Below is some (abridged) evidence related to tertiary mathematics teaching and learning. We have included only literature reviews and meta-analyses, which combine a number of individual articles that are found systematically; when done correctly the findings are much more reliable than any individual study. These quotes have been abridged. Please see the original sources for full references etc.
Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research 69(1), 21-51. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543069001021
Of the 16 studies investigated in this review, six did not report on attainment, one concluded the neutral impact of LC (with the exception of students who were not following up on their intentions to watch LC after missing a lecture—this practice was strongly associated with poor grades), one concluded a positive relationship, and nine concluded a negative relationship between LC and attainment. This lends some rudimentary evidence that the blanket LC policies that are being rolled out at many tertiary institutions across all faculties may be premature.
Of the eight studies that reported a negative impact on attainment, all found that regular substitution of live lecture attendance with LC was associated with lower achievement. Consistent with [an earlier literature reieew, one study] concluded that there is a significant negative correlation between final course grade and LC views (ρ = − 0.443, p = 0.014). However, these studies did see benefits to groups of students who used LC supplementarily, but once a student used LC as their primary learning tool, they underperformed compared to their peers attending lectures...
Only one study reported a potential positive impact of LC on attainment. Based on qualitative analysis of in-depth interviews of students, [this study] reasoned that LC increased attainment because of its usefulness when circumstances stopped a student attending class, preventing a student from falling behind. LC’s utility in re-watching content is a reason why student attainment may improve. Additionally, the authors posited that the use of LC could compensate for disadvantages of attending information-heavy live lectures, as all students reported that having to multitask in taking notes while listening to the lecturer effectively was cognitively demanding. In spite of this plausible reasoning based on students’ opinions, it is worth noting that the study was not designed to empirically ascertain the impact of LC on attainment.
Some studies found that students who were already performing poorly were the most affected by the introduction of LC. Interestingly, this negative relationship between attainment and LC often appears in disconnect with the perception some students have of the utility they gain from LC. [A study] found that students perceived increased performance and satisfaction with a course when LC was implemented despite a weak negative relationship between LC usage and performance, with low-achieving students using LC the most. Similarly, [another study] found not only that the group of students who relied on watching LC and not attending lectures (the largest cluster, N = 313, 60%) achieved the lowest grades in the course, but also that a “portion of students in this cluster strongly believed videos are superior to lectures in maximising their learning for the time available owing to a more concise format with less repetition, flexible use, efficient and faster pace” (p. 542). At James Cook University (Australia), in a survey of a mathematics for engineering class, 85% of students felt that LC did not have a negative effect on their academic performance.
Lindsay, E., Evans, T. The use of lecture capture in university mathematics education: a systematic review of the research literature. Math Ed Res J 34, 911–931 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-021-00369-8