Engineering Education

a Journal of the Higher Education Academy

ISSN: 1750-0052 (Print) 1750-0044 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rhep17

Lecture capture:making the most of face-to-face

learning

Simon Davis (Learning Technologist, Staff and Departmental Development

Unit), Anthea Connolly (Feedback and Assessment Officer) & Edmund
Linfield (Chair in Terahertz Electronics, Director of the Institute of
Microwaves and Photonics)

To cite this article: Simon Davis (Learning Technologist, Staff and Departmental Development
Unit), Anthea Connolly (Feedback and Assessment Officer) & Edmund Linfield (Chair in
Terahertz Electronics, Director of the Institute of Microwaves and Photonics) (2009) Lecture
capture:making the most of face-to-face learning, Engineering Education, 4:2, 4-13, DOI: 10.11120/
ened.2009.04020004

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.11120/ened.2009.04020004

Copyright © 2006 by Taylor & Francis

Published online: 15 Dec 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3212

View related articles

Citing articles: 4 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rhep17
 Lecture capture:
making the most of face-to-face learning
Simon Davis, Anthea Connolly and Edmund Linfield
Abstract
The deployment of a new virtual learning
environment (VLE), Blackboard, at the
University of Leeds came with a vision of
‘the use of technology enabling better use
of […] contact time’. This paper describes
how a programme of lecture capture (in
which the audio of lectures, video of the
presenter and on-screen projected content
were recorded) impacted on the delivery
and student perception of face-to-face
teaching and associated pedagogies in
the School of Electronic and Electrical
Engineering.
Two modules were involved in the pilot
study: one at level 1 (on which 74 students
were enrolled) and the other at level 2 (45
students). Approximately 30 lectures were
captured in total, the majority of these in
the level 1 module. Students were regularly
polled about their interactions with the
captures and their experiences were
overwhelmingly positive. In addition to the
teaching resources that were created and
evaluation that was conducted, the project
also produced a series of guides to support
the use of the hardware and software used
in the process.
Table 1. Format and content available
of lectures captured
Format Content available
Flash video VGA output
Audio
Video of presenter
Navigable table of contents
Streaming windows VGA output
media video Audio
Video of presenter
Mp3 audio Audio only
for download
Mv4 video VGA output
(low resolution video Audio
for download and
playback on portable
devices)
4 vol.4 issue 2 2009
EE_4_2_insides_complete.indb 4
This paper describes how the project has
informed attitudes to lecture capture and
practices of lecture delivery within the
School against a background of current
interest within higher education in this
area. The paper discusses the benefits of
the approach taken (using simple lecture
capture technology) and some of the
challenges of the project (including cost,
support, training, reliability and scalability).
Finally, the paper considers the reaction to
calls for wider use of this technology and
the implementation of a more scalable,
automated lecture capture system.
Introduction
The project focussed on the level 1 modules
Electronic Materials (semester 1) and Electronic
Materials and Devices (semesters 1 and 2)
and the linked level 2 module Transistors and
Optoelectronic Devices (semesters 1 and 2),
all delivered in the format of one-hour weekly
lectures. The aim was to capture all audio
and video of the presenter and all projected
on-screen content/VGA output (including
PowerPoint slides and written equations)
and make the finished materials available to
students via the virtual learning environment
(VLE) as soon as possible after delivery (usually
within three to four working days) in a variety of
formats (see Table 1). Between the two lecture
series (the two level 1 modules were delivered
concurrently in semester 1) just over 30 lectures
were captured and delivered via Blackboard,
the institutional VLE at the University of Leeds.
The captured material from the level 1 module
was also made available to students taking the
level 2 module, thus they were able to review
material they had previously learned.
The context of the project
The project was initiated when the leader of
the above modules became aware, through
conversations with colleagues, of the
increasing use of lecture capture technology
and of the growing pedagogical debate in
this area, particularly the potential impact that
allowing students to revisit content post-lecture
might have on teaching. He also noticed that
engineering education
30/11/2009 14:51:09

