Use of Self-Assessment of Video Recording to Raise Students’ Awareness of Development of Their Oral Presentation Skills
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to examine if using video recordings help students raise their awareness of the development of their oral presentation skills by reviewing video recordings of their presentations. For this study, all students who took a Financial Accounting class in the academic year 2018–2019 at Lincoln University (LU) were video-recorded when presenting. Participants were asked to review their video recordings, assess their performance, and record their reflections by using a Self-Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ). The results indicated that the students’ attitude toward recording the presentations was highly positive. The predominant response was that this new learning activity increased students’ awareness of the importance of presentation skills without provoking their anxiety. Participants were able to observe that certain delivery skills such as good preparation, self-confidence, eye contact, and voice quality needed improvement. For managerial implications, LU, through its Writing and Speaking Center (WSC), offered thirty-minute sessions with a presentation coach to improve students’ communication skills and prepare them to give a more polished presentation in class. In comparing the practice presentation at the WSC with the final in-class presentation, students were observed to be more confident, better prepared, and less nervous during the final presentation. However, we observed that the practice presentation did not carry the same weight as the final presentation as the practice presentation was neither graded nor delivered in front of an instructor or a wider audience.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".