Big brother or harbinger of best practice: can lecture capture actually improve teaching?

TY - JOUR

T1 - Big brother or harbinger of best practice: can lecture capture actually improve teaching?

AU - Joseph-Richard, Paul

AU - Jessop, Tansy

AU - Okafor, Godwin

AU - Almpanis, Timos

AU - Price, Daran

N1 - (Imported after academic started at Ulster. Appears on Solent Univ repository; email sent to them to check if compliant and what date of acceptance is) Response received 18/11/19; acceptance date was 15-Mar-18 but was not deposited until 10-Sep-18 (uploaded to 'Other files').

PY - 2018/6

Y1 - 2018/6

N2 - Lecture capture is used increasingly in the UK, and has become a normal feature of higher education. Most studies on the impact of lecture capture have focused on benefits to student learning, the flipped classroom or student non-attendance at lectures following its introduction. It is less clear how the use of lecture capture has impacted on lecturers’ own academic practice. In this study, we use a mixed-methods approach to explore the impact of this intrusive yet invisible technology on the quality of teaching. We have mapped our findings to the UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF). In doing so, our data paints a mixed picture of lecture capture’s Janus-faced reality. On the one hand, it enhances lecturer self-awareness, planning and conscious ‘performance’; on theother hand, it crushes spontaneity, impairs interaction and breeds wariness through constant surveillance. While the Teaching Excellence Framework rewards institutions for providing state-of the-art technology and lecture recording systems, our findings pose awkward questions as to whether lecture capture is making teaching more bland and instrumental, albeit neatly aligned todimensions of the UKPSF. We provide contradictory evidence about lecture capture technology, embraced by students, yet tentatively adopted by most academics. The implications of our study are not straightforward, except to proceed with caution, valuing the benefits but ensuring that learningis not dehumanised through blind acceptance at the moment we press the record button.

AB - Lecture capture is used increasingly in the UK, and has become a normal feature of higher education. Most studies on the impact of lecture capture have focused on benefits to student learning, the flipped classroom or student non-attendance at lectures following its introduction. It is less clear how the use of lecture capture has impacted on lecturers’ own academic practice. In this study, we use a mixed-methods approach to explore the impact of this intrusive yet invisible technology on the quality of teaching. We have mapped our findings to the UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF). In doing so, our data paints a mixed picture of lecture capture’s Janus-faced reality. On the one hand, it enhances lecturer self-awareness, planning and conscious ‘performance’; on theother hand, it crushes spontaneity, impairs interaction and breeds wariness through constant surveillance. While the Teaching Excellence Framework rewards institutions for providing state-of the-art technology and lecture recording systems, our findings pose awkward questions as to whether lecture capture is making teaching more bland and instrumental, albeit neatly aligned todimensions of the UKPSF. We provide contradictory evidence about lecture capture technology, embraced by students, yet tentatively adopted by most academics. The implications of our study are not straightforward, except to proceed with caution, valuing the benefits but ensuring that learningis not dehumanised through blind acceptance at the moment we press the record button.

KW - learning technology

KW - lecture capture systems

KW - academic practice

KW - UKPSF

U2 - 10.1002/berj.3336

DO - 10.1002/berj.3336

M3 - Article

VL - 44

SP - 377

EP - 392

JO - British Educational Research Journal

T2 - British Educational Research Journal

JF - British Educational Research Journal

SN - 0141-1926

IS - 3

M1 - 44 (3)

ER -