Pierre GorissenPhD
Cover of the dissertation: two stylised heads in profile and a laptop on a deep blue background with light blue rounded rectangles.

PhD research · Eindhoven School of Education, TU/e Promotieonderzoek · Eindhoven School of Education, TU/e

Facilitating the use of recorded lecturesAnalysing students’ interactions to understand their navigational needs

PhD research into the use of recorded lectures by students and how we can facilitate effective use.

Promotieonderzoek naar het gebruik van opgenomen colleges door studenten en hoe we effectief gebruik kunnen faciliteren.

  1. How do students use recorded lectures according to their self-report?
  2. What actual usage of the recorded lectures can we derive from the data on the system, and does that match with what students report?
  3. How can we facilitate the use of recorded lectures by students using expert tagging and tagging by the students themselves?
  1. Hoe gebruiken studenten opgenomen colleges volgens hun eigen rapportage?
  2. Welk daadwerkelijk gebruik van de opgenomen colleges kunnen we afleiden uit de gegevens op het systeem, en komt dat overeen met wat studenten rapporteren?
  3. Hoe kunnen we het gebruik van opgenomen colleges door studenten faciliteren met tagging door experts en door de studenten zelf?

Defended on 12 June 2013 at Eindhoven University of Technology.
Supervisors: prof.dr. W.M.G. Jochems and dr. J.M. van Bruggen.

Verdedigd op 12 juni 2013 aan de Technische Universiteit Eindhoven.
Promotor: prof.dr. W.M.G. Jochems; copromotor: dr. J.M. van Bruggen.

Read the summaryLees de samenvatting Browse the dissertationBlader door het proefschrift Public defenseOpenbare verdediging

This PhD research was financially supported by the STIP fund of Fontys Hogescholen and facilitated by the Eindhoven School of Education (Eindhoven University of Technology). Cover design: Vladimir Simonjan (vydesign.nl).

Dit promotieonderzoek is financieel ondersteund door het STIP-fonds van Fontys Hogescholen en gefaciliteerd door de Eindhoven School of Education (Technische Universiteit Eindhoven). Omslagontwerp: Vladimir Simonjan (vydesign.nl).

SummarySamenvatting

How do students use recorded lectures?Hoe gebruiken studenten opgenomen colleges?

Ever since the start of the information and communication technology (ICT) era, universities and educational institutions all over the world have strived to incorporate its use into their palette of instructional methods. The use of video, be it in the form of television broadcasts, DVDs or as video over the internet, has long been one of the important manifestations of the search for attractive learning materials that can be used independent of time and place.

The recording and broadcasting of lectures has been an important solution for distance education. But more and more, universities enhance parts of their courses aimed at on-campus students with online video components and lecture recordings. They do this to allow students to review lectures at their own pace and at a time and place of their choosing. With this increase in use, the main research question for this PhD research became increasingly more relevant:

How do students use recorded lectures and how can we facilitate effective use?

The research was conducted at two institutions in the higher education sector in the Netherlands, Fontys University of Applied Sciences and the Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e). There is previous research into this question, but studies show various shortcomings, such as lack of focus, meaning that the uses, technology and user groups were combined in a way that made it difficult to apply the results to our own situation. To establish some common ground, the dissertation starts with a description of a framework that more accurately determines the context of the research. The main question raised the three subsidiary questions listed at the top of this page.

The use of recorded lectures by students at the two institutions was studied using a survey and semi-structured interviews. Then the data collected by the Lecture Capture System was taken and processed into a dataset that allowed us to analyse the actual usage of the recorded lectures by the students. That data was then triangulated with the data from the survey and the semi-structured interviews.

We also looked at improving the navigational support of the use of recorded lectures by offering tags that could be used to directly access specific parts of the recorded lecture. We investigated both the use of expert tagging and of tags created by the students themselves.

More details about the main conclusions are available in the dissertation and were presented during the public defense.

Sinds het begin van het tijdperk van informatie- en communicatietechnologie (ICT) streven universiteiten en onderwijsinstellingen over de hele wereld ernaar ICT op te nemen in hun palet van onderwijsmethoden. Het gebruik van video, of dat nu televisie-uitzendingen, dvd’s of video via internet zijn, is al lang een van de belangrijke uitingen van de zoektocht naar aantrekkelijk leermateriaal dat tijd- en plaatsonafhankelijk gebruikt kan worden.

Het opnemen en uitzenden van colleges is een belangrijke oplossing geweest voor afstandsonderwijs. Maar steeds vaker verrijken universiteiten onderdelen van hun cursussen voor studenten op de campus met online videocomponenten en collegeopnames. Zo kunnen studenten colleges in hun eigen tempo, en op een zelfgekozen tijd en plaats, terugkijken. Met dit toenemende gebruik werd de hoofdvraag van dit promotieonderzoek steeds relevanter:

Hoe gebruiken studenten opgenomen colleges en hoe kunnen we effectief gebruik faciliteren?

Het onderzoek vond plaats bij twee instellingen in het Nederlandse hoger onderwijs: Fontys Hogescholen en de Technische Universiteit Eindhoven (TU/e). Er is eerder onderzoek naar deze vraag gedaan, maar die studies hebben diverse tekortkomingen, zoals een gebrek aan focus: toepassingen, technologie en gebruikersgroepen werden zo gecombineerd dat de resultaten moeilijk toe te passen zijn op onze eigen situatie. Om een gemeenschappelijke basis te leggen begint het proefschrift met een beschrijving van een raamwerk dat de context van het onderzoek nauwkeuriger afbakent. De hoofdvraag leidde tot de drie deelvragen die bovenaan deze pagina staan.

Het gebruik van opgenomen colleges door studenten van de twee instellingen is onderzocht met een enquête en semigestructureerde interviews. Daarna zijn de gegevens uit het Lecture Capture System verwerkt tot een dataset waarmee we het daadwerkelijke gebruik van de opgenomen colleges konden analyseren. Die gegevens zijn vervolgens getrianguleerd met de gegevens uit de enquête en de interviews.

Ook hebben we gekeken naar het verbeteren van de navigatieondersteuning bij het gebruik van opgenomen colleges, door tags aan te bieden waarmee direct naar specifieke delen van een opgenomen college gesprongen kan worden. We onderzochten zowel tagging door experts als tags die studenten zelf maakten.

Meer details over de belangrijkste conclusies staan in het proefschrift en zijn gepresenteerd tijdens de openbare verdediging.

Main findingsBelangrijkste bevindingen

What students say and do

  • Students mostly watch recorded lectures at home
  • No major technical problems
  • Students would like all lectures to be recorded
  • The quality of a lecture does not determine how often it is watched
  • Students prefer a live lecture
  • Usage differs between TU/e and Fontys
  • Students overestimate their own use
  • Exam dates determine use more than expected

Tagging

  • Students watch for a shorter time when tags are available
  • Use of tags increases as the exam approaches
  • Students who use tags score better on the exam
  • Students’ own tags are not bad, but they are not all the same and differ from the experts’ tags

Conclusions

  • Good usage reports are lacking
  • Questionnaires and server data need to be combined; students must log in for this
  • Delimiting the context of the research is very important
  • Tagging is a meaningful addition

Wat studenten zeggen en doen

  • Studenten kijken meestal thuis
  • Geen grote technische problemen
  • Studenten willen graag dat alle colleges worden opgenomen
  • De kwaliteit van een college is niet bepalend voor de kijkcijfers
  • Studenten hebben liever een live college
  • Het gebruik verschilt tussen TU/e en Fontys
  • Studenten overschatten hun eigen gebruik
  • Tentamendata zijn bepalender dan gedacht

Tagging

  • Studenten kijken korter als er tags zijn
  • Het gebruik van tags neemt toe naarmate het tentamen nadert
  • Studenten die tags gebruiken scoren beter op het tentamen
  • Door studenten gemaakte tags zijn niet slecht, maar ze zijn niet allemaal hetzelfde en wijken af van die van experts

Conclusies

  • Er is een gebrek aan goede rapportages
  • Vragenlijsten en serverdata moeten worden gecombineerd; inloggen door studenten is daarvoor noodzakelijk
  • Het afbakenen van de context van het onderzoek is heel belangrijk
  • Tagging is een zinvolle toevoeging

Source: the presentation at the public defense (see slides). The dissertation and articles give the full results.

Bron: de presentatie bij de openbare verdediging (zie de dia’s). Het proefschrift en de artikelen bevatten de volledige resultaten.

DissertationProefschrift

Browse the dissertationBlader door het proefschrift

The complete dissertation (in English, 203 pages) can be read here. Choose a chapter to jump straight to it, or download the PDF.

Het volledige proefschrift (in het Engels, 203 pagina’s) is hier te lezen. Kies een hoofdstuk om er direct naartoe te gaan, of download de PDF.

PDF · 203 pages · 3.8 MBpagina’s · 3,8 MB
Page of 203 PDF
Portrait of Pierre Gorissen, smiling, in a grey jacket and green shirt.

Contact

Bio

Pierre Gorissen

Pierre Gorissen is associate lector (associate professor) of Learning with ICT at the iXperium Centre of Expertise Learning with ICT at HAN University of Applied Sciences in Nijmegen.

His work focuses on digital literacy and AI in education, learning analytics, open learning materials, learning technology standards and personalised learning. Since 2023 he has also led the scientific focus area on teacher education and professional development at the National Education Lab AI (NOLAI).

After completing his master’s degree in Business Informatics, he completed a master’s degree in Business Economics and a certification as a fully qualified teacher at Tilburg University in 1994. He started his PhD project at the beginning of 2009 at the Eindhoven School of Education, facilitated by the Fontys STIP professionalization project, and successfully completed it in 2013.

Pierre Gorissen is associate lector Leren met ict bij het iXperium Centre of Expertise Leren met ict van de HAN University of Applied Sciences in Nijmegen.

Hij richt zich op digitale geletterdheid en AI in het onderwijs, learning analytics, open leermaterialen, leertechnologiestandaarden en gepersonaliseerd leren met ict. Sinds 2023 is hij ook lead van het wetenschappelijk focusgebied Opleiden en professionaliseren van leraren bij het Nationaal Onderwijslab AI (NOLAI).

Na zijn master Bedrijfskundige Informatica rondde hij in 1994 aan de Universiteit van Tilburg een master Bedrijfseconomie en een lesbevoegdheid af. Hij startte zijn promotietraject begin 2009 bij de Eindhoven School of Education, gefaciliteerd door het Fontys-professionaliseringsproject STIP, en rondde dat in 2013 met succes af.

Career (selection)Loopbaan (selectie)

  1. 2023 – now2023 – nu Lead scientific focus area Teacher education and professional developmentLead wetenschappelijk focusgebied Opleiden en professionaliseren van leraren National Education Lab AI (NOLAI)Nationaal Onderwijslab AI (NOLAI)
  2. 2020 – now2020 – nu Associate lector Learning with ICTAssociate lector Leren met ict iXperium Centre of Expertise Learning with ICT, HAN University of Applied Sciences
  3. 2015 – 2020 Senior researcherSenior onderzoeker iXperium, HAN
  4. 2010 – 2018 Secretary and chair, ICT divisionSecretaris en voorzitter, divisie ICT Netherlands Educational Research Association (VOR)Vereniging voor Onderwijsresearch (VOR); also Innovation Advisor at SURFnet (2010 – 2011)daarnaast Innovatieadviseur bij SURFnet (2010 – 2011)
  5. 2002 – 2009 Project Manager Learning Technology SURF; represented SURF in the IMS Global Learning Consortium (now 1EdTech); member of the Dutch NEN standards committee for learning technology (2002 – 2010)SURF; vertegenwoordigde SURF in het IMS Global Learning Consortium (nu 1EdTech); lid van de Nederlandse NEN-normcommissie voor leertechnologie (2002 – 2010)
  6. 2000 – 2015 Senior consultant and researcher, Education and Research ServiceSenior consultant en onderzoeker, Dienst Onderwijs en Onderzoek Fontys University of Applied Sciences: projects such as the introduction of the virtual learning environment, interactive whiteboards, virtual worlds, videoconferencing, e-books and weblectures; part-time educational technologist at the Open University in the Netherlands (2003 – 2004)Fontys Hogescholen: projecten zoals de invoering van de elektronische leeromgeving, digitale schoolborden, virtuele werelden, videoconferencing, e-books en weblectures; deeltijds onderwijstechnoloog bij de Open Universiteit (2003 – 2004)
  7. 1994 – 2000 Lecturer in Business InformaticsDocent Bedrijfskundige Informatica Fontys, predecessor of Fontys International Business School in Venlo; Dutch and German studentsFontys, voorloper van de Fontys International Business School in Venlo; Nederlandse en Duitse studenten
PublicationsPublicaties

Articles, papers and presentationsArtikelen, papers en presentaties

The dissertation can be browsed on this site or downloaded as a PDF; it is also available from the TU/e Repository. Chapters 3 to 7 are published as individual articles, listed below.