a growing number of students were taking a
‘DIY’ [‘do-it-yourself’] approach to taking their
own audio recordings of lectures to supplement
their notes (using dictating machines and mp3
players). He perceived that some students
(particularly those for whom English was not
their first language) were struggling to grasp
the concepts in lectures first time round and,
when questioned, seemed eager to be given
the opportunity to recap later. Other drivers
behind the project were students’ rising
expectations for media-rich content (particularly
audio and video) and the launch and rollout of
the institutional VLE at the University of Leeds
which brought new opportunities to host and
deliver such content online. Hence there was
a willingness to act to meet the learning needs
of students, to exploit the opportunities offered
by the VLE and to explore new technologies.
It was also felt that taking action to capture
entire lectures might assist in the retention of
students, the materials created would have the
potential to be shared with other year groups
(or even more widely) and they could be used
for future student recruitment.
Whilst it was recognised that there are a
number of commercial and open source
automated lecture capture systems available, it
was felt that the initial investment and additional
support required to install such systems may
have been substantial and could, therefore,
have delayed the start of the project. The
approach described in this paper is perhaps
unsuitable for widespread adoption, but it
reflects the fact that this was a pilot study and
that a quick start-up helped the team to carry
out an evaluation and use the results to inform
potential future developments.
Key requirements for the lecture capturing
system were identified at the start of the project
as the following:
• to capture and synchronise audio of the this type of material is the attitude of the ‘digital
lecture content; PowerPoint slide content;
video of the presenter’s body language and
explanatory gestures and equations which
had traditionally been written onto acetates
and projected using an OHP
• to be as easy as possible to set up and use
• to produce content for the VLE that allowed number of widespread notions, the authors of
students to navigate to chosen points of the
content in order to recap a specific topic or
demonstration.
engineering education vol.4 issue 2 2009
EE_4_2_insides_complete.indb 5
DAVIS et al.
The last point was considered to be especially
important since the project sought from the
outset to facilitate active learning by making
the captured materials interactive and by giving
the students a level of active control. Through
completed questionnaires and focus groups,
students indicated that they used the materials
for active learning in a number of different ways:
• self-assessment to recap examples: students
re-attempted the worked examples set
in the lectures and used the captures to
provide feedback on answers. Students
reported pausing examples at key moments,
endeavouring to complete the next section or
answer by themselves and then returning to
the capture to check their answers
• to support the completion of past papers or
new example questions: students followed
worked examples in the captures, paused
them at key moments and applied their
learning to new example questions or to past
papers
• to recap earlier materials in face-to-face
events: one student in a focus group
reported how during a lecture he used
a portable device to revisit the lecturer’s
explanation given in a previous class in order
to clarify points he could not grasp.
Comments on the pedagogy
of capturing lectures
Current pedagogical research points to some of
the main advantages and potential drawbacks
of the use of rich media, such as lecture capture
output, to support learning. In much of the
academic writing reviewed, student responses
to projects where lectures have been captured
and made available digitally is generally positive,
and the perception is that teaching and learning
have been improved (Lavelle, 2006; Sher and
Gajendran, 2008; Nortcliffe and Middleton,
2008). According to Prensky (2001), one of the
main reasons for the enthusiasm of students for
native’ (i.e. students who are used to accessing
multimedia content online and on demand). A
recent CIBER study commissioned by JISC and
the British Library (UCL, 2008) looks at some
myths and realities associated with the idea of
the ‘google generation.’ Whilst questioning a
the report say it is ‘generally true’ that young
people today prefer interactive systems and are
turning away from being passive consumers of
information.
5
30/11/2009 14:51:09
 DAVIS et al.

