The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Student conceptions of oral presentations
Abstract
A phenomenographic study of students’ experience of oral presentations in an open learning theology programme constituted three contrasting conceptions of oral presentations—as transmission of ideas; as a test of students’ understanding of what they were studying; and as a position to be argued. Each of these conceptions represented a combination of related aspects of students’ experience, namely, their awareness of the audience and their interaction with that audience, how they perceived the nature of theology, affective factors, and how they compared the oral presentation format with that of written assignments. The conception of the presentation as a position to be argued was associated with a particularly powerful student learning experience, with students describing the oral presentation as being more demanding than the written assignments, more personal, requiring deeper understanding, and leading to better learning. The study draws our attention to the various ways in which students may perceive a single form of academic task and their need to develop their understanding of assessment formats.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“This addresses common concerns about the subjective nature of oral assessments raised in previous studies (Joughin 2007;Huxham, Campbell, and Westwood 2012).”
From Utilising one-on-one interactive oral assessments as the major final assessment within a bioscience course (2025) · cites this paper as Joughin 2007
Citations
Cites
ON QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES IN LEARNING: I—OUTCOME AND PROCESS*
Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976) · British Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02980.x · Cited by 4,748
Marton, F., & Booth, S. (2013) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203053690 · Cited by 3,730
Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods
Åkerlind, G. S. (2005) · Higher Education Research & Development · doi:10.1080/07294360500284672 · Cited by 1,041
Scouller, K. (1998) · Higher Education · doi:10.1023/a:1003196224280 · Cited by 724
Marton, F., Runesson, U., & Tsui, A. Β. M. (2004) · Cited by 267
Marton, F., & Trigwell, K. (2000) · Higher Education Research & Development · doi:10.1080/07294360020021455 · Cited by 202
Contextual dependence of learning approaches: The effects of assessments.
Thomas, P. R., & Bain, J. (1984) · Cited by 147
Joughin, G. (1998) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/0260293980230404 · Cited by 127
Self-citationMarton, F., & Pang, M. (1999) · Cited by 106
What Matters? Discovering critical conditions of classroom learning
Marton, F., & Morris, P. (2002) · Cited by 104
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- Hounsell D., 1997, The experience of learning, 106
- Hounsell D., paper presented at the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Special Interest Group on Writing, Writing Conference 2000
- Hounsell D., paper presented at the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Ninth European Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction Biennial Meeting
- Joughin G., 1999, Assessment matters, 146
- Laurillard D., 1997, The experience of learning, 126
- Marton F., paper presented at the 8th European Conference for Learning and Instruction
- Marton F., paper presented at the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction
- Patrick K., 2002, What matters? Discovering critical conditions of classroom learning, 93
- Runesson U., 2002, What matters? Discovering critical conditions of classroom learning, 19
- Silvey G., 1951, School and Society, 73, 377
- Tang K. C. C., 1994, Improving student learning: theory and practice, 151
- Thomas P. R., 1984, Human Learning, 3, 227
- Tsui A., 2002, What matters? Discovering critical conditions of classroom learning, 113
Cited by
Student fears of oral presentations and public speaking in higher education: a qualitative survey
Grieve, R., Woodley, J., Hunt, S. E., & McKay, A. (2021) · Journal of Further and Higher Education · doi:10.1080/0309877x.2021.1948509 · Cited by 206
Oral versus written assessments: a test of student performance and attitudes
Huxham, M., Campbell, F., & Westwood, J. (2012) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2010.515012 · Cited by 187
The mechanism of impact of summative assessment on medical students’ learning
Cilliers, F. J., Schuwirth, L., Adendorff, H. J., Herman, N., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2010) · Advances in Health Sciences Education · doi:10.1007/s10459-010-9232-9 · Cited by 175
When old becomes new: a case study of oral examination as an online assessment tool
Akimov, A., & Malin, M. D. (2020) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1730301 · Cited by 158
EFL College Students’ Perceptions of the Difficulties in Oral Presentation as a Form of Assessment
Al-Nouh, N. A., Abdul-Kareem, M. M., & Taqi, H. A. (2015) · International Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v4n1p136 · Cited by 95
Metadata
- Authors
- Joughin, G.
- Affiliations
- University of Wollongong (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Joughin, Gordon
- ORCID
- Joughin, Gordon
- Venue
- Studies in Higher Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2007-06
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 323-336
- ISSN
- 0307-5079 (ISSN-L)
- 1470-174X
- OpenAlex
- W1993881929
- Cited by
- 110
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 17.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Studies in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
- Research Online (University of Wollongong) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Practises and Engagement
- Keywords
- oral presentations, student conceptions, theological education, open learning, test format, student learning experience, audience awareness, writing assignments, student assignments, affective factors in learning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review