of captured content on attendance at face-to-face sessions, in particular this may be because the inclusion of meaningful interactions and the opportunity for questions and answers in face-to-face sessions could not be reproduced only by accessing captured materials.

Future of the projectand conclusions

Following the end of the trial there has been sufficient enthusiasm amongst teaching staff in the School to investigate more sustainable and scalable approaches to producing lecture captures. The Faculty of Engineering is piloting the use of a commercial system (CitationEcho360) that will automate much of the process, removing many of the barriers to adoption for participating staff. To support more widespread adoption of this technology and meet the student demand that is evidenced in the surveys, the solution will:

  • install necessary equipment in well-used lecture rooms

  • automatically capture prescheduled lectures (via video and audio)

  • automatically produce lecture captures to a number of pre-determined formats that have proved popular in this trial (including embedded flash video with a table of contents and mv4 video for viewing on portable video players)

  • automatically make content available to students through the VLE.

This (so far) small-scale project within the School of Electronic and Electrical Engineering has required considerable financial and technical support and has drawn on the time of all involved, particularly the lecturer and a member of the University’s Staff and Departmental Development Unit.

Whilst the project acknowledges concerns about the effects of lecture capture upon student learning, we think that student feedback (which has highlighted how students have used the captures to enhance the effectiveness of lectures and the independence of their learning) shows this particular project in a positive light. In addition to the popularity of the resources, students have been shown to benefit directly from their availability, revisiting difficult concepts to aid comprehension and to support supplementary activities such as practice papers. We are therefore looking forward to using the captures in ways that support and develop new ways of active learning (which thereby enhance face-to-face delivery) and to exploring the surrounding pedagogies in order to exploit the full potential of the materials.

References

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.