Advertisement

Higher Education

, Volume 69, Issue 3, pp 471–493 | Cite as

Undergraduate students’ experiences with recorded lectures: towards a theory of acculturation

  • Sebnem CilesizEmail author
Article

Abstract

The use of recorded lectures—an instructional format that involves recording live lectures and disseminating these recordings to students by means of various technologies—as substitutes for classroom instruction is a growing phenomenon in higher education. Sustained use of recorded lectures has the potential to significantly alter students’ college experience, however research on students’ experiences with recorded lectures is scarce. This article reports a qualitative study of undergraduate students’ experiences with sustained participation in recorded lectures as a required part of their curriculum, thereby addressing calls for research on the impact of technology on students’ college experience. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 14 students enrolled in a campus-based undergraduate degree program in business at a flagship public university in the US, and were consequently analyzed using grounded theory. The findings suggest that students’ experiences constitute a process of acculturation into the institutional context of recorded lecture courses through four stages, which are respectively labeled ignorance, disillusionment, crisis, and coping. The study’s findings have implications for future research and practice in student development and instructional technology.

Keywords

Video lectures Undergraduate College experience Grounded theory Acculturation Socialization 

References

  1. Alavi, M., & Gallupe, R. B. (2003). Using information technology in learning: Case studies in business and management education programs. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2(2), 139–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2001). Making their own way: Narratives for transforming higher education to promote self-development. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.Google Scholar
  3. Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2008). The evolution of self-authorship. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs: Epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp. 45–64). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berge, Z. L., & Mrozowski, S. (2001). Review of research in distance education, 1990 to 1999. The American Journal of Distance Education, 15(3), 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bligh, D. A. (2000). What’s the use of lectures? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  6. Bok, D. (2013). Higher education in America. Oxfordshire: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bowen, G. A. (2008). Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: a research note. Qualitative Research, 8(1), 137–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bray, N., Harris, M., & Major, C. (2007). New verse or the same old chorus? Looking holistically at distance education research. Research in Higher Education, 48(7), 889–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Breen, R., Lindsay, R., Jenkins, A., & Smith, P. (2001). The role of information and communication technologies in a university learning environment. Studies in Higher Education, 26(1), 95–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  11. Crawford, R. P. (1965). Report on ETV in Great Britain. Educational Technology Research and Development (formerly, AV Communication Review), 13(4), 423–428.Google Scholar
  12. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  13. Dey, E. L., Burn, H. E., & Gerdes, D. (2009). Bringing the classroom to the web: Effects of using new technologies to capture and deliver lectures. Research in Higher Education, 50, 377–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Echo360. (2012). Customers of Echo360—Transformed online learning—schools using lecture capture. Retrieved March 12, 2012, from http://echo360.com/customers/.
  15. Eurich, A. C. (1958). A foundation looks at college teaching by television. Journal of Educational Sociology, 31(9), 329–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Frantz, J. B. (1965). The educational advantages of instructional television as compared with conventional teaching methods. The Journal of Higher Education, 36(4), 209–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frenkel, K. A. (2012). Echo360 pushes ‘Lecture Capture’ tech into classrooms from Qatar to the U.S. Retrieved March 17, 2012, from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-05/echo360-pushes-lecture-capture-tech-into-classrooms-from-qatar-to-the-u-s-.html.
  19. Gardner, S. K. (2008). Fitting the mold of graduate school: A qualitative study of socialization in doctoral education. Innovative Higher Education, 33, 125–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  21. Green, K. C. (2011). The campus computing project: The 2011 National Survey of Information Technology in U.S. Higher Education. Retrieved March 12, 2012, from http://www.campuscomputing.net/item/campus-computing-2011-big-gains-going-mobile.
  22. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Harley, D., Henke, J., Lawrence, S., McMartin, F., Maher, M., Gawlik, M., & Muller, P. (2003). Costs, culture, and complexity: An analysis of technology enhancements in a large lecture course at UC Berkeley CSHE: Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California. Berkeley, CA: CSHE: Center for Studies in Higher Education.Google Scholar
  24. Holley, K. A., & Taylor, B. J. (2009). Undergraduate student socialization and learning in an online professional curriculum. Innovative Higher Education, 33, 257–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jensen, S. A. (2011). In-class versus online video lectures: Similar learning outcomes, but a preference for in-class. Teaching of Psychology, 38(4), 298–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Klapper, H. L. (1958). Does lack of contact with the lecturer handicap televised instruction? Journal of Educational Sociology, 31(9), 353–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Korn, M., & Levitz, J. (2013). Online courses look for a business model. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved February 4, 2013 from http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324339204578173421673664106.