Balfour (2006) stated that the availability of library of materials to view on demand)
recorded lectures for review changes the way and control (ability to start, stop and review
that students act in face-to-face sessions material). On ‘integration’ (with, for example,
and ‘allows students to concentrate on the slides, supporting texts, discussion boards,
material being presented and to participate resource links, self assessment quizzes)
in any discussion that takes place.’ This is they say that the assumption is that ‘adding
in contrast to students spending their time an additional channel of communication to
in class ensuring that all notes are fully transmit a message will increase the quality
comprehensive when the lecture is the one of the communication itself.’ On ‘image’ they
and only opportunity that they will have to hear comment that the image adds ‘visual richness’
the information. This argument is supported to learning resources.
by Biggs (2003) who has stated that students
struggle with comprehending the message of The value of image to the production of
the lecture whilst simultaneously recording its lecture capture materials in the project at the
gist through note-taking. University of Leeds was recognised early on in
our discussions about what should be made
Balfour (2006) listed a number of advantages of available to students. As much of the delivery in
lecture capture to staff and students. Some of the lectures revolved around the lecturer writing
the main benefits to staff have been illustrated equations or referring to visual aids on slides,
by this project and include: it was decided that reproducing the on-screen
image for students would be vital to producing
• professional development opportunities authentic captures of the face-to-face delivery.
arising from lecturers being able to critically Whilst other approaches have made pre-
review their own performance prepared slides available to accompany audio
• increasing student engagement and captures, only real-time animated capture of
retention projected content would allow students to
• giving students a new way of resolving re-live the experience of the construction of
problems, meaning that face-to-face equations that feature strongly in the lectures.
interactions can be ‘spent on more complex As explained by Thornhill et al. (2002), ‘a
issues’ than those already covered. moving image can help the student to visualise
a process or see how something works, moves
Many of the benefits to students that Balfour or performs.’ They also state that even low
highlights arise from the fact that students have quality video of a presenter accompanying
the option to access captured materials at a a series of slides, talking with ‘expertise and
time, place, pace and volume that suits them. enthusiasm’ can support learning. As the
Specific benefits for students highlighted by lecturer in the project at the University of
Balfour include: Leeds makes extensive use of body language
and gestures to illustrate and make points
• the ability to catch up on missed materials during lectures, it was decided that video of
through non-attendance him should be captured along with on-screen
• increased accessibility for hearing impaired content.
and non-native speaking students
• the facility to access lectures as often as Arguments advising caution
is required in their own time in order to on lecture capture
maximise clarity and understanding Whilst many are excited by the potential
• the opportunity to revisit material, the benefits of lecture capture, it is important to
importance of which becomes apparent recognise that not everybody is a supporter
when doing revision or coursework. of this approach. One of the most common
concerns raised by academic staff is the
Asensio et al. (2004) found that the ‘Three potentially adverse impact that the production
I’s framework (image, interactivity and of the resources might have on lecture
integration) provides a ‘useful framework to attendance. The argument that if students
interpret the ‘added value’ of the media in an can access lectures online they will not bother
educational context.’ Asensio et al. state that turning up for the live event has been brought
‘interactivity’ in this context originally included into question by a number of authors, including
access (availability of material asynchronously Russell and Mattick (2005) and Williams
and independent of location), choice (a and Fardon (2005). Deal (2007) examined

6 vol.4 issue 2 2009 engineering education

EE_4_2_insides_complete.indb 6 30/11/2009 14:51:10


a number of studies on lecture capture and
lecture webcasts, and found that ‘overall, these
studies indicate that the availability of lecture
webcasts has only a slight impact, if any, on
class attendance rates.’ The experience of
the project at the University of Leeds seems
to support these studies, as attendance rates
were similar to previous years and did not
drop off throughout the semester as students
became aware of the availability of the online
lectures. Additional factors that may have
countered non-attendance in this project
were the repeated warnings to students that
resources were not designed to replace
attendance in person and that all attendance
was being recorded on signed registers. Of
more significance was the type of experience
and interactions that students got from
attending the face-to-face session that were not
replicated with the online captures. Students in
a focus group reported that they regarded the
face-to-face sessions as being more valuable
than the captures, saying that they were ‘not
equal to lectures’; ‘I would not consider them
to be a substitute for the live event. Because
you can’t ask questions; there is no actual
interaction’; that ‘you couldn’t teach yourself
from the recordings’ and that ‘if you attended
all the lectures and didn’t look at any of the
recordings you would get a better grade than if
you looked at all the recordings and didn’t go
to any of the lectures.’
The lecturer in this project has reinforced the
argument for the value of the live event, saying
that ‘one can also do far more interactive work,
since if the students don’t keep up fully at the
time (or don’t write down full notes), then they
will be able to complete their notes later.’ The
fact that the lecturer involved utilises his lecture
time in both an active and interactive manner
has been crucial to this project and matches
the University of Leeds’ five year vision for the
VLE which calls for better use of face-to-face
time.
Bennet and Maniar (2007) have expressed their
opposition to lecture capture by arguing that
videoed lectures ‘make learning uninteresting’
by failing to effectively convey enthusiasm
for a subject and by making it repetitive, as
students are essentially accessing the same
content twice or more. This argument is not
borne out by the way that students reported
accessing materials in this project. From the
outset of the project it was crucial that students
should easily be able to navigate to sections
engineering education vol.4 issue 2 2009
EE_4_2_insides_complete.indb 7
DAVIS et al.
of the online lectures that they felt were of
most relevance to them. Indeed, in our student
evaluations (method discussed below), we
found that students were actively choosing
specific sections of content to review rather
than passively revisiting entire lectures. They
did see value, however, in being able to access
the captured lecture in its entirety because, as
pointed out by one student, ‘every bit is going
to be important to a different person […] I like
having the whole lecture and then if you want
to you can search through.’ It was interesting
to find, moreover, students in a focus group
concurring that it is the ‘little extra bits [i.e.
things which are not essential knowledge,
which wouldn’t normally be taken down in
notes, but provide background information]
which are really helpful and which help your
understanding.’
Students also reported using the content for
active learning in other ways, particularly to help
with practical written example tasks: ‘you can
pause it [video of example equations], do those
calculations and then see if you’re right, and
because it’s a full answer and you can see the
working out as well rather than just a numerical
final answer it’s a lot more helpful than just
doing a past paper with a marking scheme.’
Examples of independent active learning like
this can be used to counter the contention
by Bennet and Maniar (2007) that reliance on
repeating lectures ‘may hinder the development
of students as independent learners’ and
that students should not be encouraged to
see ‘a lecture, or indeed the lecturer, as the
only source of knowledge about the subject
area.’ We agree with this last statement but
consider that a pervasive research-led learning
and teaching ethos, such as the one at the
University of Leeds, encourages students
across all subject areas to carry out their own
independent thinking and research, and that
the environment discourages students from
viewing the lecturer as the only source of
knowledge in a subject area.
Equipment and training
In order to get up and running quickly and
minimise support requirements the project
used readily available hardware and software
that would be as easy as possible to set up
and use. Ease of use was particularly important
for the lecture capture solution as it would
have to be set up and made ready to use by
the lecturer (without technical support) in the
short and hectic period between classes in a
7
30/11/2009 14:51:10
 DAVIS et al.
busy multi-use lecture room. It would also need
to be dismantled and put away in the equally
short handover period at the end of a lecture.
It was felt that the hardware selected needed
to be good enough for the task, but not over-
specified . The project followed the advice of
Thornhill et al. (2002) on this point, considering
‘the appropriateness of the image for the
educational message it is carrying […] a talking
head supporting a slide presentation […] where
the message is expertise and enthusiasm may
not require the same level of quality [as other
forms of video]’, therefore the project decided
that a webcam of reasonable quality would
suffice in this instance.
The lecture capture and postproduction was
carried out using screen capture software,
Camtasia Studio 5, and hardware which met
the needs of the project and captured the
required inputs (audio, video and mouse
movements). All of the peripheral hardware
(webcam, wireless USB microphone and
AirMouse to take the role of a laser pointer) was
‘plug and play’, supported by troubleshooting
guides to help with set up. Once the equipment
was set up at the start of the lecture,
Camtasia’s integration with PowerPoint allowed
captures to be started from within the familiar
PowerPoint interface and automatically stopped
at the end of the lecture. All hardware and
software ran on a 2.4Ghz dual core Toshiba
Portégé M70 tablet PC with 4GB of RAM.
Once a lecture had been captured, a copyright
statement was appended to the raw capture
files and some basic audio enhancement was
applied in Camtasia before being produced in
the four different formats described earlier. The
quality and other media settings were saved
into predefined production settings within
Camtasia, ensuring consistency and removing
some of the technical barriers to production
that may have arisen for the lecturer involved.
Given that the lecturer was a novice in this area,
he was also provided with a number of simple
step-by-step guides.
Problems/drawbacks
with the approach taken
While the process of lecture capture and
postproduction were distilled into a step-by-
step approach, there nevertheless remained
potential setbacks at nearly every stage of the
process. At-desk training, bespoke printed
guides and support in the room were all used
8 vol.4 issue 2 2009
EE_4_2_insides_complete.indb 8
to help the lecturer involved to overcome the
obstacles listed below:
• preparation of slide content – PowerPoint
slides needed to be formatted correctly to
automatically create a table of contents
• set up of equipment – it was necessary to
ensure that all hardware had been turned on
and detected by the tablet PC
• delivery of lecture – failure to set up
correctly resulted in screen orientation
inverting when switching between using
the mouse to move between slides and the
tablet PC stylus to annotate them
• end of lecture delivery – raw capture
files needed to be saved (on at least two
occasions the computer crashed before
the captured data could be saved to
disc, meaning that students had to rely
on a backup audio version that had been
recorded on a standalone digital recorder in
case of failure. The issue was resolved by
turning off anti-virus software and updating
all drivers.)
• production in multiple formats and upload
to the VLE – this took time to complete. The
delay meant that the materials could not
be used to support small group sessions
following lectures later in the week
• delivery – large video files were not
recommended for storage and delivery
from within the VLE. Although Blackboard’s
Content Collection (the repository that
accompanies the VLE) worked for the
downloadable items (audio and video
podcasts) it was not suitable for the delivery
of the more popular flash video which was
hosted on Faculty servers and linked into
the VLE.
These problems mainly arose during the
process of capturing live events and would not
have been significantly reduced by capturing
only the recognised “difficult concepts”.
Indeed, this would place greater demands
on staff time (for editing and post-production
tasks) and would make it necessary to interrupt
classroom delivery in order to stop and start
capture when key concepts were being
addressed. Although they did not necessarily
use recordings in their entirety, evaluation
shows that the students appreciated the
availability of the whole lecture. The process
of allowing the students to select the key
concepts for review themselves does in itself
constitute an active learning activity and
provides them with additional control and
interaction with the material.
engineering education
30/11/2009 14:51:10
 DAVIS et al.

