Premium
Nice to watch? Students evaluate online lectures
Author(s) -
Sturman Nancy,
Mitchell Benjamin,
Mitchell Amy
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
the clinical teacher
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.354
H-Index - 26
eISSN - 1743-498X
pISSN - 1743-4971
DOI - 10.1111/tct.12629
Subject(s) - focus group , interactivity , relevance (law) , medical education , psychology , focus (optics) , mathematics education , computer science , medicine , multimedia , sociology , anthropology , political science , law , physics , optics
Summary Background Many clinical teachers who previously gave face‐to‐face lectures now record presentations for students to view asynchronously online. These teachers need to understand student expectations of online lectures ( OLL s), and their place in the overall ‘ecology’ of student learning resources, in order to ensure that students watch, and learn from, their lectures. Methods We conducted focus groups with a convenience sample of medical students undertaking their general practice placements, exploring student uses, evaluations and expectations of OLL s. Focus group discussions were recorded and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were initially reviewed independently after each focus group by two of the authors, and then discussed. Descriptive categories and emergent themes were arrived at by an iterative consensus, and subjected to member checking. Teachers need to understand student expectations of online lectures and their place in the overall ‘ecology’ of student learning resourcesResults Five focus groups were conducted with 36 students in total, and no new themes emerged after the third group. Students seem to attach importance to a number of factors within the categories of: (1) content, (2) organisation and structure, and (3) design and format. Discussion/conclusion The OLL s delivered by clinical teachers seem to be valued by students, and to have a distinctive role within their overall learning resources. We suggest that the latter be curated coherently by faculty members, and that OLL s meet student expectations of relevance, brevity, focus, alignment with assessment, logical and transparent structure, sparing use of interactivity and distractions, and tight alignment of their content. Our findings may not be intuitive to clinical teachers more accustomed to face‐to‐face lectures, and may assist them to evaluate their OLL s.