campusreview.com.au
policy & reform
Online learning on the line
New study pokes holes in the value of
pre-recorded lectures delivered digitally.
By Loren Smith
F
or an unflattering portrayal of online learning, read A Study
Exploring the Impact of Lecture Capture Availability and Lecture
Capture Usage on Student Attendance and Attainment .
It shows that both of these measures drop in this context,
and attendance by double.
The researchers, from King’s Business School at King’s College
London, examined two undergraduate science degree cohorts,
year on year, before and after the introduction of pre-recorded
online lectures in a compulsory, second-year research methods
subject. They found attendance in three matched lectures
“substantially dropped” after online lectures were introduced.
Because attendance predicts attainment, they deduced – and
proved – that this consequently suffered.
“Students who are generally higher achievers who attend lectures
are likely to get better grades regardless of their lecture capture
usage; in contrast, students who do not attend are likely to get
lower grades regardless of their lecture capture usage,” they wrote.
Academic ability was controlled for.
Aside from decreases in attendance and attainment, they found
that even the students who watched the lectures online performed
worse than those who attended lectures in person.
Though cohort differences were not accounted for, the
researchers concluded that “the study serves as a useful example
(that can be communicated to students) of the pitfalls of an over-
reliance on lecture capture as a replacement for lecture attendance”.
After being shared on Twitter by Wharton professor
Ethan Mollick, the study garnered much discussion and debate.
A professor of haematology from University College London
provided a possible explanation for the study’s results.
“Perhaps being recorded tends to limit what you are willing to
share. Enlivening anecdotes which stimulate recall or provocative
personal opinion which stimulate debate are entirely absent from my
presentations to students if I’m being recorded,” Adele Fielding wrote.
Other researchers found flaws in the study. For one, sample
sizes (of 160 and 161) were small. Second, even if they were
larger, discrepancies in cohort constitutions can substantially
influence results. Only by comparing the same lectures, with and
without online versions, can a true comparison be made, one
scholar argued.
One Twitter user critiqued the assumption that physical lectures
are more engaging. “Sure, because no one goes into your lecture
hall, sits in the back, and doodles on their paper or plays Angry Birds
on their phone. Being there, playing into the professor’s fantasy of
importance, doesn’t mean people engage either,” they wrote.
Another explained the study’s results within their broader
context: other studies have found online lecturers to have either
a neutral or positive impact on attendance and outcomes.
Mollick himself admitted the study was compromised. “There are
interesting hints here, but not enough for policy,” he tweeted.
Instead of ending on a futile note, however, he offered lecturers
practical advice for encouraging students to show up.
“I now tell students before class about the latest evidence as
to why I hold classes in a particular way (no laptops, no general
recordings, assignments based around reflection, etc) but also
tell them about the strength of the evidence too. Makes for a good
way to get buy-in.” ■
11