Student evaluation January exams (in February). The surveys

Students enrolled on the two level 1 modules
(Electronic Materials and Electronic Materials
and Devices) were surveyed one month into
the start of term, mid-way through term and in
the last lecture of term, and students enrolled
on Electronic Materials and Devices were
surveyed for the final time after the January
exams (in February). Students taking the level
2 module were surveyed in the second half
of the first term (in November) and after the
were anonymous and took place either during
lecture time or online. In addition, five level 1
students attended a student focus group (with
the aim of providing detailed qualitative data) in
May 2009.
Findings from the initial survey of 47 level
1 students (64% of a total cohort of 74),
prior to the delivery of captured content, are
summarised in Table 2 below:

Table 2. Summarised responses to initial survey of level 1 students

Question Yes (%) No (%) Selected comments

Have you ever previously accessed online recorded 2 98 ‘I was unaware they existed.’
seminars or lectures as part of your studies?

Do you think you are likely to watch the online lectures 98 2

this semester?

Do you think that having the lectures available online 13 87 ‘Can’t replace having own notes.’
could affect how often you attend lectures?

If you don’t think you will watch the online lectures please say why not: ‘I may find it difficult to access!’

If you think you will watch the online lectures, please tell us why you think they ‘For revision when studying.’
will be helpful. ‘I forget all the time and I am a
slow writer for notes, so these
online lectures will really help.’
‘It will allow information to be
recovered and it will allow
students to attempt to solve there
[sic] own problems.’
‘Because I can watch it when I
want.’

Responses to the same set of questions Table 3. Responses were collected from 49
received from 45 level 2 students (87% of a students (66% of a total cohort of 74).
total cohort of 52) showed broadly the same set
of results. For both level 1 and level 2 students It was clear from the surveys up to this point
it was observed that: that the majority of students had accessed
the captured lectures online and had found
• the majority of students had not accessed them useful. It is interesting to note that, due
recorded lectures online before but said to the fact that the VLE was the only means of
they were keen to do so accessing the lecture capture material, more
• students saw revision and reinforcement students used the VLE for this module than for
of learning as key benefits of accessing others on which they were studying. Lecture
captured materials captures are therefore an effective way of
• a minority indicated that they thought the increasing student traffic through the VLE.
availability of lecture recordings would affect
their attendance at lectures. This perception A third survey of level 1 students, conducted at
was slightly higher amongst level 2 students the end of term, shows that the usage of lecture
(22% of level 2 students against 13% of capture materials had continued grow and
level 1 students). provides an insight into the students’ motivation
for usage. Findings are summarised in Table 4.
The second evaluation of level 1 students Responses were collected from 28 students (38%
showed emerging trends of use and attitudes of a total cohort of 74). It is proposed that the lower
to the materials. Findings are summarised in response rate is due to a change in the way in
which the survey was conducted.

