Ready player one: using Vevox to elicit student participation in lectures


  • Joe Greenwood Manchester Metropolitan University



educational technology, lecturing, student participation, inclusive practice


With the pivot back to on-campus teaching, many students find themselves in an unfamiliar learning environment: the lecture theatre. This can result in low rates of participation in lectures, especially with a diverse student demographic, including English as an Additional Language students. This can result in exclusion from learning for these students, as well as many students feeling nervous about participating in a lecture format. This case study looked at using the education technology Vevox to elicit student participation in a lecture format. Vevox was used to embed multiple tasks into a series of lectures with a cohort of third-year Engineering students. Vevox was found to be effective at eliciting high levels of participation, although some tasks had higher participation rates than others. An evaluation survey was also conducted with students where they responded positively to the implementation of Vevox in the lectures. Finally, the case study discusses potential applications and limitations of Vevox, with a recommendation that similar research could be carried out across multiple courses and cohorts to improve efficacy.

Author Biography

Joe Greenwood, Manchester Metropolitan University

Joe Greenwood currently works as Assistant Professor of English at Yeonsung University in South Korea, where his main responsibilities are teaching practical English courses and ESP and content-based courses to students across the university. Joe has been teaching English for ten years, as well as working in the HE sectors in both the UK and South Korea. Holder of an MA TESOL and Applied Linguistics and a PG Dip TESOL, Joe is currently working towards his PhD by published works. His research centres around needs analyses and their creation and application in HE.


Ballen, C. J., Danielsen, M., Jørgensen, C., Grytnes, J.-A. and Cotner, S. (2017) ‘Norway’s gender gap: classroom participation in undergraduate introductory science’, Nordic Journal of STEM Education, 1(1), pp.262-270.

Bligh, D. (1972) What’s the use of lectures? London: Penguin.

Bloom, B. (1953) ‘Thought processes in lectures and discussions’, Journal of General Education, (7) pp.160-169.

Denial, C. (2020) ‘A pedagogy of kindness’, in Stommel, J., Friend, C. and Morris, S. M. (eds.) Critical digital pedagogy: a collection. Washington. D.C.: Hybrid Pedagogy Inc, pp.212-218.

Doyon, P. (2000) ‘Shyness in the Japanese EFL class: why it is a problem, what it is, what causes it, and what to do about it’, Lang Teach, 24(1), pp.11-16.

Eddy, S. L., Brownell, S. E. and Wenderoth, M. P. (2014) ‘Gender gaps in achievement and participation in multiple introductory biology classrooms’, CBE—Life Sciences Education, 13(3), pp.478-492.

Freeman, M., Blayney, P. and Ginns, P. (2006) ‘Anonymity and in class learning: the case for electronic response systems’, Educ Technol, 22(4), pp.568-580.

Gill-Simmen, L. (2021) ‘Using Padlet in instructional design to promote cognitive engagement: a case study of undergraduate marketing students’, Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, Issue 20, March, pp.1-14.

Gilmour, A. (2021) ‘Adopting a pedagogy of kindness’, Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, Issue 22, October, pp.1-6.

Hood, S. and Powell, E. (2022) ‘Supporting students with the transition to university in a Covid-19 world: expectations and reality’, Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, Issue 25, October, pp.1-6.

Jones, S. M. and Dindia, K. (2004) ‘A meta-analytic perspective on sex equity in the classroom’, Review of Educational Research, 74(4), pp.443-471.

King, A. (1993) ‘From sage on the stage to guide on the side’, College Teaching, 41(1), pp.30-35. Available at: (Accessed: 11 August 2022).

Kuh, G. D. and Hu, S. (2001) ‘The relationships between computer and information technology use, selected learning and personal development outcomes, and other college experiences’, Journal of College Student Development, 42(3), pp.217-232.

Laird, T. F. N. and Kuh, G. D. (2005) ‘Student experiences with information technology and their relationship to other aspects of student engagement’, Research in Higher Education, 46(2), pp.211-233.

Liu, N.-F. and Littlewood, W. (1997) ‘Why do many students appear reluctant to participate in classroom learning discourse?’, System, 25(3), pp.371-384.

Macfarlane, B. (2015) ‘Student performativity in higher education: converting learning as a private space into a public performance’, Higher Education Research & Development, 34(2), pp.338-350.

Macfarlane, B. (2022) ‘Methodology, fake learning, and emotional performativity’, ECNU Review of Education, 5(1), pp.140-155.

Mayer, R. E. et al. (2009) ‘Clickers in college classrooms: fostering learning with questioning methods in large lecture classes’, Contemp Educ Psychol, 34(1), pp.51-57.

Minogue, L., Murphy, C. and Salmons, K. (2018) ‘Embedding learning development; a model for collaborative practice’, Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, Issue 13, April, pp.1-11.

Newswander, L. K. and Borrego, M. (2009) ‘Engagement in two interdisciplinary graduate programs’, Higher Education, 58(4), pp.551-562.

Parsons, B. and Johnston, H. (2022) ‘Understanding student preferences for one-to-one writing appointments post-pandemic’, Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, Issue 24, September, pp.1-22.

Penson, P. E. (2012) ‘Lecturing: a lost art’, Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 4(1), pp.72-76.

Shimaya, J. et al. (2020) ‘Active participation in lectures via a collaboratively controlled robot,’ International Journal of Social Robotics, 13(4), pp.587-598.




How to Cite

Greenwood, J. (2023) “Ready player one: using Vevox to elicit student participation in lectures”, Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, (27). doi: 10.47408/jldhe.vi27.935.



Case Studies