Het proefschrift is op deze site door te bladeren of als PDF te downloaden; het staat ook in de TU/e-repository. Hoofdstuk 3 tot en met 7 zijn als losse artikelen gepubliceerd; die staan hieronder.

Propositions (stellingen)Stellingen

The propositions advanced in the dissertation are available only in Dutch:

De stellingen bij het proefschrift zijn alleen in het Nederlands beschikbaar:

Articles in peer-reviewed journalsArtikelen in peer-reviewed tijdschriften

  • Gorissen, P., Van Bruggen, J. M. & Jochems, W. (2012). Students and recorded lectures: Survey on current use and demands for higher education. Research in Learning Technology, 20, 297-311. DOI 10.3402/rlt.v20i0.17299
  • Gorissen, P., Van Bruggen, J. M. & Jochems, W. (2012). Usage reporting on recorded lectures. International Journal of Learning Technology, 7(1), 23-40. DOI 10.1504/IJLT.2012.046864
  • Gorissen, P., Van Bruggen, J. M. & Jochems, W. (2013). Methodological triangulation of the students’ use of recorded lectures. International Journal of Learning Technology, 8(1), 20-40. DOI 10.1504/IJLT.2013.052825
  • Gorissen, P., Van Bruggen, J. M. & Jochems, W. (2013). Does tagging improve the navigation of recorded lectures by students? British Journal of Educational Technology. DOI 10.1111/bjet.12121
  • Gorissen, P., Van Bruggen, J. M. & Jochems, W. (2013). Comparing student and expert based tagging of recorded lecture. Education and Information Technologies, 1-21. DOI 10.1007/s10639-013-9271-y

Conference proceedingsConferentiepublicaties (proceedings)

  • Gorissen, P., Van Bruggen, J. M. & Jochems, W. (2012). Analysing students’ use of recorded lectures through methodological triangulation. In: Uden, L., Rodríguez, E. S. C., De Paz Santana, J. F. & De La Prieta, F. (eds.) Workshop on Learning Technology for Education in Cloud (LTEC’12), Salamanca, Spain. Springer, pp. 145-156. DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-30859-8_14

Conference contributions (without proceedings)Conferentiebijdragen (zonder proceedings)

  • Gorissen, P. (2013). Weblectures hoe werkt dat? [Weblectures, how does that work?] Presentation during the Fontys Docent event [Teacher event], Eindhoven, the NetherlandsPresentatie tijdens het Fontys Docentenevent, Eindhoven
  • Gorissen, P. (2012). Weblectures in het Onderwijs [Weblectures in Education] Presentation for the Fontys School of Nursing, Eindhoven, the NetherlandsPresentatie voor Fontys Hogeschool Verpleegkunde, Eindhoven
  • Gorissen, P. (2012). Do you count what counts? Presentation during the Mediasite Usergroup EU Forum 2012, Amsterdam, the NetherlandsPresentatie tijdens het Mediasite Usergroup EU Forum 2012, Amsterdam
  • Gorissen, P. (2012). Tellen we wel wat Telt? [Do we count what counts?] Presentation during the annual meeting of the Fontys research group Educational functions of ICT, Echt, the NetherlandsPresentatie tijdens de jaarlijkse bijeenkomst van de Fontys-onderzoeksgroep Onderwijskundige functies van ICT, Echt
  • Gorissen, Pierre, Van Bruggen, J.M. & Jochems W. (2011). Analysing the use of recorded lectures by students. Short paper presented during the ALT-C conference in Leeds, UKKorte paper gepresenteerd op de ALT-C-conferentie in Leeds (Verenigd Koninkrijk)
  • Gorissen, P., Van Bruggen, J. M. & Jochems, W. (2011). Using methodological triangulation to analyse students’ use of recorded lectures. Paper presented at the Joint Meeting of Research Schools, Hamburg, GermanyPaper gepresenteerd op de Joint Meeting of Research Schools, Hamburg (Duitsland)
  • Gorissen, P., Van Bruggen, J. M. & Jochems, W. (2011). Het gebruik van opnames van colleges door studenten [The use of recorded lectures by students] Paper presented at the ORD 2011, Maastricht, the NetherlandsPaper gepresenteerd op de Onderwijs Research Dagen (ORD) 2011, Maastricht
  • Gorissen, P. (2011). Do you know what your students do with your lecture recordings? Presentation at the Unleash 2011 conference, Madison, WisconsinPresentatie op de Unleash 2011-conferentie, Madison, Wisconsin (VS)
  • Gorissen, P. (2010). Meten is weten: wat doen studenten met opnames van colleges? [To measure is to know: what do students do with recordings of lectures?] Presentation at the Educational Days, Utrecht, the NetherlandsPresentatie op de Onderwijsdagen, Utrecht
  • Gorissen, P., Van Bruggen, J. M. & Jochems, W. (2010). Facilitating the use of recorded lectures with social tagging. Poster presentation at the ORD 2010, Enschede, the NetherlandsPosterpresentatie op de ORD 2010, Enschede
  • Gorissen, P., Van Bruggen, J. M. & Jochems, W. (2010). Facilitating the use of recorded lectures with social tagging. Poster presentation at the Joint Meeting of Research Schools, Helsinki, FinlandPosterpresentatie op de Joint Meeting of Research Schools, Helsinki (Finland)
  • Gorissen, P. (2009). Faciliteren van het gebruik van recorded lectures met behulp van social tagging [Facilitating the use of recorded lectures with social tagging] Presentation at the Platform Education and ICT, Eindhoven, the NetherlandsPresentatie op het Platform Onderwijs en ICT, Eindhoven
Public defenseOpenbare verdediging

The defenseDe verdediging

Wednesday 12 June 2013, 16:00 · Room 4, Auditorium, Eindhoven University of TechnologyWoensdag 12 juni 2013, 16:00 · Zaal 4, Auditorium, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven

Members of the Doctorate CommitteeLeden van de promotiecommissie

  • prof.dr. D. Beijaard Eindhoven School of Education, chairEindhoven School of Education, voorzitter
  • prof.dr. W.M.G. Jochems Eindhoven School of Education / Open University, supervisorEindhoven School of Education / Open Universiteit, promotor
  • dr. J.M. van Bruggen Open University, co-supervisorOpen Universiteit, copromotor
  • prof.dr. P.B. Sloep Open UniversityOpen Universiteit
  • prof.dr. M. Valcke Gent UniversityUniversiteit Gent
  • prof.dr.ir. W.M.P. van der Aalst TU/e
  • prof.dr. T.C.M. Bergen TU/e
  • prof.dr. P.M.E. De Bra TU/e
The invitation to the defense: a tall card in the blue colours of the dissertation cover.
The invitation (click to enlarge)De uitnodiging (klik om te vergroten)
How does a public defense work in the Netherlands?Hoe verloopt een promotie in Nederland?

In the Netherlands, every doctoral dissertation has to be approved by a supervisor (a full university professor who has the role of principal adviser, ‘promotor’) and usually one or more co-supervisors before it is submitted for review by a core committee of three or four experts (usually other university professors). Only after they approve the submitted dissertation, the dissertation is printed and distributed and a date for a public defense is set.

During the public defense, the doctoral candidate gives a short, 10 minute summary of the research (‘lekenpraatje’) for the people present. After that presentation, the members of the Doctorate Committee in turn oppose by asking the candidate questions. The doctoral candidate is often accompanied by seconds (‘paranimfen’) seated behind the doctoral candidate.

The session lasts exactly the assigned time slot (1 hour in this case) after which the defense is stopped by the beadle (‘pedel’) who interrupts ongoing questioning by entering the room and announcing in Latin that the time is past (‘Hora est’). At this stage the candidate is allowed to stop the defense even mid-sentence, although in practice a short one sentence wrap up is usually given. If one of the members of the Doctorate Committee is still phrasing a question, no answer will be given.

The chairman of the Doctorate Committee asks the doctoral candidate to take a seat in the hall and announces that the Committee will retire to deliberate further, whereupon the Committee leaves the hall. After their deliberations are complete the Committee, preceded by the beadle, returns to the hall. The doctoral degree is awarded at the end of the session. Failure during this session is in theory possible but in practice this never happens.

In the Netherlands, although there is no such thing as a PhD degree, the official title doctor (dr.) is informally often replaced by the internationally more common acronym PhD.

In Nederland moet elk proefschrift worden goedgekeurd door een promotor (een gewoon hoogleraar die de rol van hoofdbegeleider heeft) en meestal één of meer copromotoren, voordat het ter beoordeling wordt voorgelegd aan een kleine commissie van drie of vier deskundigen (meestal andere hoogleraren). Pas nadat zij het ingediende proefschrift goedkeuren, wordt het gedrukt en verspreid en wordt een datum voor de openbare verdediging vastgesteld.

Tijdens de verdediging geeft de promovendus een korte samenvatting van tien minuten van het onderzoek (het ‘lekenpraatje’) voor de aanwezigen. Daarna stellen de leden van de promotiecommissie om beurten vragen aan de promovendus (‘opponeren’). De promovendus wordt vaak bijgestaan door paranimfen, die achter hem of haar zitten.

De zitting duurt precies de afgesproken tijd (in dit geval een uur). Daarna wordt de verdediging beëindigd door de pedel, die tijdens het opponeren de zaal binnenkomt en in het Latijn aankondigt dat de tijd om is (‘Hora est’). De promovendus mag dan stoppen, zelfs midden in een zin, hoewel meestal nog een korte afsluitende zin wordt gegeven. Als een commissielid nog bezig is een vraag te formuleren, wordt die niet meer beantwoord.

De voorzitter van de commissie vraagt de promovendus plaats te nemen in de zaal en kondigt aan dat de commissie zich terugtrekt om te beraadslagen, waarna de commissie de zaal verlaat. Na de beraadslaging keert de commissie, voorafgegaan door de pedel, terug in de zaal. Aan het einde van de zitting wordt de doctorsgraad verleend. Dat het mis gaat tijdens deze zitting is in theorie mogelijk, maar komt in de praktijk niet voor.

In Nederland bestaat formeel geen PhD-graad; de officiële titel is doctor (dr.), maar die wordt informeel vaak vervangen door de internationaal gangbaardere afkorting PhD.

Video summary of the defenseVideosamenvatting van de verdediging

Created by Vic Peeters.

Gemaakt door Vic Peeters.

The video is only loaded from YouTube (privacy-enhanced mode) after you press play.

De video wordt pas van YouTube geladen (privacyvriendelijke modus) nadat je op afspelen drukt.

The presentation used during the defense (in Dutch)De presentatie bij de verdediging

15 slides. Browse with the arrows or the arrow keys, or swipe on a phone or tablet. The PDF can also be downloaded.

15 dia’s, in het Nederlands. Blader met de pijlen of de pijltjestoetsen, of veeg op een telefoon of tablet. De PDF kan ook worden gedownload.

PDF · 15 slides · 0.7 MBdia’s · 0,7 MB
Slide of 15
PDF

PicturesFoto’s

The room during the technical try-out a week before:

De zaal tijdens de technische try-out een week eerder:

Lectern with a laptop and a screen showing the title slide. Lecture hall with the title slide on the projection screen and the committee table in front. Rows of red, grey and wooden seats in the empty auditorium. The auditorium seen from the side, with whiteboards and the committee tables.

And during and after the defense:

En tijdens en na de verdediging:

The defense seen from the audience, with the committee in gowns at the front. Group photo of eleven people in academic dress and suits, some holding copies of the dissertation, in front of a red wall.
ReferencesReferenties

Reference listLiteratuurlijst

Full list of the references included in the dissertation (143 sources).

Volledige lijst van de referenties in het proefschrift (143 bronnen).

  • Abelson, H. (2008). The creation of OpenCourseWare at MIT. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(2), 164–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-007-9060-8
  • Abowd, G. D., Atkeson, C. G., Brotherton, J., Enqvist, T., Gulley, P., & LeMon, J. (1998). Investigating the capture, integration and access problem of ubiquitous computing in an educational setting. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 440–447). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/274644.274704
  • Abowd, G. D., Atkeson, C. G., Feinstein, A., Hmelo, C., Kooper, R., Long, S., Sawhney, N., & Tani, M. (1996). Teaching and learning as multimedia authoring: The Classroom 2000 project. In Proceedings of the fourth ACM international conference on multimedia (pp. 187–198). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/244130.244191
  • Abowd, G. D., Brotherton, J., & Bhalodia, J. (1998). Classroom 2000: A system for capturing and accessing multimedia classroom experiences. In CHI 98 conference summary on human factors in computing systems (pp. 20–21). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/286498.286509
  • Advanced Distributed Learning. (2004). SCORM run-time environment version 1.3. Retrieved September 16, 2010, from http://www.adlnet.org/
  • Allers, J. (2007). Triple L evaluatie – Pilot UvA [Triple L evaluation – UvA pilot]. UvA.
  • Anderson, T. H., & Armbruster, B. B. (1986). The value of taking notes during lectures. University of Illinois.
  • ANP. (2012, August 12). Piratenpartij wil colleges op internet hebben [Pirate Party wants lectures on the Internet]. Volkskrant. http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/5288/Onderwijs/article/detail/3299998/2012/08/12/Piratenpartij-wil-colleges-op-internet-hebben.dhtml
  • Arnold, H. J., & Feldman, D. C. (1981). Social desirability response bias in self-report choice situations. Academy of Management Journal, 24(2), 377–385. https://doi.org/10.2307/255848
  • Arons, B. (1997). SpeechSkimmer: A system for interactively skimming recorded speech. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 4(1), 3–38. https://doi.org/10.1145/244754.244758
  • Badger, R., White, G., Sutherland, P., & Haggis, T. (2001). Note perfect: An investigation of how students view taking notes in lectures. System, 29(3), 405–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0346-251x(01)00028-8
  • Baecker, R. M., Moore, G., & Zijdemans, A. (2003). Reinventing the lecture: Webcasting made interactive [Paper presentation]. HCI International 2003, Crete, Greece.
  • Baker, R. S. J. d. (2010). Data mining. In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGaw (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 112–118). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.01318-X
  • Bateman, S., Brooks, C., McCalla, G., & Brusilovsky, P. (2007). Applying collaborative tagging to e-learning [Paper presentation]. Workshop on Tagging and Metadata for Social Information Organization at the 16th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW2007), Banff, Canada.
  • Behr, A. L. (1988). Exploring the lecture method: An empirical study. Studies in Higher Education, 13(2), 189–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075078812331377866
  • Belanger, Y. (2005). Duke University iPod first year experience final evaluation report. Duke University, Center for Instructional Technology.
  • Bell, T., Cockburn, A., McKenzie, B., & Vargo, J. (2001). Digital lectures: If you make them, will students use them? Constraints on effective delivery of flexible learning systems. Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning, 3(2).
  • Ben Youssef, A., & Dahmani, M. (2010). The impact of ICT on student performance in higher education: Direct effects, indirect effects and organisational change. RUSC: Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 5(1). https://rusc.uoc.edu/rusc/en/index.php/rusc/article/view/v5n1-ben-youssef-dahmani.html
  • Bergmann, J., Overmyer, J., & Willie, B. (2011, June 21). The flipped class: Myths vs. reality. The Daily Riff. http://www.thedailyriff.com/articles/the-flipped-class-conversation-689.php
  • Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.
  • Bligh, D. (1998). What is the use of lectures? (5th ed.). Intellect Books.
  • Bregman, R. (2013, January 2). Hoogleraar: Verplaats colleges naar het internet [Professor: Move lectures to the internet]. Volkskrant. http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/5288/Onderwijs/article/detail/3371083/2013/01/02/Hoogleraar-verplaats-colleges-naar-het-internet.dhtml
  • Brotherton, J. A., & Abowd, G. D. (2004). Lessons learned from eClass: Assessing automated capture and access in the classroom. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 11(2), 121–155. https://doi.org/10.1145/1005361.1005362
  • Brown, F., & Brown, Y. (1994). Distance education around the world. In B. Willis (Ed.), Distance education: Strategies and tools (pp. 3–39). Educational Technology Publications.
  • Brown, G., & Bakhtar, M. (1988). Styles of lecturing: A study and its implications. Research Papers in Education, 3(2), 131–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267152880030204
  • Brown, G., & Manogue, M. (2001). Refreshing lecturing: A guide for lecturers. AMEE Medical Education Guide No 22. Medical Teacher, 23(3), 231–244.
  • Burby, J., Brown, A., & WAA Standards Committee. (2007). Web analytics definitions. Web Analytics Association.
  • Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016
  • Campbell, G. (2005). There’s something in the air: Podcasting in education. EDUCAUSE Review, 40(6), 33–44.
  • Campbell, J. P., & Oblinger, D. G. (2007). Academic analytics. EDUCAUSE.
  • Chan, A., Lee, M. J. W., & McLoughlin, C. (2006). Everyone’s learning with podcasting: A Charles Sturt University experience. In Who’s learning? Whose technology? Proceedings ascilite Sydney 2006 (pp. 111–120). ASCILITE. https://doi.org/10.65106/apubs.2006.2883
  • Chang, S. (2007). Academic perceptions of the use of Lectopia: A University of Melbourne example. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007 (pp. 135–144). ASCILITE. https://doi.org/10.65106/apubs.2007.2817
  • Chaudron, C., & Richards, J. C. (1986). The effect of discourse markers on the comprehension of lectures. Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/7.2.113
  • Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203029053
  • Collegerama. (2012). Collegerama. Retrieved August 28, 2012, from http://www.collegerama.nl/live/
  • Cormier, D., & Siemens, G. (2010). The open course: Through the open door—Open courses as research, learning, and engagement. EDUCAUSE Review, 45(4), 30–32.
  • Craig, J., Brittan-Powell, C., El-Haggan, A., Gregory, S., & Braha, H. (2009). Lecture capture systems – Are they worth it? [Paper presentation]. Mid-Atlantic Regional Conferences.
  • Day, J. (2008). Investigating learning with web lectures [Doctoral dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology]. SMARTech. https://hdl.handle.net/1853/22627
  • De Backer, G. (2012). PHP Dutch stemmer [Computer software]. Google Code. Retrieved December 10, 2012, from http://code.google.com/p/php-dutch-stemmer/
  • de Boer, J., Kommers, P. A. M., & de Brock, B. (2011). Using learning styles and viewing styles in streaming video. Computers & Education, 56(3), 727–735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.015
  • Deal, A. (2007). Lecture webcasting: A teaching with technology white paper. Carnegie Mellon University.
  • Dekker, P., & Allers, J. (2007). Overall evaluatieverslag Triple L pilots [Overall evaluation report Triple L pilots]. Triple L.
  • Delicious. (n.d.). Delicious. Retrieved January 21, 2013, from https://delicious.com/
  • Deming, W. E. (1944). On errors in surveys. American Sociological Review, 9(4), 359–369. https://doi.org/10.2307/2085979
  • Denzin, N. K. (1970). Strategies of multiple triangulation. In N. K. Denzin (Ed.), The research act in sociology: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (pp. 297–313). Butterworth.
  • Denzin, N. K. (2006). Sociological methods: A sourcebook (5th ed.). Transaction Publishers.
  • Echo360. (2012). Student usage reporting. In EchoSystem 5.1 documentation. Retrieved August 28, 2012, from http://confluence.echo360.com/display/51/Student+Usage+Reporting
  • Elias, T. (2011). Learning analytics: Definitions, processes and potential. Athabasca University.
  • Entwistle, N., Hanley, M., & Hounsell, D. (1979). Identifying distinctive approaches to studying. Higher Education, 8(4), 365–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01680525
  • Exley, K., & Dennick, R. (2004). Giving a lecture: From presenting to teaching. RoutledgeFalmer. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203465080
  • Fardon, M. (2003). Internet streaming of lectures: A matter of style [Paper presentation]. Educause in Australasia 2003, Adelaide, Australia.
  • Filius, R. (2008). De huiskamer als cursuslokaal, flexibel leren met weblectures [The living room as a classroom, flexible learning using weblectures]. Develop, 4, 30–41.
  • Filius, R., & Lam, I. (2009). Rapport evaluatie weblectures Universiteit Utrecht [Report evaluation weblectures Utrecht University]. Utrecht University.
  • Fontys. (2013). About Fontys. http://fontys.edu/about.fontys/default.aspx
  • Frederick, P. J. (1986). The lively lecture: 8 variations. College Teaching, 34(2), 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.1986.9926766
  • Geerligs, J., Mittendorff, K., & Nieuwenhuis, L. (2004). Succesvol innoveren van (beroeps)onderwijs [Successful innovation of (vocational) education]. Stoas.
  • Gibson, J. J. (1979). The theory of affordances. In The ecological approach to visual perception (pp. 127–143). Houghton Mifflin.
  • Golder, S. A., & Huberman, B. A. (2005). The structure of collaborative tagging systems (arXiv:cs/0508082). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.cs/0508082
  • Golder, S. A., & Huberman, B. A. (2006). Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems. Journal of Information Science, 32(2), 198–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551506062337
  • Gorissen, P., van Bruggen, J. M., & Jochems, W. (2012a). Analysing students’ use of recorded lectures through methodological triangulation. In L. Uden, E. S. C. Rodríguez, J. F. De Paz Santana, & F. De La Prieta (Eds.), Workshop on learning technology for education in cloud (LTEC’12) (pp. 145–156). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30859-8_14
  • Gorissen, P., van Bruggen, J. M., & Jochems, W. (2012b). Students and recorded lectures: Survey on current use and demands for higher education. Research in Learning Technology, 20(3), 297–311. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v20i0.17299
  • Gorissen, P., van Bruggen, J. M., & Jochems, W. (2012c). Usage reporting on recorded lectures using educational data mining. International Journal of Learning Technology, 7(1), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLT.2012.046864
  • Gorissen, P., van Bruggen, J. M., & Jochems, W. (2013). Methodological triangulation of the students’ use of recorded lectures. International Journal of Learning Technology, 8(1), 20–40. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLT.2013.052825
  • Gosper, M., Green, D., McNeill, M., Phillips, R., Preston, G., & Woo, K. (2008). The impact of web-based lecture technologies on current and future practices in learning and teaching. Australian Learning & Teaching Council.
  • Gruber, T. R. (1993). A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition, 5(2), 199–220. https://doi.org/10.1006/knac.1993.1008
  • Guy, M., & Tonkin, E. (2006). Folksonomies: Tidying up tags? D-Lib Magazine, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1045/january2006-guy
  • Hall, D. (2009). MyMedia student evaluation 2009. University of Adelaide, Centre for Learning and Professional Development.
  • Harley, D., Henke, J., Lawrence, S., McMartin, F., Maher, M., Gawlik, M., & Muller, P. (2003). Costs, culture, and complexity: An analysis of technology enhancements in a large lecture course at UC Berkeley. University of California.
  • Hermann, C., Hürst, W., & Welte, M. (2006). The eLecture-Portal: An advanced archive for lecture recordings [Paper presentation]. Informatics Education Europe.
  • Hoven, T. (2013, January 4). Online studeren? Dat is pas ouderwets [Study online? Now that is old-fashioned]. Volkskrant. http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/4884/Bezuinigingen-in-het-hoger-onderwijs/article/detail/3372116/2013/01/04/Online-studeren-Dat-is-pas-ouderwets.dhtml
  • Hürst, W. (2003). Indexing, searching, and skimming of multimedia documents containing recorded lectures and live presentations. In Proceedings of the eleventh ACM international conference on multimedia. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/957102.957107
  • Hürst, W., Lauer, T., Bürfent, C., & Götz, G. (2005). Forward and backward speech skimming with the Elastic Audio Slider. In People and computers XIX—The bigger picture (pp. 455–471). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-249-7_29
  • Hürst, W., Lauer, T., & Götz, G. (2005). Audio-visual data skimming for e-learning applications [Paper presentation]. 19th British HCI Group Annual Conference (HCI 2005), Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
  • Hurtado, S., Eagan, K., Pryor, J. H., Whang, H., & Tran, S. (2012). Undergraduate teaching faculty: The 2010–2011 HERI faculty survey. Higher Education Research Institute, University of California, Los Angeles.
  • Isaacs, G. (1994). Lecturing practices and note-taking purposes. Studies in Higher Education, 19(2), 203–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079412331382047
  • Janssen, M., & Dekker, P. (2007). Evaluatierapport experiment webcolleges 2006/2007 [Evaluation report weblecture experiment 2006/2007]. Hogeschool van Amsterdam.
