The students were asked three questions about student attitudes towards using recorded presentations as a primary source of grading for the course and how this affected fairness in grading in a required EFL classroom. The first question was related to the fairness of using YouTube videos as presentations for the class. Out of the 145 students who responded to the survey, 130 students, or 89.7%, believed that the grading generated using video presentations was fair. Eleven students felt that videos were not fair. Four students could not decide if it was fair or not. One of these students gave both sides, and three responded that they did not know. The second question related to what areas most affected the fairness when using videos as presentations. The third question related to what areas most affected the fairness of grading using videos versus live presentations. This section analyzes the responses to the final two questions and looks for trends in the answers.
1. Fairness of Using YouTube Video Presentations in Class
One hundred thirty students reported believing that the grading of videos was a fair way to run the required EFL class. The student responses fell into several categories. The students liked the feedback and rubric systems used by the two teachers. There was also a belief that hard work could pay off with a better presentation. The students liked that they could turn in the best possible video for grading. Then, students commented that they liked that the conditions were the same for everyone. Next, there were additional comments about not having to be nervous, using technology, better grading, and comparing with others by watching the videos. Finally, some students reported negative sentiments towards video presentations because of a belief that cheating was occurring and technical issues.
The most popular reason that students felt that videos were fair was that they were graded using a transparent and fair rubric with good feedback. Thirty-four students mentioned this in their explanations of why using video presentations was fair. Student 3 wrote, “I think it’s fair. Because the professor gave detailed instructions on how the scores were reflected. Also, when giving feedback on the video, it informs the point where the score has been reduced and gives understanding.” Student 20 agreed, “I think it’s fair. This is because there are set standards, and if I look at the comments, I can understand the score. I think professor judging from the presentation fairly.” Another point related to the rubric was brought up by Student 42 (translated), “The professor announced the evaluation method in advance and used the rubric, so it is reflected in the grade.” Student 128 added the comment that it worked “because the standard of score is accurately appear before uploading.” Based on the feedback and pre-published rubric, Student 68 felt more comfortable making a presentation. They stated, “The student can present according to the given rubric. Preparing for an online presentation is a student’s ability. It’s fair because the rubric.” Therefore, a teacher who would like to use video presentations should make a strong rubric and explain the grading before the presentation. Then after the video is graded, give good feedback to help students improve for the next presentation.
The second most commented topic was that if students worked hard, they could earn their deserved score. A total of 17 students mentioned this area in their comments. Student 4 remarked, “You can see how hard I worked on the online video.” Student 7 added, “A person who has prepared a lot can make a high-quality video without mistakes.” Student 54 echoed these sentiments, “Students who have not really tried very hard and those who have put quite a lot of effort can be distinguished by video.” Student 56 observed:
I think online presentation is fair because the tasks have been prepared by presenters and the video have been made by one-take. I think the times of recording as practice for presentations. The online presentations can show how the presenter can perform and has prepared.
Finally, Student 144 wrote, “Individuals have to make efforts to produce results.” Therefore, using videos for presentations rewards students for spending time and effort working on their presentations. The next area mentioned by students was getting the highest quality work possible through using video presentations.
The third theme reported by 15 students was that using videos presentation allowed students to turn in the best video possible. Student 6 stated, “Each person submits a video that they think was the best shot.” Student 31 agreed, “By preparing it in their most stable state, they are all able to make their perfect result as possible.” Students liked being able to turn in the best possible video, as shown by Student 112, who wrote, “If you make a mistake, you can shoot again.” Therefore, students believed that the product which got turned in was better if it was a video instead of a live presentation which aided the fairness in the grading.
The next area, which 14 students responded to as a reason for the fairness of using video presentations for grading, was that the conditions were the same for everyone. Student 35 stated, “It is not only for one person, but for everyone.” Student 65 echoed this with the sentiment, “Everyone is given the same opportunity.” Other students felt that the time allowed was necessary. Student 19 stated, “Everyone has the same amount of time to prepare their speech.” Concerning time, Student 1 said, “I think the time to prepare the presentation is no less than live.” There was also a segment of the student population who agreed that live and video had many similarities. Student 122 espoused this opinion with the statement, “There seems to be no difference between online and live.”
