Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bringing the Classroom to the Web: Effects of Using New Technologies to Capture and Deliver Lectures

  • Published:
Research in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Technology expands instructional options for faculty, and this study examines the differential learning effects of offering a lecture on physics to students in a traditional classroom versus internet video formats. Based on an experiment conducted in a natural educational context, results indicate enhanced transfer of lecture information in the video formats relative to the live condition, with students also responding more positively to personalized video presentation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. These included gender, academic status (first year to fourth year), prior math, academic confidence, physics confidence, whether they had a computer at their residence, had taken a distance-learning course, could fix a computer freeze, and the extent to which they use e-mail, surf the internet, had ridden a roller coaster, enjoy their physics course, see the course as relevant to their future careers, feel connected to their peers, and like to figure things out for themselves.

References

  • An Online Experience. (1995). Change, 27(2), 28–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andre, E., Rist, T., & Muller, J. (1998). Integrating reactive and scripted behaviors in a life-like presentation agent. Proceedings of AGENTS’98, 1998 (pp. 261–268).

  • Baddeley, A. D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 225, 556–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, R. (1998). Technology’s impact on faculty life and work. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 76, 7–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bousdira, N., Goldfarb, S., Myers, E., Neal, H. A., Severance, C., Storr, K. M., & Vitaglione, G. (2001). WLAP the Web Lecture Archive Project: The development of a web-based archive of lectures, tutorials, meetings and events at CERN and at the University of Michigan (CERN-OPEN–2001-066). Geneva: CERN.

  • Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambliss, M. J., & Caffee, R. C. (1998). Textbooks for learning. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1992). The split attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 223–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, L. K., & Mayer, R. E. (1988). Teaching readers about the structure of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 448–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, G. (December, 1998). Research into cognitive load theory and instructional design at UNSW. Retrieved January 16, 2003, from http://www.arts.unsw.edu/au/education/CLT_NET_Aug_97.HTML.

  • Corwin, T., & Marcinkiewicz, H. (1998). Prediction of differences in computer use when universally available. Paper presented at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communication and Technology. St. Louis, MO. February, 1998.

  • Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. M. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia education environments: Effects of agent properties, picture features, and redundancy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 428–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crofts, S., Dilley, J., Fox, M., Retsema, A., & Williams, B. (2005). Podcasting: A new technology in search of viable business models. First Monday, 10(9).

  • Duderstadt, J. J. (2000). The future of the research university in the digital age. Paper presented at the University of Wisconsin, November, 2000.

  • Gibson, S., & Nocente, N. (1998). Addressing instructional technological needs in faculties of education. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 44(3), 320–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grunwald, H. E. (2004). Institutional contexts and faculty that predict use of the Web by college faculty teaching in traditional classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan.

  • Hidi, S., & Baird, W. (1988). Strategies for increasing text-based interest and students’ recall of expository texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 465–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, B., & Pintrich, P. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, M. T., & Hutchings, P. (2005). The advancement of learning: Building the teaching commons. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen, M. D. (1998). Adoption patterns of faculty who integrate computer technology for teaching and leaning in higher education. In Proceedings of ED-MEDIA/ED-TELCOM 98: World conference on educational multimedia and hypermedia & world conference on educational telecommunications. 10th, Freiburg, Germany, June 20th–25th, 1998.

  • Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. (1997). ‘Social’ human-computer interaction. In B. Friedman (Ed.), Human values and the design of computer technology (pp. 191–199). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knutel, P. G. (1998). Adoption of an innovation: the process through which faculty decide whether to use instructional technology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan.

  • Laurel, B. (1997). Interface agents: Metaphors with character. In J. M. Bradshaw (Ed.), Software agents (pp. 67–77). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lester, J. C., Converse, S. A., Kahler, S. E., Barlow, S. T., Stone, B. A., & Bhogal, R. S. (1997). The persona effect: Affective impact of animated pedagogical agents. In Proceedings of CHI ‘97 (pp. 359–366). ACM Press.

  • Massy, W. F., & Wilger, A. K. (1998). Technology’s contribution to higher education productivity. In J. Groccia & J. Miller (Eds.), Enhancing productivity: Administrative, instructional, and technological strategies (Vol. 103, pp. 49–69). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, K. M. (Ed.). (2002). Quality in distance education: Focus on on-line learning (Vol. 29). ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  • Mitra, A., Steffensmeier, T., Lensmeier, S., & Massoni, A. (1999). Changes in attitudes toward computers and use of computers by university faculty. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(1), 189–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, R. (2001). Software agents in multimedia: An experimental study of their contributions to students’ learning. Human-Computer Interaction Proceedings (pp. 275–277), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000a). Engaging students in active learning: The case for personalized multimedia messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 724–733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000b). A coherence effect in multimedia learning: The case for minimizing irrelevant sounds in the design of multimedia instructional messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 117–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2004). Personalized messages that promote science learning in virtual environments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 165–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2001). Lessons from the cyberspace classroom: The realities of online teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulsen, M. B., & Feldman, K. A. (1995). Taking teaching seriously: Meeting the challenge of instructional improvement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudolph, F. (1956). Mark Hopkins and the log: Williams College (pp. 1836–1872). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutter, D. R. (1984). Looking and seeing: The role of visual communication in social interaction. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark, J. S., & Lattuca, L. R. (1997). Shaping the college curriculum: Academic plans in action. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4, 295–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J., Chandler, P., Tierney, P., & Cooper, M. (1990). Cognitive load as a factor in the structure of technical material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 119, 176–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tapscott, D. (1997). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trice, A. G., & Dey, E. L. (1997). Trends in faculty teaching goals: A longitudinal study of change. Journal of College Student Development, 38(5), 527–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walburton, E. C., & Chen, X. (2002). Teaching with technology: Use of telecommunications technology by postsecondary instructional faculty and staff (NCES 2002–161). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Prof. Homer A. Neal and Jeremy W. Herr of The University of Michigan, Department of Physics and the U-M Atlas Collaboratory Project for their support of this research by providing access to advanced lecture capture technologies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education, 2117 School of Education, 610 E. University Avenue, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Eric L. Dey

  2. Department of Mathematics, Pure and Applied Sciences Division, Highline Community College, Des Moines, WA, USA

    Helen E. Burn

  3. Physics Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    David Gerdes

Authors
  1. Eric L. Dey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Helen E. Burn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Gerdes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric L. Dey.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dey, E.L., Burn, H.E. & Gerdes, D. Bringing the Classroom to the Web: Effects of Using New Technologies to Capture and Deliver Lectures. Res High Educ 50, 377–393 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-009-9124-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-009-9124-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation