Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Enhancing Student-Centred Teaching in Higher Education pp 273–291Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

An Innovative Presentation Tool as an Alternative to Traditional Methods for Student Assessments

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 686 Accesses

Abstract

To understand if students have met desired learning outcomes, assessments are imposed to identify whether learning has occurred. Presentation assessments are popular within higher education, but traditional software tools may be too static for the new generation of students, whereas new programmes are able to make more captivating and engaging presentations. Therefore, the aim of this project was to compare students’ preferences between traditional and novel software during assessments. Anonymous questionnaires were completed to record student preferences, followed by more rigorous qualitative analysis via a focus group to facilitative further discussions. It was found that the novel software has the potential to be engaging and provide an alternative assessment tool that can be used in isolation or within traditional programmes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alexander, R. (2013). Improving oracy and classroom talk: Achievements and challenges. Primary First, pp. 22–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, S. J., Maton, K. A., & Kervin, L. K. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G. (2001). Assessment: A guide for lecturers (No. 3, LTSN Generic Centre Assessment Series). York: LTSN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, C., Davies, C., & Highton, M. (2006). Designing learning: From module outline to effective teaching. Oxon, UK: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cilliers, E. J. (2017). The challenge of teaching generation Z. International Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 188–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. In R. Dienstbier (Ed.), Perspectives on motivation (pp. 237–288). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26(3–4), 325–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll, M. P. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fallows, S., & Steven, C. (2000). Building employability skills into the higher education curriculum: A university-wide initiative. Education & Training, 42(2), 75–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, F. (2007). Conducting focus groups with children and young people: Strategies for success. Journal of Research in Nursing, 12(5), 473–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, S., & Hogan, D. (2005). Researching children’s experiences: Approaches and methods. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, G. H. (2003). Learning styles. In J. A. Provost & W. S. Anchors (Eds.), Using the MBTI instrument in colleges and universities (pp. 123–155). Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33, 14–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morley, L. (2001). Producing new workers: Quality, equality and employability in higher education. Quality in Higher Education, 7(2), 131–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Dickinson, W. B., Leech, N. L., & Zoran, A. G. (2009). A qualitative framework for collecting and analysing data in focus group research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(3), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, S. L., Kleine, K. L. M., Purcell, J., & Carter, G. R. (2005). Evaluating academic challenge beyond the NSSE. Innovative Higher Education, 30(2), 129–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. L. (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. Washington, DC: The National Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, D., Jones, G., & Peters, J. (2008). Preferred ‘learning styles’ in students studying sports-related programmes in higher education in the United Kingdom. Studies in Higher Education, 33(2), 155–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1998). Teaching for learning in higher education. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education (2nd ed.). Routledge Falmer: London.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reeve, J., & Tseng, C. M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 257–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romanelli, F., Bird, E., & Ryan, M. (2009). Learning styles: A review of theory, application, and best practices. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(1), 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shell, R. (1991). Personality and socialization correlates of vicarious emotional responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(3), 459–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shuell, T. J. (1986). Cognitive conceptions of learning. Review of Educational Research, 56, 411–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • UK Government. (2003). White paper on the future of higher education. Retrieved from: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20040117000548/dfes.gov.uk/highereducation/hestrategy/. Accessed 13 June 2018.

  • Vaughn, S., Shay, S., & Sinagubm, J. (1996). Focus group interviews in education and psychology. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, A. (1965). The concept of oracy. Educational Review, 17(4), 11–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wotapka, D. (2016). How to teach gen Z students—Prepare for the next generation arriving on campus. Retrieved from: https://www.aicpa.org/interestareas/accountingeducation/newsandpublications/how-to-teach-generation-z-students.html. Accessed 14 June 2018.

  • Živković, S. (2014). The importance of oral presentations for university students. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(19), 468–475.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Surrey, Guildford, UK

    Andrew T. Hulton & Kyle Gapper

Authors
  1. Andrew T. Hulton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kyle Gapper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew T. Hulton .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Higher Education, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK

    Karen Gravett

  2. Doctoral College, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK

    Nadya Yakovchuk

  3. Department of Higher Education, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK

    Ian M. Kinchin

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hulton, A.T., Gapper, K. (2020). An Innovative Presentation Tool as an Alternative to Traditional Methods for Student Assessments. In: Gravett, K., Yakovchuk, N., Kinchin, I. (eds) Enhancing Student-Centred Teaching in Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35396-4_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35396-4_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-35395-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-35396-4

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation