Ready player one: using Vevox to elicit student participation in lectures
Keywords: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.
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. https://doi.org/10.5324/njsteme.v1i1.2325.
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. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-10-0204.
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. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1286.
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. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi20.575.
Gilmour, A. (2021) ‘Adopting a pedagogy of kindness’, Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, Issue 22, October, pp.1-6. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi22.798.
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. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi25.991.
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. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074004443.
King, A. (1993) ‘From sage on the stage to guide on the side’, College Teaching, 41(1), pp.30-35. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27558571?origin=JSTOR-pdf (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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-004-1600-y.
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.956697.
Macfarlane, B. (2022) ‘Methodology, fake learning, and emotional performativity’, ECNU Review of Education, 5(1), pp.140-155. https://doi.org/10.1177/2096531120984786.
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.04.002.
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. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.v0i13.443.
Newswander, L. K. and Borrego, M. (2009) ‘Engagement in two interdisciplinary graduate programs’, Higher Education, 58(4), pp.551-562. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9215-z.
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. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi24.871.
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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00651-y.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2023 Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).