You are here:

Tegrity as a Means of Student Reflection

, Arkansas Tech University, United States

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Orlando, Florida, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-83-9 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA


Graduate students enrolled in an Educational Media class utilized the Tegrity lecture capture system as part of the regular course activities. Students accessed videos to review classroom activities and discussions. Students captured their demonstration lessons using the Tegrity screen-capture system. At the conclusion of the course students were ask to reflect on their experiences with Tegrity both as a means of obtaining and referencing information presented in the classroom and as a vehicle to present their ideas to the instructor and class. The results of this study indicate that graduate education students valued Tegrity as a means of reviewing course material with several indicating a desire to use the system in their K-12 classrooms. Student reflections of their own presentations provided the instructor with insight into what course content the students valued, student’s value of course projects and the connections students made between course content and their own classrooms.


Callaway, R. (2010). Tegrity as a Means of Student Reflection. In J. Sanchez & K. Zhang (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2010--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 617-621). Orlando, Florida, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved February 19, 2019 from .

View References & Citations Map


  1. Chen, C. (2008). Why do teachers not practice what they believe regarding technology integration? The Journal of Educational Research,102(13), 65-65.
  2. Cherney, I. (2008). "The effects of active learning on students' memories for course content." Active Learning in Higher Education 9(2):152-71. Education Full Text. Web. 15 July 2010.
  3. Delamarter, S. (2006). Strategic planning to enhance teaching and learning with technology. Teaching Theology& Religion, 9(1), 9-23.
  4. Holmes, K. (2009). Planning to teach with digital tools: Introducing the interactive whiteboard to pre-service secondary mathematics teachers. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(3), 351-365.
  5. Kim, S. & Bagaka, J. (2005). The digital divide in students' usage of technology tools: A multilevel analysis of the role of teacher practices and classroom characteristics. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(3/4), 318329.
  6. Larrivee, B. (2006). An educator’s guide to teacher reflection. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
  7. Mayer, R.E. (2006). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Miners, Z. (2009). Classroom technology integration. District Administration, 45(4), 35-38.
  9. Rogers, C.R. & Freiberg, H.J. (1994). Freedom to Learn (3rd Ed). Columbus, OH: Merrill/Macmillan.
  10. Rone, T. (2008). Culture from the Outside in and the Inside Out: Experiential Education and the Continuum of Theory, Practice, and Policy. College Teaching, 56(4), 237-45. Retrieved from Education Full Text database July 14, 2010.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact