Evaluating the use and impact of lecture recording in undergraduates: Evidence for distinct approaches by different groups of students

Abstract

Lecture recordings are increasingly used to supplement lecture attendance within higher education, but their impact on student learning remains unclear. Here we describe a study to evaluate student use of lecture recordings and quantify their impact on academic performance. Questionnaire responses and online monitoring of student's access to recordings indicate that ∼75% students use this material, the majority in a targeted manner. In contrast, a small subset of students (∼5%) are highly dependent on recordings downloading every lecture, and viewing the material for long periods, such that this represents a large proportion of their independent study. This ‘high user’ group is atypical, as it contains a high proportion of dyslexic and Non-English Speaking Background students. Despite high usage, lecture recordings do not have a significant impact on academic performance, either across the cohort or with students that use the recordings. Overall, this approach appears to be beneficial, but may reduce lecture attendance and encourage surface learning approaches in a minority of students.

Full text

Evaluating the use and impact of lecture recording in undergraduates: Evidence
for distinct approaches by different groups of students
Wendy Leadbeater
a
, Tom Shuttleworth
b
, John Couperthwaite
c
, Karl P. Nightingale
b
,
*
a
Clinical & Experimental Medicine, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, UK
b
Immunity & Infection, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, UK
c
Medical Education Unit, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, UK
article info
Article history:
Received 27 February 2012
Received in revised form
20 July 2012
Accepted 20 September 2012
Keywords:
Dyslexia
Action reasearch
Lecture recording
Evaluation of impact
abstract
Lecture recordings are increasingly used to supplement lecture attendance within higher education, but
their impact on student learning remains unclear. Here we describe a study to evaluate student use of
lecture recordings and quantify their impact on academic performance. Questionnaire responses and
online monitoring of student’s access to recordings indicate that w75% students use this material, the
majority in a targeted manner. In contrast, a small subset of students (w5%) are highly dependent on
recordings downloading every lecture, and viewing the material for long periods, such that this repre-
sents a large proportion of their independent study. This ‘high user’group is atypical, as it contains a high
proportion of dyslexic and Non-English Speaking Background students. Despite high usage, lecture
recordings do not have a significant impact on academic performance, either across the cohort or with
students that use the recordings. Overall, this approach appears to be beneficial, but may reduce lecture
attendance and encourage surface learning approaches in a minority of students.
!2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The audio and video recording of lectures (echo360, i.e. Voice and Powerpoint slides), with subsequent ‘publishing’via virtual learning
environments is used with increased frequency within higher education. This approach, using recorded lectures as a supplement to lecture
attendance is popular with students (Soong, Chan, Cheers, & Hu, 2006), with a large proportion stating that they use these materials (Davis,
Connolly, & Linfield, 2009), primarily in a ‘targeted’manner to revisit difficult concepts, make additional notes, or for revision (Soong et al.,
2006). This targeted use is consistent with download data that indicate that most students access only a proportion of available recordings
(Williams & Fardon, 2007). In contrast, the quantitative impact of this approach on student learning remains largely unexplored, though
lecture recordings are known to be a valuable component of distance learning (Boling & Robinson, 1999). Recent studies examining the
impact of audio-only lecture recordings (‘podcasts’)on academic performance found small but statistically significant increases in grades
(McKinney, Dycka, & Lubera, 2009;Morris, 2010), though this varied with the study design (Abt & Barry, 2007). Importantly, one study
indicated that students that used these materials took more extensive notes (McKinney et al., 2009). This is likely to be a central issue given
that note-taking in lectures is known to increase academic performance (Kiewra, 1985a,1985b). Some authors have speculated that the
observed increase in academic performance reflects students’ability to pause recordings at difficult concepts, and/or listen to lectures
several times, and thereby encourages more note-taking than in lectures (Bassili & Joordens, 2008). This is controversial though, as
a subsequent study found ‘pausing’during lecture recordings was associated with poorer grades, possibly due to students adopting surface
learning approaches (Le, Joordens, Chrysostomou, & Grinnell, 2010).
The ability to create coherent, comprehensive lecture notes is a key issue for dyslexic students, who are disadvantaged in these study
skills (Mortimore & Crozier, 2006). Dyslexic students represent a significant proportion of undergraduate students in the UK (w4%, HESA,
2005/6), but have poorer academic outcomes (Richardson & Wydell, 2003). We speculate that dyslexic students may gain particular benefit
from lecture recordings via their ability to facilitate note-taking and ‘over-learning’(frequent revision) of taught material. Although lecture
*Corresponding author. Tel.: þ44 (0) 121 414 6833.
E-mail address: k.p.nightingale@bham.ac.uk (K.P. Nightingale).
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Computers & Education
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compedu
0360-1315/$ –see front matter !2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.09.011
Computers & Education 61 (2013) 185–192

recording is a recommended learning aid for dyslexic students, it is unclear whether this increases academic performance. Similarly,
Non-English Speaking Background (NESB) students find lecture recordings useful (Pearce & Scutter, 2010), but their impact is unknown. We
hypothesised that dyslexic and NESB students would particularly benefit from this approach, and that this would be apparent from their
engagement with the materials, and academic performance.
In this study we use a combination of approaches to examine student views on the use of lecture recordings and to analyse the impact of
these materials on academic performance. We also examined aspects of lecture recording that may negatively impact on their use as
pedagogic tool, notably their implications for lecture attendance (Phillips et al., 2007), and whether they reinforce ‘lecture centric’(Bennett &
Manair, 2008), or ‘pragmatist’attitudes (Dolnicar, 2004,2005). These assume that lectures are the sole source of material required for exam
success, and that lecture attendance identifies these topics. Our observations that recordings are a valuable approach especially for dyslexic
students, is tempered by findings that they may reinforce these surface learning attitudes.
2. Materials & methods
2.1. Participants
This study represents a multi-year study (2010/11 and 2011/12) with undergraduate, year 2 Medical Science students delivered at a large
research intensive university. The course has a mix of genders (w60% female), ages (majority w20 years old) and nationalities (2% inter-
national students) similar to many UK Medical science and Bioscience degrees. The whole cohort was invited to participate. We received 69
(2010/11) and 71 (2011/12) completed questionnaires, from a cohort of 76 per year, a 91% response rate.
2.2. Study design
Medical science in year 2 is a modular course, with 11 overlapping 10-credit modules delivered in 5–6 week intervals throughout the
year. Of these, nine are broadly equivalent, containing a similar number of contact hours (Average 39 h) and using the same mix of learning
environments (lectures, small group teaching & laboratory-based practicals) to focus on distinct areas of biology. Lectures, primarily in 1 h
sessions, represent w60% of this contact (Average 22 h/module).
Audio and video lecture recordings using the echo360 system (http://echo360.com) automatically capture a digital audio track, overlay
this with the presented Powerpoint slides, and create a file that can be ‘published’within a virtual learning environment. In this study these
were accessed via an appropriate module folder on WebCT. The use of lecture capture technology on the course is sporadic, reflecting the
personal preferences of individual lecturers, allowing us to assess the impact of the approach. As such, recordingwas used comprehensively
in two modules (Immunology, Infection), partially in another (Molecular biology), and was absent in most (Cell biology, Cardiovascular Science,
Endocrine Science, Neuroscience, Pharmacology & Renal biology). This built upon intermittent use in year 1, such that students had not been
able to incorporate recordings into their routine study.
This study was performed in compliance with British Educational Research Association guidelines. Students were told that they were
potential participants early in the academic year, and given a questionnaire on their use of lecture recordings several months after the
recorded modules. This requested disclosure of lecture recoding usage in categories previously shown in a pilot study to divide users into
four broadly equal groups (0–15 min, 15 min–1h,1–5h&>5h), and where we reasoned that students in the 0–15 min and >5hcategories
were likely to use the material in different ways. We were able to correlate the extent of use of lecture recording and academic performance
by requesting student ID numbers on the questionnaire. Approximately half the cohort disclosed this (54%, 2010–11; 42% 2011–12). The data
presented is combined from the two cohorts except when indicated. Data on the mode and extent of student use of lecture recordings were
also assessed by alternate approaches; echo360 download data was monitored to determine when and the extent that students accessed the
material, and focus groups were used to explore themes around this technology. These comprised student volunteers of known lecture
recording usage. We used two group structures –one only included high users (>5 h lecture recording use, 4 students), whereas another was
representative of the cohort’s lecture recording use (6 students). We used a semi-structured approach, with questions initiated by a member
of staff uninvolved in the teaching sessions involved. The discussion was recorded, so that common themes and the generality of opinions
could be subsequently assessed.
