Many lecturers would agree that students learn better when they are expected to participate in class as this stimulates their thinking process. Research has also shown that students learn better from their peers. A lecture is not just a time to take notes but an opportunity for students to contribute, learn and reinforce their own understanding of the subject through lively discussions. Although many university modules/courses assign marks for class
participation (from 5% to as high as 40% of the module’s total grade, depending on the type of module), these marks are often given for attendance, submission of home assignments or participation in online discussions on the universities’ e-learning platforms (e.g. the Integrated Virtual Learning Environment (IVLE) discussion forums at NUS), instead of the actual discussion that takes place during class.

For the actual discussion, the lecturer teaching a small class would usually be able to remember who participated and easily make a record of it. There are other examples where the lecturer or his assistant would immediately record the student’s participation in the class discussion. The former method may be applicable to a class of 20 students or less, but is not possible if the class size is more than 20, as the lecturer may not remember who participated. The latter method of recording class participation may give students the impression that they are being graded in the class and the recording process may also interrupt the flow of the ongoing discussion. In some lectures, the lecturer tosses a Koosh ball to a student when he/
she participates in the class and when the lecture ends, all students who participated would bring the balls to the lecturer and record their names on a register (Robinson, 2008). This minimises interruption during the class discussion. However, throwing Koosh balls across a lecture theatre can also be distracting. Moreover, the lecturer has to be ready with many Koosh balls for each lecture if the discussion becomes intense. According to Robinson’s (2008) survey, students liked the idea of using Koosh balls. Some other approaches use IT gadgets where the lecturer asks the class a question and the students answer using handheld electronic devices (Scantron Corporation, 23 January, 2008). However, the disadvantages of using such tools is that first, they place too much emphasis on technology and second, they can at best be used only for ‘yes and no’ type of questions, which do not constitute proper class participation.

The idea of class participation is practiced more in business, law or other humanities subjects than in engineering. One belief is that engineering subjects, which involve mathematics and data, are very factual and theory-oriented, and hence there is little scope for discussion. Having studied two disciplines (Engineering and Business), I can see the difference in their pedagogical approaches. In business education, most modules adopt a problem based
learning approach where case studies are used, which the class discusses before the lecturer
teaches related theories and provides insights gleaned from his/her research or own practical
experiences. In engineering, my experience has been that, except for some design- or problembased modules, theory and concepts (content) are given precedence over discussion. As the engineering syllabus is often vast, there is little time left for any discussion. Most discussions are postponed to after-class meetings between some students and the lecturer, which may not include the entire lecture.

In my early days at NUS, I tried to introduce written or video-based engineering case studies,
and encouraged students to participate in class discussions and make short presentations. However, except for a few very enthusiastic students, I did not receive as much participation in the discussion as I wished. From this early experience, it was clear that students would participate in class only if it contributes towards their final grades. However, giving credit to students for class participation was not an easy task as my modules comprised 120–140 students. As mentioned earlier, the methods for grading student participation in large classes involve too much technology and lose the human touch (no real live discussion), or disturbs the discussion’s flow or worse, give students the impression that they are being graded on the discussion.

To solve this problem, I used the IVLE’s Assessment tool as a logbook. This tool makes it possible to set essay-style questions where students can write their responses in a text window rather than select their answers from the given choices. After writing, students press the ‘Submit’ button and their entries are saved in the IVLE’s central database which only the lecturer has access to. An example is provided in Figure 1, where I ask students to record their experiences regarding their participation during the class, which they can do any time within the next two working days after the lecture. When I read these online logbook entries, I can easily remember which student participated or not. If necessary, I can also browse the student’s class roster photo to ensure that he/she was not simply adding incorrect information or worse, cheating. It is also not possible for two students to record the same class participation, which I can verify using the photos. In fact, this method of recording class participation has been effective in preventing cheating or over-claiming by any student because when I read the entries, I can easily associate a discussion point to the student
who participated. Also, by using this method, the onus is on the student to record his/her own class participation. In the Assessment tool, one student can make any number of entries throughout the semester, which I continuously verify two days after every lecture. All the entries remain stored in the IVLE database and can be used for evaluating each student’s level and quality of participation and for grading the continuous assessment.

I usually assign 5% of the module’s total marks for class participation, which includes discussions and short class presentations by students. Any additional work such as home assignments may also be included in the total grade for class participation. Giving very small credit for class participation ensures that students make a voluntary effort in contributing to the class.

Figure 1. Screenshot of the class participation record of a student
provided after the lecture.

Also, there is less chance of only a few students participating most of the time. Since the class is very large, justifiably, some students may not have the opportunity to participate during the lecture. Therefore, I also include participation in IVLE discussion forums within this 5% class participation grade, which gives students, who were unable to participate during the lecture, the opportunity to discuss the topic online afterwards.

After trying this method for several academic years, I surveyed my students who recently
graduated after their exams results were released. The survey showed that all my students liked the idea of class participation if they were credited with some marks or bonus points for their effort. The survey also shows that giving some percentage of the module’s total marks to class participation is generally practiced in the humanities or business modules but less so in engineering modules. I believe that using the IVLE Assessment tool as a class participation logbook eliminates the problem of grading these activities, which enables the lecturer and students to fully focus on the classroom discussion and not be disturbed by the logistics of recording class participation. A good classroom discussion among their peers will enhance our students’ learning experience.

Below are some of the comments given by my students through the NUS student feedback
survey conducted before the exams and through my own survey conducted after the exam results were announced:

• “I believe that student participation is very important in helping students to learn actively, as it is a common phenomenon in local universities for students to refrain from participating. While it might seem a little coerced [coercing] when…marks are awarded for participation, I believe it encourages students to ask questions and contribute to some extent which is…a means to help inculcate this active learning environment.”

• “Mutual learning amongst the student encourage[s] the students [to] learn more. Students would not take initiative to contribute without CA (class assessment) marks for class participation. Students will always [try] to find different answers for a question in order to earn the CA marks. So, I strongly believe that CA marks will improve the quality of the class participation. I think your method of awarding the CA marks to class participation is quite reasonable. The weightage for the class participation is good also.”

• “Yes, I think class participation is good! Everything in life that happens adds to our experience, hence also to our memory. This is especially important in a short-time study period of 3 months in an educational institution like NUS. All that [we] accumulated will prove its worth when the time comes.”

References
Robinson, Mary K. (2008). Koosh! Enhancing class participation.
The Mathematical Association of America. http://www.maa.org/t_and_l/exchange/ite9/koosh.html. Last accessed: November 14, 2008.

Scantron Corporation (January 23, 2008). New, innovative Engage
Response System encourages class participation, boosts achievement. Press release. http://datamanagement.scantron.com/news/08-01-23.htm. Last accessed: November 14, 2008.

Endnote
This method is equally applicable to modules from all faculties. The author would be glad to help NUS
colleagues to implement this system of recording and grading class participation using IVLE. He can
be contacted at mpesks@nus.edu.sg.