Holding the Room: Designing Interaction without Technology in Large Chinese University Lectures

Authors

  • Boran Liu Taizhou University
  • Lingzhi Tan Jiaojiang District Education Bureau
  • Haiying Dong The Affiliated School of Taizhou University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62177/jetp.v3i4.1756

Keywords:

Large Lecture, Classroom Interaction, Teaching Design, Undergraduate Teaching, Low-Tech Pedagogy, Chinese Higher Education

Abstract

In Chinese universities, undergraduate lectures of eighty to one hundred and thirty students have become the norm. Faced with such rooms, teachers often feel that meaningful interaction is out of reach without technological support: smart response systems, live bullet-screen chat, or AI-mediated question platforms. This paper argues that the bottleneck in large lectures is design, not technology. It proposes that “interaction” in a large room should be redefined away from public speech by a few visible students and toward a ninety-second cognitive operation in which every student is engaged at the same time. Drawing on recent empirical work on active learning, retrieval practice, and large-class teaching, the paper identifies three structural constraints of the Chinese large lecture—the voice problem, the accountability problem, and the timing problem—and translates them into three reusable, no-technology interaction patterns: neighbour recount, folded-paper vote, and three-sentence exit. Holding the attention of a hundred or so students is a design task, and a smart classroom platform can support—but hardly replace—the teacher’s weekly practice of inserting three ninety-second cognitive contracts into a forty-minute lecture.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Stains, M., Harshman, J., Barker, M. K., et al. (2018). Anatomy of STEM teaching in North American universities. Science, 359(6383), 1468–1470. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap8892

Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science, 319(5865), 966–968. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1152408

Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., et al. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111

Deslauriers, L., McCarty, L. S., Miller, K., et al. (2019). Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(39), 19251–19257. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1821936116

Hattie, J. (2015). The applicability of Visible Learning to higher education. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(1), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000021

Cen, X., Lee, R. J., Contreras, C., et al. (2024). Time spent on active learning activities does not necessarily correlate with student exam performance: A controlled case study. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education, 25(3), e00073–24. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00073-24

Downloads

How to Cite

Liu, B., Tan, L., & Dong, H. (2026). Holding the Room: Designing Interaction without Technology in Large Chinese University Lectures. Journal of Educational Theory and Practice, 3(4). https://doi.org/10.62177/jetp.v3i4.1756

Issue

Section

Articles

DATE

Received: 2026-09-30
Accepted: 2026-10-08
Published: 2026-10-22