3. Results
3.1. Analysing students’use of lecture recordings
Previous analyses on how students use lecture recordings, find that most cite their ability to facilitate note-taking (Gosper et al., 2007).
Given that many students have weaknesses in this area, we speculated that this may be a key driver for students to engage with lecture
recordings. Our initial questions therefore focused on this. Responses indicate that a surprisingly large proportion, w21% of the cohort
report problems in taking notes in lectures, with a majority of the self-disclosed dyslexic students agreeing they had problems in this area
(75%, Fig. 1). In contrast, Non-English Speaking Background students were not disproportionally affected, suggesting that any problems have
been resolved by year two. Approximately half of the cohort agree that they use lecture recordings to support their learning, with a majority
of the dyslexic students in this class (Fig. 1).
3.1.1. Most students use lecture recordings in a ‘targeted’manner
Previous studies indicate that many students use recordings in a strategic way –focussing on areas where lectures contain difficult
concepts, or were inaudible (Gosper et al., 2007). However it was unclear how relevant this was a UK undergraduate context. We therefore
asked students how they used the material.
Responses indicate that the bulk of the students use the materials in a targeted or strategic way –the majority download a small number
of recordings (‘1or2’, 52%, Fig. 2), and use them for expanding their notes (w80% of recording users), or understanding difficult concepts
W. Leadbeater et al. / Computers & Education 61 (2013) 185–192186

(w60%). However, other questions appeared to reveal distinct patterns of use in the two cohorts: in 2010/11 the students predominantly
used recordings to listen to small sections (43%), with a smaller number listening to whole lectures (33%), consistent with a small proportion
of students who used the recordings to catch up on missed lectures. In contrast, the largest reported use in 2011/12 was to listen to the whole
lecture, and the proportion of students reporting that they used them to catch up on missed lectures also increased significantly. This
correlated with a decline in lecture attendance, from an average attendance rate of 84% in 2010/11 to 71% in 2011/12.
Fig. 2. Students’use and motivation for using lecture recordings.(Upper left) Student responses to how many recordings they accessed. Combined responses from 2010/11 and ’11/12
(Upper right). Student use of lecture recordings in 2010/11 (blue) and 2011/12 (green) (Lower panels). Student responses to how they use the recordings in 2010/11 (Left panel) and
2011/12 (Right panel). Multiple answers were possible. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 1. Assessing students’problems in note-taking, and use of lecture recordings. (Left) Questionnaire responses to whether students have problems taking notes in lectures, and
(Right) whether students use lecture recordings to supplement their learning. Number in brackets indicate number of dyslexic or NESB students. Data presents combined responses
from 2010/11 & ‘11/12 (n¼139).
W. Leadbeater et al. / Computers & Education 61 (2013) 185–192 187

3.1.2. Recording download data is consistent with ‘targetted’use by students
Echo360 allows the monitoring of download data for individual lecture recordings, recording how often they were accessed, and the date
on which this happened. During 2010/11 student access to all recorded lectures in year 2 BMedSci (49 lectures, 1896 downloads), gave an
average 39 downloads/lecture, suggesting w50% of the cohort typically accessed the materials. This may be inflated as the technology
cannot distinguish multiple downloads from one individual, but this seems unlikely, given the proportion of users is in line with the
questionnaire response (w50% of the cohort,Fig. 1).
As these numbers cannot reveal the pattern(s) of student use, we focused on a representative series of lecture recordings (‘Gene
expression’, 6 lectures, delivered Oct–Nov ’10). This indicated that the individual lectures were accessed to varying extents, with some
apparently accessed by w90% of the cohort by the end of year (Download rates range from 55–88% of cohort,Fig. 3,Upper panel). However it
was clear that the bulk of download activity was within six weeks after the lecture is given. This was confirmed by the cumulative timeline of
downloads of these six recordings (Fig. 3,Lower panel), which shows two distinct peaks of activity –an initial peak relatively soon after
a lecture was given, and an additional peak at Easter, presumably for revision in preparation for the exams.
