Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer


Vol. 12 No. 2 (2021): Evaluation, feedback, equity: a challenge in education

On-line lecture university hall and feedback: A possible combination?

agosto 24, 2021


In the Italian context, the training of teacher's aide, for years now, has been linked through a special specialization course for educational support activities for pupils with disabilities and, in the universities where it has been, it has often involved consistent numbers of students. The V Cycle of this Course, for the first time, for obvious reasons linked to the Covid-19 emergency, took place for the most part on-line. In this paper, through the analysis of the course "Special education: metacognitive and cooperative approach" (30 hours-4 CFU) which was taught at the University of Molise by the same teacher both in the course dedicated to the kindergarten and primary, both in that for lower and upper secondary school we tried to see how teaching methods of active learning based on feedback that try to investigate opinions and ask questions during the university lecture, even in a "lecture hall", have allowed the involvement, understanding and learning of the students to obtain, at the same time, the teaching action of the teacher is more effective


  1. Ausubel D.P. (2000). The acquisition and retention of knowledge. A cognitive view. Switzerland: Springer.
  2. Barnes W.B. and Slate J.R. (2013). College-readiness is not one-size-fits-all. Current Issues in Education, 16(1): 1-13.
  3. Bonaiuti G. (2011). Organizzatori grafici e apprendimento. In: Calvani A., a cura di, Principi di comunicazione visiva e multimediale. (pp. 75-127). Roma: Carocci.
  4. Bonauti G. and Dipace A. (2021). Insegnare e apprendere in aula e in rete. Per una didattica blended efficace. Roma: Carocci.
  5. Calvani A. (2011). Principi dell’istruzione e strategie per insegnare. Criteri per una didattica efficace. Roma: Carocci.
  6. Calvani A. (2014). Come fare una lezione efficace. Roma: Carocci.
  7. Carless D. (2019). Feedback loops and the longer-term: towards feedback spirals. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(5): 705-714.
  8. Castagna M. (1998). La lezione. Metodi e idee per la formazione degli adulti. Milano: Unicopli.
  9. Charlton B., Marsh S. and Gurski N. (2015). Are Lectures the Best Way to Teach Students? The Guardian, Higher Education Network. March 31.
  10. Compton M. and Allen J. (2018). Student Response Systems: a rationale for their use and a comparison of some cloud-based tools. Compass: Journal of Learning and Teaching, 11(1): 1-19.
  11. Cowling M. and Brack C. (2015). Let’s not Abandon the Humble Lecture Theatre Quite Yet. The Conversation, July 15.
  12. Dirksen J. (2017). Learning Design. Progettare un apprendimento efficace. Milano: Pearson.
  13. Cuban L. (2001). Oversold and Underused. Computers in Classrooms. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
  14. French S. and Kennedy G. (2016). Reassessing the value of university lectures. Teaching in Higher Education, 22(6): 639-654. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2016.1273213.
  15. Giannandrea L. (2019). Valutazione, feedback, tecnologie. In: Rivoltella P.C. and Rossi P.G., a cura di, Tecnologie per l’educazione. (pp. 69-81). Milano: Pearson.
  16. Graham C.R. (2006). Blenden Learning System: Definition, Current Trends, and Future Directions. In: Bonk C.J. and Graham C.R., a cura di, Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Design. (pp. 3-21). San Francisco (CA): Pfeiffer.
  17. Gunderman R. (2013). Is the Lecture Dead? The Atlantic, January 29.
  18. Hattie J. and Clarke, S. (2018). Visible Learning Feedback. London-New York: Routledge.
  19. Hattie J. and Yates, G.C.R. (2013). Visible Learning and the science of how we learn. Abingdon: OX.
  20. Keough S.M. (2012). Clickers in the Classroom: A Review and a Replication. Journal of Management Education, 36(6): 822-847. doi: 10.1177/1052562912454808.
  21. Laneve C. (2003). La didattica fra teoria e pratica. Brescia: La Scuola.
  22. Laurillard D. (2012). Teaching as a Design Science. Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. London-New York: Routledge.
  23. Laurillard D. (2002). Rethinking University Teaching. A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. New York and London: Routledge.
  24. Marton F., and Pong W.Y. (2007). On the unit of description in phenomenography. Higher Education Research and Development, 24(4): 335-348.
  25. McLoone S., Villing R., and O’Keeffe S. (2015). Using Mobile Touch Devices to Provide Flexible Classroom Assessment Techniques. International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction, 7(4): 1-15.
  26. MIUR, Decreto 30 settembre 2011, Criteri e modalità per lo svolgimento dei corsi di formazione per il conseguimento della specializzazione per le attività di sostegno.
  27. Ranieri M. (2004). Le insidie dell’ovvio. Tecnologie educative e critica della retorica tecnocentrica. ETS: Pisa.
  28. Penson P. E. (2012). Lecturing: A Lost art. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching & Learning, 4(1): 72-76.
  29. Rivoltella P.C. (2012). Neurodidattica. Insegnare al cervello che apprende. Milano: Raffaello Cortina.
  30. Rossi P.G., Pentucci M., Fedeli L., Giannandrea L. and Pennazio V. (2018). Dal feedback informativo al feedback generativo. Education Sciences & Society, 2: 83-107.
  31. Simeone D. (2002). La consulenza educativa. Milano: Vita e Pensiero.
  32. Tomassucci Fontana L. (1997). Far lezione. Firenze: La Nuova Italia.
  33. Wolff J. (2013). It’s Too Early to Write off the Lecture. The Guardian. June 23.


Metrics Loading ...