engineering education vol.4 issue 2 2009 9

EE_4_2_insides_complete.indb 9 30/11/2009 14:51:10

 DAVIS et al.

Table 3. Summarised responses to midpoint survey of level 1 students

Blank or
Question Yes (%) No (%) Selected comments
N/A (%)

Have you accessed the Virtual Learning 78 22

Environment pages for this module?

Have you accessed the online recorded 63 37

lectures?

Have you accessed the VLE pages for 51 49

other modules on your course?

If you have watched the online lectures
were they helpful?
Selected indicative comments presented
here.
63 2 35 ‘Very helpful. Do same for all
modules.’
‘I could re-cap sections I didn’t
understand in the actual lecture.’
‘It helped with my revision.’
‘Allows reinforcing of ideas
and anything not understood.’

If you have watched the online lectures 6 57 37

did you experience any technical
difficulties?

If you have watched the online lectures 0 63 37 ‘Not yet.’

has it affected your lecture attendance? ‘Will NOT affect my attendance,
Selected indicative comments presented allows me to recover lectures 2-3
here. additional times.’

Please say which formats for the online recorded lectures you are most likely Flash video with table of
to use (tick all that apply): contents: 61% of total
Windows Media Video via the
streaming server: 35% of total
Mp3 for download: 24% of total
Mv4 portable video for download:
33% of total

If you have not watched the online lectures please tell us why not: ‘Haven’t felt the need!’
Selected indicative comments presented here. ‘I do not like to use computers in
my learning. I prefer books and
worked examples.’
‘Lack of time, but I should watch
them.’ (NB. Lack of time was
indicated in 50% of responses).

The results of this survey are supported by the The student focus group supported these
final surveys of level 1 and level 2 students conclusions:
carried out after the January exams. 50% of
the level 1 cohort and 62% of the level 2 cohort • the materials had been useful and popular,
responded to the survey. These surveys show especially for revision. One student said
that: they had been ‘a massive help […] when it
comes up to exams and you start to stress
• the majority of students had accessed it’s definitely a lot more useful to have that
lecture capture material online and be able to refer to it, rather than just
• almost all of those who had accessed the trying to recall it from memory. Even from
materials found them useful your notes, there’s some things you’re
• the most popular uses of the materials were going to miss’
for revision or to recap on difficult concepts • students understood how to use
• the availability of lecture captured material the materials and adapted them for
did not cause a significant change in lecture independent active learning. One student
attendance commented that ‘it lets you be more
• the resources were popular with a majority of independent. You don’t have to come and
students, with many saying that they would ask questions all the time’
like similar resources for other courses. • the materials reinforced rather than replaced

10 vol.4 issue 2 2009 engineering education

EE_4_2_insides_complete.indb 10 30/11/2009 14:51:10

 DAVIS et al.

Table 4. Summarised responses to end of term survey of level 1 students

Blank or
Question Yes (%) No (%)
N/A (%)

Have you accessed the online recorded lectures for this module? 86 14

If you have watched the online lectures were they helpful? 96 0 4

If you have watched the online lectures did you experience any technical 13 83 4
difficulties?

Has the availability of the online lectures changed how often you attend 0 100
lectures?

Do you intend to use the materials for revision during the examination 93 0 7
period?

Would you like to see online lectures made available for lectures next 89 0 11
semester?