3.1.3. How students use lecture recordings: comparison of ‘high’and ‘low’users
This analysis suggests that the majority of students adopt a strategic approach to the material. However, we also identified considerable
divergence across the cohort, suggesting that different students use the material in different ways. We therefore focused on how students
use recordings at the two extremes, (1) the ‘high users’who listened to more than >5 h recordings/module, and (2) ‘low users’–who listened
for >15 min/module. We initially speculated that high users may be weaker students who use recordings for surface learning approaches.
However, this is unlikely given that this group’s academic performance (Mean year 2 grades: 66% #6.5 n ¼3), is comparable to the whole
cohort (Mean grade: 60% #0.9, n ¼76).
Analysis of recording use over the consecutive years suggests that the two groups adopt distinct approaches to the material. ‘Low users’
adopt a highly targeted approach –listening to small sections (62% responses), or to one part multiple times (26%), but few listened to whole
lectures (10%). Consistent with this, most in this group downloaded only one or two recordings (67%), often considerably after the lecture
was delivered (86%, ‘Up to a month later’). In contrast, ‘high users’listen strikingly more often to the whole lecture (100%, Fig. 5), in addition to
listening to small sections, and focussing on one part, consistent with a larger commitment to the material. This is reinforced by finding that
Fig. 3. Download data for recorded lectures in 2010/11. (Upper panel) Download numbers for individual lecture recordings (Delivered in weeks 2–8). These were assessed in the
Spring term (January, ’11) and at the end of year (Total 2010–11). The cohort ¼76. (Lower panel) Timeline of total downloads of these six lectures over the academic year, and
correlation with breaks and exams.
W. Leadbeater et al. / Computers & Education 61 (2013) 185–192188

the majority of this group download ‘All’or ‘Most’(86%) of the recordings, typically within a week after the lecture (‘Within 7 days’; 86%,
Fig. 4).
This suggests that ‘high users’are extremely reliant on recordings if they are available. Our finding that this group contained a high
proportion of dyslexic and NESB students (i.e. 6/7 high users) suggested that this approach may be appropriate for these students.
3.2. Lecture recording has no impact on the cohorts’or on users’academic performance
The final analysis examined whether lecture recording impacted on the students’academic performance. This focused on exam grades,
as we reasoned that in course assessment (e.g. laboratory practical reports, presentations) was unlikely to be affected by the availability of
lecture recordings. This took two aspects –initial comparison of the exam performance of the whole cohort, detected significant differences
between the marks in different modules, but not between recorded and unrecorded modules. This is perhaps not a surprise given the broad
distribution of marks in each module (Data not shown).
A second analysis focused on the students that allowed us to correlate their lecture recording use and exam grades (2010/11, n¼41). As
numbers were limited, we divided them into two groups: Non Users (n ¼16 ), and Users of lecture recordings (n¼25), and analysed the
distribution of marks in these two groups across the modules. Importantly, ‘Non users’marks allows us to assess differences between
modules other than lecture recording (i.e. exam difficulty, content etc.), and generate a ‘baseline’for each module against which the grades of
‘Users’can be compared. This shows that ‘Users’grades often diverge from ‘Non users’in both non-recorded, partially recorded, or
fully recorded modules, but there is no consistent pattern in either recorded or non-recorded modules (Fig. 5). Analysis of exam grades in
Fig. 4. Comparison of ‘High Users’and ‘Low Users’use of lecture recordings.(Upper panels) Student responses to how they use the recordings, where multiple answers were possible.
(Lower panels) Student responses to how many recordings they accessed, and when they downloaded them. Combined responses for 2010/11 and 2011/12, ‘High users’(n¼7), ‘Low
users’(n¼27).
W. Leadbeater et al. / Computers & Education 61 (2013) 185–192 189

2011–12 gave a similar outcome, with no discernable impact of lecture recording on users exam grades (Responses n ¼32, Non users, n ¼13,
Users, n ¼19. Data not shown).