  28. Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  29. Löfström, E., & Nevgi, A. (2007). From strategic planning to meaningful learning: Diverse perspectives on the development of web-based teaching and learning in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 312–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lou, Y., Bernard, R. M., & Abrami, P. C. (2006). Media and pedagogy in undergraduate distance education: A theory-based meta-analysis of empirical literature. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(2), 141–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Merriam-Webster’s. (2003). Merriam-Webster’s 11th Collegiate Dictionary, Electronic ver. 3.0.Google Scholar
  32. Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Oliphant, R. (1964). Instructional television and programmed learning. Journal of Higher Education, 35(9), 488–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Owen, P. S., & Demb, A. (2004). Change dynamics and leadership in technology implementation. The Journal of Higher Education, 75(6), 636–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Owston, R., Lupshenyuk, D., & Wideman, H. (2011). Lecture capture in large undergraduate classes: Student perceptions and academic performance. Internet and Higher Education, 14, 262–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Panopto. (2011). Panopto reaches 400 adoptions and 2.7 million students, taking pole position among lecture capture vendors. Retrieved March 17, 2012, from http://www.panopto.com/news/in-the-news/panopto-reaches-400-adoptions-and-27-million-students-taking-pole-position-among.
  37. Pascarella, E. T. (1980). Student-faculty informal contact and college outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 50(4), 545–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pascarella, E. T. (2006). How college affects students: Ten directions for future research. Journal of College Student Development, 47(5), 508–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  40. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  41. Phipps, R., & Merisotis, J. (1999). What’s the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education (pp. 42). Washington, DC: The Institute for Higher Education Policy.Google Scholar
  42. Pierce, M. S. (1960). Closed-circuit television as a teaching aid. Journal of Higher Education, 31(8), 451–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pillay, H., Irving, K., & Tones, M. (2007). Validation of the diagnostic tool for assessing tertiary students’ readiness for online learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 26(2), 217–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Premack, S. L., & Wanous, J. P. (1985). A meta-analysis of realistic job preview experiments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(4), 706–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Privateer, P. M. (1999). Academic technology and the future of higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 70(1), 60–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Reporter, (1955). The Reporter. The Journal of Higher Education, 26(9), 493–505.Google Scholar
  47. Reynolds, A. (1992). Charting the changes in junior faculty: Relationships among socialization, acculturation, and gender. The Journal of Higher Education, 63(6), 637–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schramm, W. (1962). Learning from instructional television. Review of Educational Research, 32(2), 156–167.Google Scholar
  49. SonicFoundry (2012). Lecture capture and academic webcasting. Retrieved March 17, 2012, from http://www.sonicfoundry.com/webcasting-solutions/lecture-capture/.
  50. Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., & Karseth, B. (2007). Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy. Higher Education, 54(3), 417–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Taplin, R. H., Kerr, R., & Brown, A. M. (2013). Opportunity costs associated with the provision of student services: A case study of web-based lecture technology. Higher Education. doi: 10.1007/s10734-013-9677-x.
  52. Tegrity (2012). Some of our customers. Retrieved March 17, 2012, from http://www.tegrity.com/customers/.
  53. Tierney, W. G. (1997). Organizational socialization in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 68(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Traphagan, T., Kucsera, J. V., & Kishi, K. (2010). Impact of class lecture webcasting on attendance and learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58, 19–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tschofen, C., & Mackness, J. (2012). Connectivism and dimensions of individual experience. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(1), 124–143.Google Scholar
  56. van Maanen, J., & Schein, E. H. (1979). Toward a theory of organizational socialization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 1, 209–264.Google Scholar
  57. Wanous, J. P. (1973). Effects of a realistic job preview on job acceptance, job attitudes, and job survival. Journal of Applied Psychology, 58(3), 327–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Waters, J. K. (2011). Lecture capture: Lights! Camera! Action!. Retrieved March 17, 2012, from http://campustechnology.com/Articles/2011/06/01/Lecture-Capture-Lights-Camera-Action.aspx?Page=6.
  59. Weidman, J. C. (1979). Nonintellective undergraduate socialization in academic departments. The Journal of Higher Education, 50(1), 48–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Weidman, J. C. (1989). Undergraduate socialization: A conceptual approach. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, 5, 289–322.Google Scholar
  61. Weidman, J. C., & Stein, E. L. (2003). Socialization of doctoral students to academic norms. Research in Higher Education, 44(6), 641–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Weidman, J. C., Twale, D. J., & Stein, E. L. (2001). Socialization of graduate and professional students in higher education: A perilous passage? In A. J. Kezar (Ed.), ASHE-ERIC higher education report, Vol. 28, pp. 48–62. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  63. Westbrook, T. S. (1997). Changes in students’ attitudes toward graduate business instruction via interactive television. The American Journal of Distance Education, 11(1), 55–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Young, J. (2008). The lectures are recorded, so why go to class? Chronicle of Higher Education, 54, A1.Google Scholar
  65. Zhao, Y., Lei, J., Yan, B., Lai, C., & Tan, H. S. (2005). What makes the difference? A practical analysis of research on the effectiveness of distance education. Teachers College Record, 107(8), 1836–1884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Educational Foundations and LeadershipUniversity of Louisiana at LafayetteLafayetteUSA

Personalised recommendations