We have found some journal articles and other publications around lecture capture which we have found useful and informative. When possible, we have linked to a fulltext version on the web or through the eLibrary (protected by Coventry University login). Each entry is accompanied with its abstract.
There is also a very extensive list of resources on LectureCapture.com’s forums involving lecture capture, podcasts, and related subjects.
Tutor Perceptions and Staff Development
| Buxton, K., Jackson, K., deZwart, M., Webster, L., and Lindsay, D. (2006) ‘Recorded Lectures: Looking to the Future.’ In Markauskaite, L., Goodyear, P. and Reimann. P. (eds.) Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education , ‘Who’s Learning? Whose Technology?’ Held December 3-6 2006 at the University of Sydney. Sydney: Sydney University Press: 101-104 | |
| This paper looks at the development of recorded lectures at Monash University, with a particular emphasis on the experience of the Faculty of Law. Teacher concerns regarding the provision of recorded lectures and the potential implications for other teachers and units in the faculty of a Semester 2 trial of podcast lectures is discussed. | |
| Chang, S. (2007) ‘Academic Perceptions of the Use of Lectopia: A University of Melbourne Example.’ In Atkinson, R.J., McBeath, C., Soong, S. K. A. and Cheers, C. (eds.) Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007, ‘ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning.’ Held December 2-5 2007 at Nanyang Technological University. 135-144 | |
| Since the introduction of the Lectopia (iLecture) technology to higher education, there has been debate about its relevance and effectiveness as a teaching and learning tool (Fardon, 2003). Anecdotally, students expect to access Lectopia recordings for their revision and for going through points that were made which they missed in lectures. From the academics’ point of view, resistance has resulted from the perception that the Lectopia option will reduce attendance in lectures and also the notion that not all lecturing styles can be suitably recorded by an admittedly limited technology. Fardon (2003) also argues cogently that Lectopia is not necessarily conducive to some styles of lecturing. The classifications of different lecturing styles (Brown and Bakhtar, 1988; Behr, 1988; Saroyan and Snell, 1997) as highlighted by Fardon (2003) present a useful tool in determining if particular styles of lecture may be more or less conducive to Lectopia. However, lecturing styles alone do not determine a willingness or resistance to adoption of the technology. Some other reasons may include perceptions of the reliability of the technology, the technology as a pedagogical tool, the engagement levels with students and suitability for the curriculum. This qualitative project examined 11 Academics’ perception of Lectopia at The University of Melbourne. The results affirmed some of the benefits and concerns around the use of Lectopia, and highlighted some academic practices in using the technology. Initial results point to some recommendations on incorporating Lectopia technology into the teaching toolkit as well as indicate some future areas of research. | |
