Running head: CRITIQUE 1

Research Article Critique

Podcasting in Education: Are students as ready and eager as we think they are?
Deborah Leal
University of New Brunswick
ED 6902
March 2017
Running head: CRITIQUE 2

Abstract

The journal article I selected was as follows:

Walls, S. M., Kucsera, J. V., Walker, J. D., Acee, T. W., McVaugh, N. K., & Robinson,

D. H. (2010). Podcasting in Education: Are students as ready and eager as we think they are?

Computers & Education, 54(2), 371-378. This article is related to my field of research as I am

interested in the role of technology in the adult learning and making conclusions on the most

efficient technologies for learning delivery, as well as determining the strengths and weaknesses

of each. With adult learning becoming increasingly digitized to maximize the return on training

investment, educators need to adapt to the technological means through which learning outcomes

can be achieved and embrace the role of technology within the classroom. In my experience,

technology has been perceived as a threat to employment in the post-secondary sector due to the

potential to eliminate jobs through cost cutting measures. My belief is that technology is best

used as a complement rather than a replacement for teacher-led learning, and requires a

facilitator to maximize benefits. During the forthcoming article critique, I used elements of both

the General Guidelines for Critiquing a Research Article and the Guidelines for Descriptive

Research Critique from the ED6902 critique guidelines document.

Keywords: Adult Education, Educational Technology, Post-Secondary

Running head: CRITIQUE 3

Critique

The study has a clear purpose.

The purpose of this study has been elaborated clearly by the authors. The described aim is

to determine the efficacy of podcasting for learning in post-secondary education. It is the

authors belief that since College learners are immersed in a technology-based world, podcasting

would be a natural fit and a preferred method of receiving instruction. The authors express their

intent to study two forms of podcasting, repetitive and supplemental, to determine student

attitudes toward the technology for learning. Additionally, Walls et al. (2010) state, A

secondary interest is to contribute to the research debate of whether repetitive podcasting can

affect student attendance (p. 373).

The review of the literature or background provides clear context for the study.

The authors make the context for this study clear when they describe the phenomenon of

increasing technology integration into educational delivery, stating, internet based education

technologies have become pervasive in our learning institutions and now educators are exploring

the use of mobile technologies to improve communication (Walls et al., 2011, p. 371). They

explain that several universities are investing in podcasting technology for educational use

(Walls et al., 2011, p. 371). In addition, the authors speculate about the potential value of

podcasting in education and refer to a Duke University initiative where orientation podcasts were

distributed to the incoming class in 2004 and used with success (Walls et al., 2011, p. 371).

Background literature is up to date and relevant.

With the publication of this article in 2009, the literature cited is up to date. The authors

provide context for their own research by referring to studies on the success and supporting

evidence of educational podcasting in healthcare, science, geography, teaching, and tourism

Running head: CRITIQUE 4

(Walls et al., 2011, p. 371). In addition, they refer to studies by Waizenegger and Norman to

rationalize their theory that the two types of podcasting, repetitive and supplemental, may garner

different levels of adoption (Walls et al., 2011, p. 371). The literature on the limitations of

podcasting highlight cognitive overload as a concern, as well as, the shift in attitude required for

learners to recognize portable media devices for their educational value and not solely for

entertainment (Walls et al., 2011, p. 372).

There is a clear research question.

The study presents two research questions: Are students ready to adopt podcasting as a

learning technology? and how did students make use of or were influenced by the respective

podcasts, such as with attendance (Walls et al., 2011, p. 373). The duplicity of purpose is not

entirely unexpected in a descriptive research study because according to McMillan (2011),

Most nonexperimental studies contain more than one type of design element and purpose (p.

177). However, the authors did not make their questions explicitly clear. The questions above

are a summation of several inquisitive questions around student readiness, habits, experiences,

and attitudes.

It is clear which research paradigm the study falls into.

According to the Diagram for Classifying Six Types of Research and McMillan (2011),

this study is a descriptive research study describing a phenomena (p.174).

The paradigm is appropriate for the kind of knowledge being sought.