3.3. Focus group analysis of student attitudes to lecture recordings
Analysis of questionnaire and download data suggest that the majority of students adopt a targeted approach to lecture recordings, but
that ‘high users’do not appear to. We used focus groups in an exploratory study to explore this and other issues in more detail. Two groups
were formed, one containing only high users (4 students), and the other being more representative of the whole cohort (Mixture of non-users
and users:6 students). This identified a number of key themes.
3.3.1. Motivation for using lecture recordings
Both groups identified the ability of lecture recordings to facilitate note-taking as a key advantage, with all of the members of the high
user group identifying their poor ability to understand, concentrate or take coherent notes as a central issue. The majority of the members of
this group identified dyslexia or their non-English speaking background as underlying reasons for their problems, though two students
identified themselves as ‘audio learners’, or needing to hear material several times to learn it.
3.3.2. Student use of lecture recordings
A majority view for high users was that recordings allow individuals to relax and focus on the lecture, rather than taking notes. Similarly,
a large number of comments centred on how recordings allow students to take notes at their own pace, for example, a high user commented
“For me lectures aren’t that a great way of learning.but being able to go back over it, makes you able to do it at your own speed”. Similarly,
several students in both groups mentioned the ability to pause (“I listen through it and pause when I get to a concept I don’t understand, and
have a look at a textbook”), and a high user felt the ability to repeat material was a keyadvantage (“For me, listening to a concept over and over
again.helps reinforce the concept.”). Interestingly, several high users appeared to adopt new strategies to their note-taking in response to
recordings (i.e. “I make a mark on my handout if I know I’ve missed something so I know where I want to go back to.”)
We also explored areas where staff voiced concerns about the technology, notably whether lecture recordings impact on lecture
attendance or encourage surface learning attitudes.
3.3.3. Impact on lecture attendance
The majority view in both focus groups appears to be that recordings would not affect lecture attendance, with one high user com-
menting that she valued non-verbal aspects of lectures that are not captured on recordings (‘When you’ve got someone standing in front of you
waving their arms about a bit, to me you get a lot more from that than just voice and slides.’). However, this was not universal with one high user
commenting ‘If you’re guaranteed that all the lectures are there [i.e. recorded], then many people wouldn’t turn up at nine. They’d come later.’It is
interesting to note that only one student (i.e. 1/10 students attending focus groups) felt there would be an impact on lecture attendance. This
was surprisingly low, but may reflect that the students attending focus groups were self selected, and many wanted to encourage the wider
use of lecture recording on the course. For example, half of the high user group argued that staffshould not consider lecture attendance when
deciding whether to record lectures (‘It really annoys me when lecturers say they won’t give podcasts if [students] can’t be bothered to come.
But.I don’t see why we should suffer because a minority of people might not come.’)
3.3.4. Reinforcing ‘lecture centric’or ‘pragmatist’attitudes
Staff concerns that lecture recordings may be associated with surface learning attitudes may be justified as we found half of the members
of the high user group believed that lecture content was sufficient to perform well at assessment (“You ’ve got the things that should be in the
exam in the lecture, one could think ‘Why should I search for more? It could stop you searching for things in books.”), and that lecture recordings
were an efficient way to learn this (“If there’s a concept I don’t understand listening to the recording is a lot quicker than going and reading loads
Fig. 5. Lecture recording has no impact on the exam grades of lecture recording users. Box plots of student’s exam grades, classed by lecture recording use, for all modules in 2010/11.
Students are categorised into Non users (Blue), and Users (1 min –>5 h/module, Green). Lectures in modules 4 and 5 were fully recorded, and module 6 was partially recorded,
whereas the remaining modules were not recorded. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
W. Leadbeater et al. / Computers & Education 61 (2013) 185–192190

of stuff.”). Likewise, concerns that recordings may supplant other forms of independent study (e.g. “[Lecture recordings are] very time
consuming.. it could take time off researching by yourself, like going to textbooks.”), or could be used poorly, were evident. As one high user
commented; “It’s something quite new –listening to a lecture. So sometimes I think I’ll just listen to just bits, or a part, but in the end I end up
listening to it all again.”However, these were not majority views among the high user group, and were not apparent in the mixed group,
suggesting they are not widely held throughout the cohort.
4. Discussion
4.1. General conclusions
In the UK, lecture recordings are increasingly used as a supplement to lecture attendance, however our understanding of how students
use these materials, and whether this has benefits for their academic performance remains largely unexamined. This study reinforces the
findings of a number of international studies, but uncovered a number of issues that are likely to be relevant throughout HE.
4.2. Student response to lecture recordings
This study is consistent with a number of international (Davis et al., 2009;Soong et al., 2006) and UK-based studies (Rossiter, Nortcliffe,
Griffin, & Middleton, 2009), in reporting student’s positive attitudes and engagement with lecture recording approaches. We found
generally w50% of the cohort accessed the material, but this could rise to w75% for specific lectures, with most students reporting using the
material in the ‘targeted’approach seen elsewhere. A typical use was to download one or two lectures to focus on difficult areas and make
notes, or revision (Figs. 2 and 3). Our finding that w20% of students have problems in taking notes in lectures (Fig. 1), suggests that this is
likely to be a major driver of lecture recording use.
A key finding was that the extent of use of lecture recording is highly diverse across the cohort. Whereas the majority of students use
recordings strategically, a small number of students are heavily reliant on these materials (w5%, High users). Our finding that a large
proportion of these students are dyslexic or of NESB suggests that recordings are particularly valuable to these groups. This is consistent
with the preference of many dyslexicstudents for these support materials (Mortimore & Crozier, 2006), though quantitative studies indicate
that audio-visual material like lecture recordings may not be ideal learning resources for dyslexic students as the two media format may
increase the cognitive effort required to learn the material (Beacham & Alty, 2006).
4.3. Impact of lecture recording on academic performance
Our use of a controlled study attempts to link intervention and outcome. In this case the study design allowed us to examine whether
lecture recording was associated with changes in student’s academic performance, as assessed by their final exams marks.
Initial comparison of marks in non-recorded and recorded modules showed that recording was not associated with a significant change
in the average mark of the cohort. This is not a surprise, given the broad range of marks across the cohort, variation in marks between
modules, and that only w50% of students engage with the recorded material.
However, comparison of the marks of recording Users and Non users removed some of this variation.This showed that the grades of these
two groups often diverged, but did not show a consistent pattern across the modules (Fig. 5). Overall, the finding that the grades of the w50%
of students that use lecture recordings were not significantly different from non-users was disappointing, but may reflect the diversity of
recording use. Limited numbers prevented us from analysing the marks of distinct categories of lecture recording users, but an analysis of
low users and high users would be particularly valuable to assess the impact of the substantial amounts of time the latter group devote to the
material. This is particularly relevant as previous studies found using lecture recordings can reduce academic performance (Le et al., 2010),
and may not be optimal support materials for dyslexic students (Beacham & Alty, 2006).
These outcomes demonstrate this is an appropriate study design to identify the impact of educational interventions. We intend to use
a larger cohort study to focus on the response of dyslexic students to this technology, and the impact on their academic performance.
4.4. Impact of lecture recording on lecture attendance and surface learning attitudes
Our findings suggest that lecture recording is of positive benefit to the majority of students, most of whom use the recordings in
a strategic manner. However, this is tempered by our observation that lecture attendance is reduced in some recorded modules (by w15%),
and that some high users appear to be motivated to use the recordings by surface learning attitudes. These factors reinforce faculty concerns
about adopting the technology (i.e. Gosper et al., 2007), and suggest that the approach may have negative impacts on a subset of students. It
is unclear whether these concerns can be addressed by guidance –a more effective route may be to find alternate ways to reinforce lecture
attendance and ensure assessment does not reward surface learning approaches.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge this study is based on the contributions of faculty across the BMedSci programme, most notably Drs. Peter
Balfe, Brian Martin and John Curnow who initiated the use of lecture recordings on the course. We also acknowledge the contribution of Dr
John Shuttleworth (BMedSci programme lead) for facilitating the study, and Mr Robert Jones who was instrumental in establishing
procedures to record and publish recordings within the College.
W. Leadbeater et al. / Computers & Education 61 (2013) 185–192 191

References
Abt, G., & Barry, T. (2007). The quantitative effect of students using podcasts in a first year undergraduate exercise physiology module. Bioscience Education, 10, [WWW
document] URL. http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/journal/vol10/beej-10-8.htm.