How often do you normally attend lectures? All of the time: 86% Occasionally; 0%

Most of the time: 14% Never: 0%

If you have accessed the materials, what have you accessed
them for? (Tick all that apply)
Revision: 75% of total
To recap difficult concepts: 83% of total
Because I didn’t understand/follow the lecture
first time: 38% of total
To make additional notes: 38% of total
To catch up on a missed lecture: 18% of total
To help me with the examples that are set:
25% of total

How can we make the materials better?
Selected indicative comments presented here.
It isn’t possible (50% of responses expressed
this view).
Maybe including java applets in the website
that are related to some topics.
Do the same for every module.
More reliable recordings. Lecturer’s laptop has
crashed a few times and taken the recording
with it.

If you have any other comments, please tell us.
Selected indicative comments presented here.
Definitely a good idea. Would like to see for
other modules!
Online lectures are a very useful and helpful
resource - helps to make a difficult module
easier to deal with.
The lecturer encountered some technical
problems which made some lectures not
available online or not including audio for
a period of time in the recorded lecture.
Please prevent these problems in the future if
possible.

the face-to-face event. A student remarked Impact of lecture capture

that he asked a question during the lecture
and then listened again to the lecturer’s
response to remind himself of exactly what
had been said: ‘a lot of your actual use
of them is to sit and think “Right I can’t
remember this bit”, it’s not the sort of thing
where you think “Right I’ve got to sit here for
an hour and learn this” – I don’t think you
could teach yourself from it.’
Lecture capture has the potential to alter
the way in which face-to-face teaching is
delivered and received. It can free-up time
in teaching sessions, enabling a move from
didactic delivery to discussion of material.
Released from note taking, students have
greater opportunities to interact with lecturers
and materials and can recap information or
augment their notes at a later date. In this study

engineering education vol.4 issue 2 2009 11

EE_4_2_insides_complete.indb 11 30/11/2009 14:51:10

 DAVIS et al.

we have also observed that captured lectures
were used by students for active learning
activities, such as completing problems (or
inventing new problems), whilst using the
captures for guidance.
Despite reported concerns from some sections
of the academic community, this project
indicated no impact of the availability of
captured content on attendance at face-to-face
sessions, in particular this may be because the
inclusion of meaningful interactions and the
opportunity for questions and answers in face-
to-face sessions could not be reproduced only
by accessing captured materials.
a number of pre-determined formats that
have proved popular in this trial (including
embedded flash video with a table of
contents and mv4 video for viewing on
portable video players)
• automatically make content available to
students through the VLE.
This (so far) small-scale project within the
School of Electronic and Electrical Engineering
has required considerable financial and
technical support and has drawn on the
time of all involved, particularly the lecturer
and a member of the University’s Staff and
Departmental Development Unit.

Future of the project Whilst the project acknowledges concerns

and conclusions about the effects of lecture capture upon
Following the end of the trial there has been student learning, we think that student
sufficient enthusiasm amongst teaching staff feedback (which has highlighted how students
in the School to investigate more sustainable have used the captures to enhance the
and scalable approaches to producing lecture effectiveness of lectures and the independence
captures. The Faculty of Engineering is piloting of their learning) shows this particular project
the use of a commercial system (Echo360) in a positive light. In addition to the popularity
that will automate much of the process, of the resources, students have been shown to
removing many of the barriers to adoption for benefit directly from their availability, revisiting
participating staff. To support more widespread difficult concepts to aid comprehension and
adoption of this technology and meet the to support supplementary activities such as
student demand that is evidenced in the practice papers. We are therefore looking
surveys, the solution will: forward to using the captures in ways that
support and develop new ways of active
• install necessary equipment in well-used learning (which thereby enhance face-to-face
lecture rooms delivery) and to exploring the surrounding
• automatically capture prescheduled lectures pedagogies in order to exploit the full potential
(via video and audio) of the materials.
• automatically produce lecture captures to n

References
Asensio, M., Young, C., Little, R. and Cuttle, M. (2004) The click and go decision tool: towards
inclusive and accessible visual literacies, Networked Learning Conference 2004, 5-7 April 2004,
Lancaster, UK. Available from http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/past/nlc2004/
proceedings/individual_papers/asensio_et_al.htm [accessed 29 September 2009].
Balfour, J.A.D. (2006) Audio recordings of lectures as an e-learning resource, Built Environment
Education Annual Conference (BEECON 2006), 12-16 September 2006, London, UK. Available
from http://www.cebe.heacademy.ac.uk/news/events/beecon2006/pdf/P24_Jim_Balfour.pdf
[accessed 29 September 2009].
Beldarrain, Y. (2006), Distance education trends: integrating new technologies to foster student
interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27 (2),139-153.
Bennett, E. and Maniar, N. (2007), Are videoed lectures an effective teaching tool? Available
from http://stream.port.ac.uk/papers/Are%20videoed%20lectures%20an%20effective%20
teaching%20tool.pdf [accessed 29 September 2009].
Biggs, J.B. (2003), Teaching for quality learning at university. 2nd edition. Buckingham: Open
University Press/Society for Research into Higher Education.

