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

Paul Joseph-Richard, Tansy Jessop, Godwin Okafor, Timos Almpanis, Daran Price

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.
LanguageEnglish
Article number44 (3)
Pages377-392
Number of pages15
JournalBritish Educational Research Journal
Volume44
Issue number3
Early online date17 Apr 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2018

Fingerprint

best practice
university teacher
Teaching
spontaneity
student
self awareness
reward
recording
surveillance
acceptance
classroom
planning
interaction
learning
performance
evidence
education

Keywords

  • learning technology
  • lecture capture systems
  • academic practice
  • UKPSF

Cite this

Joseph-Richard, Paul ; Jessop, Tansy ; Okafor, Godwin ; Almpanis, Timos ; Price, Daran. / Big brother or harbinger of best practice: can lecture capture actually improve teaching?. In: British Educational Research Journal. 2018 ; Vol. 44, No. 3. pp. 377-392.
@article{715c7b973d464108be51b6715d5ee31c,
title = "Big brother or harbinger of best practice: can lecture capture actually improve teaching?",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "learning technology, lecture capture systems, academic practice, UKPSF",
author = "Paul Joseph-Richard and Tansy Jessop and Godwin Okafor and Timos Almpanis and Daran Price",
note = "(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)",
year = "2018",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1002/berj.3336",
language = "English",
volume = "44",
pages = "377--392",
journal = "British Educational Research Journal",
issn = "0141-1926",
number = "3",

}

Big brother or harbinger of best practice: can lecture capture actually improve teaching? / Joseph-Richard, Paul; Jessop, Tansy; Okafor, Godwin; Almpanis, Timos; Price, Daran.

In: British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 44, No. 3, 44 (3), 06.2018, p. 377-392.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

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)

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 -