Finally, there were some other comments made about students liking the use of video presentations. First, three students stated that they could show their ability without being nervous. Student 32 said, “Online presentations can fully represent one’s ability without being nervous.” Student 35 agreed, “Online presentations are much less stressful than live presentations, and can be carried out in a more comfortable state.” A further two students commented about the use of technology in producing the videos, like Student 10, who said, “I think online presentation requires the technology to present its own online.” Two students liked that the teacher could watch the video multiple times to determine a fair grade. Finally, one student thought using video presentations was good “because we can compare ourselves with students when watching their presentation” (Student 76). However, not all of the students were positive in their responses to using videos in the classroom.
Eleven students had negative responses about the fairness of using videos for presentations for homework and examinations. One student also discussed both positive and negative aspects. The first reason that three students reported was the possibility for a student to cheat on the video. Student 69 wrote, “There are some cheats. ex: After recording the video, record the voice file separately and insert it. or hide the script on the back of your phone.” Student 54 was also concerned about reading or hiding the script to make it easier. Student 16 felt there were many tricks to making a video but did not go so far as to say that it was cheating. Two students were also worried about re-recording the videos. Student 30 stated, “I record videos until I meet the standards.” However, scripts were not explicitly banned by the teachers who encouraged the use of note cards. The teachers also allowed the rerecording of the presentation.
Student 75 was worried about technology by replying, “equipment can affect the presentation.” Other negative aspects reported in the survey responses include things not included in the grading standards, too different from a live presentation, prior experience, and feeling more confident with an audience.
2. Elements Affecting the Fairness of Live Versus Video Presentations
Several different elements are related to making live and video presentations. The most popular response was the fear of live performance. Second, students reported technology as a factor associated with making a presentation. Preparation time was the third most popular response to what effects presentations. The next factor affecting presentations was the teacher’s grading. Finally, there were some other miscellaneous effects reported by the students. There were more than 145 responses because some students listed more than one reason (see
Table 1).
The fear of live presentations was the main element affecting in versus video presentations. It was mentioned in some form by 67 students out of 145, or 46.2%. Student 11 stated, “I think it’s a fear of live performances. Even if I prepared hard, if I get nervous on the day, I can’t make a good presentation.” Student 18 was concerned that a live presentation might not allow them to reach their potential, saying, “The most effective factor is fairness in grading live. There is a huge psychological difference between presenting in front of people and presenting in front of the screen. The best online presenter may be poor presenter.” Student 42 tried to highlight the reason for the nervousness, writing, “Live is given only one opportunity, which requires more effort than online and is also very tense. Therefore, it is highly likely that live broadcasts will make mistakes that can be avoided online.” Student 54 added:
I think students can be very nervous when they make a presentation in a foreign language for the first time in front of students they see for the first time. Therefore, even students who have been good at presenting can stutter with nervousness, which can cause timeouts, staring at the ceiling, etc. to reduce scores. For this reason, I think that the fear of live presentation can undermine fairness as students have no experience in live presentation.
Student 56 stated, “fear of live performance effect the fairness of grading.” Based on these comments, the fear of live performances was the central element in the effects of in-class versus video presentations.
The second most discussed element affecting live and video presentations was preparation time, with 31 students mentioning it. Student 4 is mixed about the time spent working on the presentation with the comment:
It takes me two days to submit the video. It’s hard, my legs hurt, and my throat is swollen. The online presentation is fair because it reflects my efforts because I get good grades for online presentation. It depends on whether you see effort or ability.
Student 31 (translated) concurred with the opinion:
The preparation time for the presentation is long. The best outcome you can prepare for is enough time; it seems to be the fairest way to evaluate it online because it excludes the inevitable situations such as tension, pronunciation, etc.
Student 105 also listed preparation time as the main element that affects the difference between online and live presentations with the statement, “Different from offline presentation, students can use much time to make presentation and this might very closely related to the quality of presentation.”
The third major theme that developed from the student responses of factors affecting live versus online presentations was technology. Twenty-two students, or 15.2%, responded that technology was a factor in the fairness of grading presentations. The students thought that technology was not only crucial to online presentations as Student 10 wrote, “I think that the technology part has a lot of influence when presenting in front of an audience, such as live.” However, the central theme from comments about technology was the difficulties students encountered. Student 29 stated, “I think who doesn’t have a computer or a laptop cannot prepare a presentation well than others who has.” Student 2 opined, “Some of us have a Bluetooth mouse, and some of us hasn’t. It’s quite huge in presentation.” Student 51 concurred with the opinion, “It is a bit hard to show my PowerPoint when doing online presentations.” Other issues the students listed included “editing skill problems” (Student 66) and “network problems” (Student 107).