12 vol.4 issue 2 2009 engineering education

EE_4_2_insides_complete.indb 12 30/11/2009 14:51:10

 DAVIS et al.

Deal, A. (2007) A teaching with technology white paper: lecture webcasting. Available from
http://www.cmu.edu/teaching/resources/PublicationsArchives/StudiesWhitepapers/
LectureWebcasting_Jan07.pdf [accessed 29 September 2009].
Echo360 Inc. Echo360. Available from http://www.echo360.com/index.asp [accessed 29 September
2009].
Lavelle, D. (2006), Delivery of e-lectures. Built Environment Education Conference (BEECON 2006),
12-16 September 2006, London, UK. Available from http://www.cebe.heacademy.ac.uk/news/
events/beecon2006/pdf/P4_Derek_Lavelle.pdf [accessed 29 September 2009].
Nortcliffe, A. and Middleton, A. (2008) A three year case study of using audio to blend the
engineer’s learning environment. Engineering Education: Journal of the Higher Education
Academy Engineering Subject Centre, 3 (2), 45-57.
Prensky, M. (2001) Digital natives, digital migrants Part 1. On the Horizon, 9 (5), 1-6.
Ralph, J., Head, N., Lightfoot, S. and Jubb, E. (2008), Pol-casting: the use of podcasting in the
teaching and learning of Politics and International Relations. Higher Education Academy Annual
Conference, 1-3 July 2008, Harrogate, UK. Available from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/
York/documents/events/conference/2008/Simon_Lightfoot.doc [accessed 29 September 2009].
Russell, P. and Mattick, K. (2005) Does streaming of a lecture result in empty seats? ALT-C 2005:
Exploring the frontiers of e-learning - borders, outposts and migration, 6-8 September 2005,
Manchester, UK.
Sher, W. and Gajendran, T. (2008), Evaluation of modes of electronic delivery of construction
management courses. AaeE Conference 2008, 7-11 December 2008, Yeppoon, Australia.
Available from http://www.events.rockhamptoninfo.com.au/upload/documents/aaee08_
submission_W2A1.pdf [accessed 29 September 2009].
TechSmith. Camtasia studio. Available from http://www.techsmith.com/camtasia.asp [accessed 29
September 2009].
Thornhill, S., Asensio, M. and Young, C. (2002) Video streaming: a guide for educational
development. Available from http://web.archive.org/web/20060821182004/www2.umist.ac.uk/
isd/lwt/clickgo/the_guide/Video_Streaming-The_Guide.pdf [accessed 29 September 2009].
UCL (2008) Information behaviour of the researcher of the future, a CIBER briefing paper.
Available from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/reppres/gg_final_
keynote_11012008.pdf [accessed 29 September 2009].
Williams, J. and Fardon, M. (2005) On demand internet transmitted lecture recordings: attempting
to enhance and support the lecture experience. ALT-C 2005: Exploring the frontiers of e-learning
- borders, outposts and migration, 6-8 September 2005, Manchester, UK.

Contact details
Simon Davis MSc, Learning Technologist, Staff and Departmental Development Unit,
University of Leeds, UK.
Tel: 0113 343 5598 Email: s.j.davis@adm.leeds.ac.uk

Anthea Connolly MA, PhD, Feedback and Assessment Officer, Faculty of Engineering,
University of Leeds, UK.

Edmund Linfield MA, PhD, Chair in Terahertz Electronics,

Director of the Institute of Microwaves and Photonics, University of Leeds, UK.

engineering education vol.4 issue 2 2009 13

EE_4_2_insides_complete.indb 13 30/11/2009 14:51:10