  • Jones, S. E. (2007). Reflections on the lecture: Outmoded medium or instrument of inspiration? Journal of Further and Higher Education, 31(4), 397–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098770701656816
  • Kamabathula, V. K., & Iyer, S. (2011). Automated tagging to enable fine-grained browsing of lecture videos. In 2011 IEEE international conference on technology for education (pp. 96–102). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/T4E.2011.23
  • Kiewra, K. A. (1989). A review of note-taking: The encoding-storage paradigm and beyond. Educational Psychology Review, 1(2), 147–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01326640
  • Kishi, C., & Traphagan, T. (2007). Lecture webcasting at the University of Texas at Austin [Paper presentation]. 23rd Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning, Madison, WI, United States.
  • Kopcha, T. J., & Sullivan, H. (2007). Self-presentation bias in surveys of teachers’ educational technology practices. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(6), 627–646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9011-8
  • Koyun, H. (2007). Logging model for Windows Media Services. Microsoft. Retrieved September 1, 2009, from http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/howto/articles/loggingmodel.aspx
  • Kraaij, W., & Pohlmann, R. (1994). Porter’s stemming algorithm for Dutch. In Informatiewetenschap 1994 (pp. 167–180).
  • Lampi, F., Kopf, S., Benz, M., & Effelsberg, W. (2007). An automatic cameraman in a lecture recording system. In Proceedings of the international workshop on educational multimedia and multimedia education (pp. 11–18). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1290144.1290148
  • Lane, B. (2008). Uni students say no to podcasts. The Australian IT. http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,24323671-15306,00.html
  • Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational technology (2nd ed.). RoutledgeFalmer. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203160329
  • Laurillard, D. (2005). Styles and approaches in problem-solving. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning: Implications for teaching and studying in higher education (pp. 126–144). University of Edinburgh, Centre for Teaching, Learning and Assessment.
  • Leoni, K., & Lichti, S. (2009). Lecture capture in higher education. Northwestern University.
  • Liu, Q., Rui, Y., Gupta, A., & Cadiz, J. J. (2001). Automating camera management for lecture room environments. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 442–449). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/365024.365310
  • Manning, C. D., & Schütze, H. (1999). Foundations of statistical natural language processing. MIT Press.
  • Markines, B., Cattuto, C., Menczer, F., Benz, D., Hotho, A., & Stumme, G. (2009). Evaluating similarity measures for emergent semantics of social tagging. In Proceedings of the 18th international conference on World Wide Web (pp. 641–650). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1526709.1526796
  • Marlow, C., Naaman, M., Boyd, D., & Davis, M. (2006). Position paper, tagging, taxonomy, Flickr, article, ToRead [Paper presentation]. Collaborative Web Tagging Workshop at WWW2006, Edinburgh, Scotland.
  • Mathes, A. (2004). Folksonomies—Cooperative classification and communication through shared metadata [Unpublished manuscript]. Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.
  • McAuley, A., Stewart, B., Siemens, G., & Cormier, D. (2010). The MOOC model for digital practice. SSHRC Knowledge Synthesis Grant on the Digital Economy.
  • Mertens, R., Schneider, H., Müller, O., & Vornberger, O. (2004). Hypermedia navigation concepts for lecture recordings. In Proceedings of E-Learn 2004: World conference on e-learning in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education (pp. 2840–2847). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
  • O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Communications & Strategies, (65), 17–37.
  • Opencast project. (2010). Roles involved in coursecasting. Retrieved February 16, 2010, from http://www.opencastproject.org/wiki/roles_involved_coursecasting
  • Phillips, R. (2005). Challenging the primacy of lectures: The dissonance between theory and practice in university teaching. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 2(1), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.2.1.2
  • Phillips, R., Preston, G., Roberts, P., Cumming-Potvin, W., Herrington, J., Maor, D., & Gosper, M. (2010). Using academic analytic tools to investigate studying behaviours in technology-supported learning environments. In Curriculum, technology & transformation for an unknown future. Proceedings ascilite Sydney 2010 (pp. 761–771). ASCILITE. https://doi.org/10.14742/apubs.2010.2008
  • Porter, M. F. (1997). An algorithm for suffix stripping. In K. Sparck Jones & P. Willett (Eds.), Readings in information retrieval (pp. 313–316). Morgan Kaufmann.
  • Porter, M. F. (2001). Snowball: A language for stemming algorithms. Retrieved December 10, 2012, from http://snowball.tartarus.org/texts/introduction.html
  • Preston, G., Phillips, R., Gosper, M., McNeill, M., Woo, K., & Green, D. (2010). Web-based lecture technologies: Highlighting the changing nature of teaching and learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(6), 717–728. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1038
  • Read, B. (2005). Lectures on the go. The Chronicle of Higher Education. http://chronicle.com/article/Lectures-on-the-Go/7794
  • Romero, C., Ventura, S., Pechenizkiy, M., & Baker, R. S. J. d. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of educational data mining. Chapman & Hall/CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b10274
  • Russell, K., Fass, H., & Bloothooft, G. (2008). Rapportage project Weblectures [Report project weblectures]. Utrecht University.
  • Russell, K., Filius, R., & te Pas, S. (2007). Verslag Grassroots project: Opnemen en uitzenden van hoorcolleges voor studenten met een handicap [Report Grassroots project: Recording and broadcasting of lectures for students with disabilities]. Utrecht University.
  • Sanchez, D. (2008). Class capture at the University of New Mexico. University of New Mexico.
  • Schok, M. (2007). Videocolleges op de TU/e [Recorded lectures at the TU/e] [Conference presentation]. SURFnet Expertiseseminar: Streaming video in de onderwijspraktijk [SURFnet expert seminar: Streaming video in educational practice], Utrecht, The Netherlands. http://www.surfnet.nl/nl/bijeenkomsten/archief/Pages/bijeenkomst_188694.aspx
  • Sheard, J. (2011). Basics of statistical analysis of interactions data from web-based learning environments. In C. Romero, S. Ventura, M. Pechenizkiy, & R. S. J. d. Baker (Eds.), Handbook of educational data mining (pp. 27–42). Chapman & Hall/CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b10274-5
