The bottom line: Digital polling tools such as Vevox offer a practical route to formative feedback in large psychology lectures, where traditional methods are often unworkable. A reflection published in Psychreg Journal of Psychology found that anonymous, real-time polling helped students gauge their own progress and engaged them more readily than conventional classroom participation. Ongoing multi-institutional research into how such tools serve neurodivergent students will be important for educators and institutions seeking to make higher education more inclusive.
University lecturers often struggle to provide timely feedback when teaching large classes. In psychology programmes where hundreds of students may attend a single lecture, giving meaningful formative feedback can be difficult without placing heavy demands on teaching staff.
A reflection, published in Psychreg Journal of Psychology, suggests that digital polling platforms such as Vevox could help address this challenge. The study explores how the tool can support formative assessment, improve participation in lectures, and give students immediate feedback on their understanding of course material.
Formative feedback refers to information given to learners that helps them adjust their thinking or behaviour in order to improve learning. Unlike graded assessments, formative activities are designed to guide progress rather than contribute directly to final marks.
Research in educational psychology has long linked formative feedback with improved academic performance and motivation. The difficulty arises when lecturers attempt to provide that feedback in large cohorts where written responses to each student can be impractical.
Psychology programmes frequently include lecture groups ranging from several dozen students to more than 400. In such settings, traditional feedback methods such as written comments on draft work or extended classroom discussions can become difficult to manage within limited teaching time.
The reflection examines how Vevox, an internet based audience response system, was used across several undergraduate psychology modules. The platform allows students to respond to questions during lectures using their devices while results appear instantly on screen. Laura Jenkins, PhD, a lecturer at Loughborough University who authored the reflection, explains what motivated the work: “The paper only looked at the general uses of Vevox, therefore I wanted to reflect upon how Vevox could be used for formative assessments and feedback, rather than just for the purpose of making a lecture more engaging, as this is an integral part to higher education.”
The lecturer first introduced the tool in 2018 in a foundation level psychology module with around 60 students. It was later used in larger undergraduate lectures with more than 300 students and occasionally approaching 400.
Several types of activities were used to encourage participation. Multiple choice questions allowed students to test their understanding of lecture content, while word cloud responses helped generate discussion around more complex topics.
A question and answer feature also enabled students to submit longer responses during class. Because submissions are anonymous, students may feel more comfortable participating than in traditional hands up discussions.
Anonymity appears to be an important factor in participation. Previous classroom activities often relied on volunteers answering questions aloud, which can discourage some students who worry about giving the wrong answer in front of peers.
Using live polling meant that students could see how their responses compared with the wider group immediately. The lecturer could then explain why certain answers were correct or incorrect, turning the activity into a moment of instant feedback. Dr Jenkins reflects on the overall impact: “My reflections suggested that when using Vevox as a formative assessment tool, this was a positive addition to the modules I was teaching on, and allowing students to track their own progress by seeing correct answers helped them to consider where they may have needed to refine their revision.”
The reflection reports that students generally participated willingly in the activities even though they were not graded. This supports wider research suggesting that students engage in formative tasks when they see clear learning value.
But the approach is not without limitations. Participation tended to decline if too many activities were included in a single lecture, suggesting that digital engagement tools must be used carefully rather than excessively.
Different formats also worked better in different class sizes. Simple response types such as multiple choice questions were more suitable for large cohorts, while other activities were more effective in smaller classes.
Despite these limitations, the reflection suggests that digital polling tools can make feedback more immediate and interactive. For lecturers facing increasing class sizes, such systems may offer a practical way to maintain student engagement while still supporting learning through formative feedback. Dr Jenkins’s future research will extend this work beyond a single institution: “I am currently leading a multi-institutional study with Loughborough University, the University of Strathclyde, the University of Exeter and Queen’s University Belfast. The research alongside my colleagues is now looking at the challenges faced by those who identify as being neurodivergent. This research is really important as it will hopefully allow us to disseminate our findings and showcase how all educators and students can make use of Vevox.”
