Making Sense of Lecture Capture:A Case Study of Peer and TeacherInfluence

Ilkka Kukkonen, Outi-Maaria Palo-oja

@ilkkakukkonen @palooja #edmediaconf

EdMedia 2014, Tampere, Finland 25.6.2014

SLIDES

LECTURER

NAVIGATION

TIMELINE

TEACHER’S COMMENTS

PERSONAL BOOKMARKS

Lecture capture as pedagogical development

• Allows the development of lecture format

• Integrating the physical and virtual learning environment

• Increasing the pedagogical understanding through analytics

• Continuing the social dimension of the event

• Modifying the structure and the content of the lecture

• Bypassing the time restrictions of traditional lecture, covering larger topics and individualizing education

• Creating multiaccess courses and increasing flexibility of participation

Project approach to support the development(”MOVIE”*, 2011-2012) N~800

• The development of pedagogical quality and effectivenessof lecture capture

• Student/teacher/organizational perspectives

• Surveys, interviews, log analysis, eye tracking for usabilityresearch, background information and performance in grades.

• Pair work vs. individual performance

• Data from teacher training and high school students, collected in mathematical subjects and statistics

* www.aducate.fi/movie

Findings from the previous study

• Students are willing to use lecture capture

• Lecture capture supports developing conceptualunderstanding for content so it seems to be efficientespecially for lower achieving students

• Challenge is to create meaningful learning contexts for students

– How to help students to make sense of therecordings?

* www.aducate.fi/movie

Seven properties of sensemaking by Weick*

1. Identity

2. Retrospection

3. Enactment

4. Social

5. Ongoing

6. Extract cues

7. Plausibility over accuracy

*Weick, K.E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, California, USA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Case study: Research setup

• 14 students, two videos, six related questions

• One of the videos sent in advance

Case study: Research setup

• 14 students, two videos, six related questions

• One of the videos sent in advance

• Recorded data from on-screen activity, students´collaboration and eye tracking

• Critical incidents for sensemaking

• Similarities and differences in behavior between pairs, and this compared to their success

• How teacher and peers affect on student’s understanding about statistics taught through video?

Critical incidents for sensemaking

•Events that accelerate learning

•Teacher’s cursor movements, highlighting, verbalrequests

•Problems that teacher solved on the video as example

•Problems that teacher gave students to solve

•Peer student’s questions, critique, and doubts

Sensemaking after teacher’s actions

•Students follow teacher’s cursor movements carefullyand follow the verbal requests

•Two strategies to use teacher’s example:

– Pairs who imitated teacher’s actions on the screenperformed worse

– Pairs who studied the issue first and then proceeded to solve problems received better grades

•Difficult questions increase the need for revision

Sensemaking after peer’s action

•The weaker student in pair may challenge his/her pair to explain and develop more thorough understanding

•Differences in skills and previous knowledge reflectsdifferences in power

Conclusions

•Teacher’s actions serve as significant awakeningstimulus for students to look for meaningful explanationfor difficult issues

•Teacher’s actions help students to extract cues aboutissues which are important for learning

•Peers’ feedback serve as disruption in ongoingsensemaking

•Revision leads to deeper understanding

www.aducate.fiwww.uef.fi

Thanks!

Questions and comments?

http://aducate.fi/movie

ilkka.kukkonen@uef.fi, outi-maaria@palo-oja.fi

@ilkkakukkonen @palooja