Bassili, J. N., & Joordens, S. (2008). Media player tool use, satisfaction with online lectures and examination performance. Journal of Distance Education, 22,93–107.
Beacham, N. A., & Alty, J. L. (2006). An investigation into the effects that digital media can have on the learning outcomes of individuals with dyslexia. Computers & Education,
47,74–93.
Bennett, E., & Manair, N. (2008). Are videoed lectured and effective teaching tool? [WWW document]. URL. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi¼10.1.1.105.
6020&rep¼rep1&type¼pdf.
Boling, N. C., & Robinson, D. H. (1999). Individual study, interactive multimedia, or cooperative learning: which activity best supplements lecture-based distance education?
Journal of Educational Psychology, 91,169–174 .
Davis, S. J., Connolly, A., & Linfield, E. (2009). Lecture capture: making the most of face to face learning. Engineering Education, 4(2), [WWW document] URL. http://www.engsc.
ac.uk/journal/index.php/ee/article/view/132.
Dolnicar, S. (2004). What makes students attend lectures? The shift towards pragmatism in undergraduate lecture attendance 2004 [WWW document]. URL. http://ro.uow.edu.au/
commpapers/81.
Dolnicar, S. (2005). Should we still lecture or just post examination questions on the web? The nature of the shift towards pragmatism in undergraduate lecture attendance.
Quality in Higher Education, 11,103–115 .
Gosper, M., McNeill, M., Woo, K., Phillips, R., Preston, G., & Green, D. (2007). Web-based lecture recording technologies: do students learn from them?. In Educause Australasia.
Melbourne, Australia.
Higher Education Statistics Agency. (2006). First year UK domiciled HE students by qualification aim, mode of study, gender and disability 2005/6 [WWW document]. URL.
http://www.hesa.ac.uk/dox/dataTables/studentsAndQualifiers/download/disab0506.xls.
Kiewra, K. A. (1985a). Learning from a lecture: an investigation of notetaking, review and attendance at a lecture. Human Learning: Journal of Practical Research & Applications,
4,73–77.
Kiewra, K. A. (1985b). Providing the instructor’s notes: an effective addition to student notetaking. Educational Psychologist, 20,33–39.
Le, A., Joordens, S., Chrysostomou, S., & Grinnell, R. (2010). Online lecture accessibility and its influence on performance in skills-based courses. Computers & Education, 55,
313–319.
McKinney, D., Dycka, J. L., & Lubera, E. S. (2009). iTunes university and the classroom: can podcasts replace professors? Computers & Education, 52,617–623.
Morris, N. (2010). Podcasts and mobile assessment enhance student learning experience and academic performance. Bioscience Education, 16(1), [WWW document] URL.
http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/journal/vol16/beej-16-1.aspx.
Mortimore, T., & Crozier, W. R. (2006). Dyslexia and difficulties with study skills in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 235–251.
Pearce, K., & Scutter, S. (2010). Podcasting of health sciences lectures: benefits for students from a non-English speaking background. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology, 26, 1028–1041.
Phillips, R., Gosper, M., McNeill, M., Woo, K., Preston, G., & Green, D. (2007). Staff and student perspectives on web-based lecture technologies: insights into the great divide. In
ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings Ascilite Singapore 2007, [WWW document]. URL. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/
phillips.pdf.
Richardson, J. T. E., & Wydell, T. N. (2003). The representation and attainment of students with dyslexia in UK higher education. Reading & Writing, 16,475–503.
Rossiter, A., Nortcliffe, A., Griffin, A., & Middleton, A. (2009). Using student generated audio to enhance learning. Engineering Education, 4(2), [WWW document] URL. http://
www.engsc.ac.uk/journal/index.php/ee/article/viewArticle/132/170.
Soong, S. K. A., Chan, L. K., Cheers, C., & Hu, C. (2006). Impact of video recorded lectures among students. Who’s learning? Whose technology?. In Proceedings Ascilite Sydney
2006, [WWW document]. URL. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/sydney06/proceeding/pdf_papers/p179.pdf.
Williams, J., & Fardon, M. (2007). Perpetual connectivity: lecture recordings and portable media players. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings Ascilite
Singapore 2007, Available at http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/williams-jo.pdf.
W. Leadbeater et al. / Computers & Education 61 (2013) 185–192192