The research paradigm is appropriate. The study possesses characteristics typical of

descriptive research including presenting survey data on activities where students were likely to

use podcasting; no cause and effect or data relationships, and no outcome prediction.
Running head: CRITIQUE 5

Furthermore, simple descriptive statistics have been used to report the findings including

percentages and frequencies (McMillan, 2011, p. 178)

Is there a clear description of the sample, population, and procedures for sampling?

The authors clearly describe the sample population; two undergraduate classes at a

university in the southwest USA. The authors explain, The classes represented two educational

domains, an upper-level business elective and an upper-level required education course (Walls

et al., 2011, p. 373). In addition, the authors clarify the classes are similar in demographics, with

similar enrollment (49/50) and a gender balance representing the university at large; 51% female

and 49% male. (Walls et al., 2011, p. 373)

If longitudinal, is loss of subjects a limitation?

Over the semester, there would be a minimal loss of subjects, arising if a student

transferred out the classes or left the university entirely. The authors do not mention an option

for students to opt out of the study. As a result, it is unclear what recourse a student would have

if they preferred not to participate in this study.

The method is clearly described.

The authors described their method clearly and in high detail. The business class

implemented podcasting as supplementary learning and the education course as repetitive

learning (Walls et al., 2011, p. 373). Due to varying access to devices for accessing podcasts,

students were allowed to use either a computer or a mobile device (Walls et al., 2011, p. 373).

The business class podcasts were from existing providers and education course podcasts were

recorded lectures. The podcasts were delivered evenly across the semester and both classes were

instructed (Walls et al., 2011, p. 373). Pre and post semester questionnaires were supplied to both

classes to determine attitudes towards podcasting. For the education students, the use repetitive
Running head: CRITIQUE 6

podcasting required interim questionnaires to determine whether podcasts influenced

performance and/or in-class attendance (Walls et al., 2011, p. 373).

The authors describe measuring readiness using fourteen closed-ended items on students

access (four items); podcasting proficiency/familiarity (five items); and habits/experience (five

items) (Walls et al., 2011, p. 373). Attitudes were measured using three closed-ended and four

open-ended items. The response scales differed due to the nature of the item stem (Walls et al.,

2011, p. 373).

Is there assurance of confidentiality of responses? If not, is this likely to affect the results?

The method through which the pre and post surveys were distributed and collected was

not described within this study, making the evaluation of confidentiality difficult. Assuming \

surveys were paperbased, there is a risk that a student could view anothers responses. Any

breech would have been of a minimally personal nature, reflecting only the students attitudes

and perceptions towards podcasting, its use, and its effect on attendance.

Data collection procedures are appropriate to the question.

The surveys were appropriate for a descriptive research study exploring student

readiness, habits, experiences, and attitudes in regard to educational podcasting. The authors

used pre, post, and interim surveys to collect information on student attitudes toward podcasting,

as well as whether podcasting was a factor in their in-class attendance. The format of the pre and

post surveys included questions about their current ownership, frequency of use, and functions of

mp3 players. In addition, the surveys also asked about the students familiarity with podcasting,

download frequency, and subscriptions. At conclusion, the surveys asked about audio/video files

in the classroom, including how often the student used them, their satisfaction level with these
Running head: CRITIQUE 7

files as an educational resource, the strengths and limitations of the files, and their likelihood of

use if offered (Walls et al., 2011, p. 376).

The interim surveys were given only to the education class receiving repetitive

podcasting. The first interim survey included questions on how students accessed/used the

podcasting files provided, and their utility. The second interim survey also posed questions about

the access, use, and utility of the podcasting files, but also on absences from class, the number of

study hours before quizzes, and how podcasts affected their in-class attendance (Walls et al.,

2011, p. 377).

The analysis of the data is described fully and clearly.

The authors clearly describe their process of computing statistics from the pre and post

survey results for both courses within the study. After receiving the surveys with a response rate

of 89% for pre survey and 84% for post survey (Walls et al., 2011, p. 376), results were

categorized as either student access; proficiency/familiarity; and habits/experience. The authors

list analysis steps during the study, including calculating frequencies and comparing results to

determine variances in readiness/attitude from intervention, comparing results of students using

supplemental versus repetitive podcasting, and reviewing feedback on likeliness of missing class

resulting from repetitive podcasts (Walls et al., 2011, p. 373).

The results seem reasonable and are clearly presented.

The results are clearly explained with descriptive narratives under classification headings.

The authors provide data in two tables: a Likert scale representing responses on whether

podcasting files contribute to learning and a table on circumstances when students were likely to

use podcasting.
Running head: CRITIQUE 8

Student Readiness. Results revealed that 72% of students owned an mp3 capable

portable device, while 25% did not have access to mp3 files via a portable device. Laptop and

desktop PCs were the next most frequently used at 67% and 34% respectively. 78% of students

used their portable devices for listening to music, with 61% listening at least weekly. Only 26%

reported using their portable device for watching lectures, movie clips, and other course related

videos. The results also found that familiarity with podcasting increased over the semester, from

48% familiarity on the pre survey to 91% on the post survey (Walls et al., 2011, p. 373).

Attitudes. A majority of students responded that exposure to educational podcasting had

a positive effect on their performance (95% repetitive, 76% supplemental). Within the repetitive

group, students were more likely than the supplemental group to respond that podcasting

reinforced course content. These students also indicated that decreased motivation to attend

classes could be a weakness of the technology, more often than their supplemental counterparts.

In addition, the authors examined variances between each groups results on the utility of

supplemental podcasting, with the repetitive group perceiving podcasts as less effective as

supplemental content than those in the supplemental group, whose attitude about supplemental

podcasting utility was relatively unchanged over the semester. Students indicated podcasting

would most likely be used on a computer while studying, with the supplemental group choosing

this option 53% and repetitive, 82%. These results were relatively unchanged between pre and

post surveys (Walls et al., 2011, p. 374).

Additional findings from repetitive podcasting format. Despite student responses

suggesting they thought podcasting would most likely be accessed via computer, in reality the

data from the repetitive group interim surveys demonstrated audio/video/podcasting/PowerPoints

Running head: CRITIQUE 9

were not used or downloaded to a great extent during studying. Of these formats, PowerPoint

files appeared to be the most used format for study (Walls et al., 2011, p. 375).

Conclusions and discussions follow logically from the results.

Despite Walls et al. (2011) originally stating internet based education technologies have

become pervasive in our learning institutions (p. 371), the authors concede the results do not

support this claim. The authors reflect that, only two-thirds of students surveyed owned and

used digital media players a finding that differs from our assumption and the push found in the

literature for educators to hurryingly meet students on the Internet and audio players (Walls et

al., 2011, p. 375). Those who did use digital media players overwhelming used them to access

music rather than educational podcasts (Walls et al., 2011, p. 375). Also, learners were not as

familiar with podcasting as assumed, with the authors assumptions originating from news

articles and other informal reporting (Walls et al., 2011, p. 375). After reviewing the data, the

authors conclude that students are not as ready for educational podcasting as they once thought,

on neither a regular or occasional basis (Walls et al., 2011, p. 375). In regard to the effects of

educational podcasting on attendance, the authors conclude there is the possibility of a negative

effect on attendance; but state this is mostly unsubstantiated because no relationship was

demonstrated (Walls et al., 2011, p. 375). The authors reveal that the supplemental use of

podcasting encouraged a more favourable attitude from students than repetitive use. The authors

study did not consider why supplemental podcasts were perceived as more beneficial than

repetitive and therefore further study should be completed in this area (Walls et al., 2011, p.

375).
Running head: CRITIQUE 10

References

McMillan, J. H. (2011). Educational research: Fundamentals for the Consumer. (6th ed.). New

York, NY: Pearson

Walls, S. M., Kucsera, J. V., Walker, J. D., Acee, T. W., McVaugh, N. K., & Robinson, D. H.

(2010). Podcasting in education: Are students as ready and eager as we think they

are?. Computers & Education, 54(2), 371-378. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.018