  • Sheard, J., Ceddia, J., Hurst, J., & Tuovinen, J. (2003a). Determining website usage time from interactions: Data preparation and analysis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 32(1), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.2190/vlx5-twpq-h9px-r48m
  • Sheard, J., Ceddia, J., Hurst, J., & Tuovinen, J. (2003b). Inferring student learning behaviour from website interactions: A usage analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 8(3), 245–266. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1026360026073
  • Sheely, S. (2006). Persistent technologies: Why can’t we stop lecturing online? In Who’s learning? Whose technology? Proceedings ascilite Sydney 2006 (pp. 769–774). ASCILITE. https://doi.org/10.65106/apubs.2006.2967
  • Sieber, S. D. (1973). The integration of fieldwork and survey methods. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1335–1359. https://doi.org/10.1086/225467
  • Siemens, G. (2010, August 25). What are learning analytics? Elearnspace. Retrieved December 10, 2011, from http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2010/08/25/what-are-learning-analytics/
  • Smith, C., & Whiteley, H. (2002). Learners, learning styles and learning media [Paper presentation]. The New Educational Benefits of ICT in Higher Education, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Smith, H. W. (1975). Strategies of social research: The methodological imagination. Prentice-Hall.
  • Sonic Foundry. (2010). Mediasite. Retrieved November 15, 2010, from http://www.sonicfoundry.com/mediasite/
  • Srinivas, G., Tandon, N., & Varma, V. (2010). A weighted tag similarity measure based on a collaborative weight model. In Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on search and mining user-generated contents (pp. 79–86). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1871985.1871999
  • Traphagan, T. (2005a). Class lecture webcasting, fall 2004 and spring 2005: A case study. University of Texas at Austin.
  • Traphagan, T. (2005b). Class lecture webcasting, fall 2004 and spring 2005: A case study – Program evaluation report. University of Texas at Austin.
  • Traphagan, T. (2006a). Class lecture webcasting, fall 2004, spring 2005, and fall 2005: Summary of three case studies. University of Texas at Austin.
  • Traphagan, T. (2006b). Class lecture webcasting, fall 2005: A case study. University of Texas at Austin.
  • Traphagan, T., Kucsera, J. V., & Kishi, K. (2010). Impact of class lecture webcasting on attendance and learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(1), 19–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9128-7
  • Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., & Waterhouse, F. (1999). Relations between teachers’ approaches to teaching and students’ approaches to learning. Higher Education, 37(1), 57–70. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1003548313194
  • TU/e. (2010). Facts and figures: Edition 2010. Eindhoven University of Technology.
  • Udell, J. (2004, November 15). Name that genre: Screencast. Jon Udell’s weblog. Retrieved January 1, 2009, from http://weblog.infoworld.com/udell/2004/11/15.html#a1114
  • van Gemert, E. (2013, January 4). Het hoorcollege is een inspiratie voor student én docent [The lecture is a source of inspiration for both students and teachers]. Volkskrant. http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/3184/opinie/article/detail/3371823/2013/01/04/Het-hoorcollege-is-een-inspiratie-voor-student-en-docent.dhtml
  • van Hoof, S. (2013, January 5). Goed onderwijs is gebaat bij regelmatig contact tussen docent en student [Good education will benefit from regular contact between teacher and student]. Volkskrant.
  • Vander Wal, T. (2007). Folksonomy. Retrieved January 21, 2013, from http://vanderwal.net/folksonomy.html
  • Veeramani, R., & Bradley, S. (2008). Insights regarding undergraduate preference for lecture capture. University of Wisconsin-Madison, E-Business Institute.
  • van Velsen, L., & Melenhorst, M. (2008). User motives for tagging video content [Paper presentation]. 5th International Conference on Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Web-Based Systems (AH 2008), Hannover, Germany. https://research.utwente.nl/en/publications/user-motives-for-tagging-video-content/
  • Verburg, J. (2010). Live & social tagging van weblectures [Live and social tagging of weblectures] [Unpublished manuscript]. Hogeschool Utrecht.
  • Westera, W. (2008). The problem of web lectures. http://hdl.handle.net/1820/1466
  • Wieling, M. (2008). De effecten van het aanbieden van videocolleges als aanvulling op de reguliere hoorcolleges binnen de Faculteit Rechten [The effects of recorded lectures as a supplement to regular lectures at the Law department] [Unpublished manuscript]. University of Groningen.
  • Williams, J., & Fardon, M. (2007a). Perpetual connectivity: Lecture recordings and portable media players. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007 (pp. 1084–1092). ASCILITE. https://doi.org/10.65106/apubs.2007.2583
  • Williams, J., & Fardon, M. (2007b). Recording lectures and the impact on student attendance [Paper presentation]. ALT-C 2007. http://cmalt.com/altc2007/timetable/files/1064/2007_AltC_Williams_Attendance.pdf
  • Winne, P. H., & Jamieson-Noel, D. (2002). Exploring students’ calibration of self reports about study tactics and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(4), 551–572. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00006-1
  • Witten, I. H., & Frank, E. (2002). Data mining: Practical machine learning tools and techniques with Java implementations. ACM SIGMOD Record, 31(1), 76–77. https://doi.org/10.1145/507338.507355
  • Woo, K., Gosper, M., McNeill, M., Preston, G., Green, D., & Phillips, R. (2008). Web-based lecture technologies: Blurring the boundaries between face-to-face and distance learning. ALT-J, 16(2), 81–93. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v16i2.10887
  • Zhang, C., Crawford, J., Rui, Y., & He, L.-W. (2005). An automated end-to-end lecture capturing and broadcasting system. In Proceedings of the 13th annual ACM international conference on multimedia (pp. 808–809). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1101149.1101326
  • Zhang, C., Rui, Y., Crawford, J., & He, L.-W. (2008). An automated end-to-end lecture capture and broadcasting system. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications, 4(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1145/1324287.1324293
  • Ziewer, P. (2004). Navigational indices and full-text search by automated analyses of screen recorded data. In Proceedings of E-Learn 2004: World conference on e-learning in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education (pp. 3055–3062). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
  • Zupancic, B. (2006). Vorlesungsaufzeichnungen und digitale Annotationen: Einsatz und Nutzen in der Lehre [Lecture recording and digital annotations: Use and benefits in teaching] [Doctoral dissertation, Universität Freiburg].