Small-Group Teaching: Should It Be Recorded?
- PMID: 37886281
- PMCID: PMC10597944
- DOI: 10.1007/s40670-023-01837-5
Small-Group Teaching: Should It Be Recorded?
Abstract
Background: Recording large-group lectures is commonplace in higher education, allowing students to access content asynchronously and remotely. With the move towards online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, recording of small-group teaching sessions has also become increasingly common; however, the educational value of this practice is unknown.
Methods: All medical students rotating through the Acute Medicine Department of a large teaching hospital were invited to enrol in the study. Consenting students were recorded for the second half of an online case-based learning (CBL) session. The recording was available for 6 months; viewing patterns were analysed. Students were sent a questionnaire after the session, asking them to reflect on the recorded and unrecorded halves of the session.
Findings: Thirty-three students underwent recording in 12 separate groups; 31 students (94%) completed the questionnaire. All 31 respondents (100%) described the session as "useful" or "very useful". Twenty-four respondents (77%) recommended continuing to record small-group sessions and 17 (55%) reported being "likely" or "very likely" to watch the recording. Six respondents (19%) reported a negative impact of being recorded. During 6 months of follow-up, no students returned to view the recording for more than 1 minute.
Conclusion: Despite positive feedback for the session and high student demand for ongoing recording, no students viewed the recording for any significant duration. One-fifth of students reported a negative impact of being recorded. The findings from this study do not support routine recording of small-group CBL sessions, even where demand for this may exist.
Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-023-01837-5.
Keywords: Case-based learning; Medical education; Recording; Small-group learning.
© The Author(s) 2023.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of InterestsNMPA declares current research grant from Kathleen Valles Charitable Trust and consultancy with Aeovian pharmaceuticals; previous research grants from Imperial College London Biomedical Research Centre, The Wellcome Trust, NIHR, King’s College London Biomedical Research Centre; and consultancy fees from Novartis & Vifor Pharma. The other authors have no competing interests to declare.
Figures


References
-
- Universities and Colleges Information Systems Association (UCISA). 2020 Survey of Technology Enhanced Learning for higher education in the UK [Internet]. UCISA; 2020 [cited 2023 May 15]. Available from: https://www.ucisa.ac.uk/Groups/Digital-Education-Group/TEL2020-report.
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources