Auditory Learner
Authors: Locke Kathryn , Ellis Katie , Wolf Katharina 
Published: April 2024

Introduction
This study examines the ways in which students and staff in higher education use and engage in audio, both in everyday life and within the university setting. Specifically, we explore if the increasingly diverse student population utilise audio as part of a personalised approach to learning. Increasing student engagement in online delivery through a personalised approach to learning is a vital area of focus in contemporary pedagogy internationally. The rapid move to online delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed both opportunities and challenges for learners with diverse digital access requirements (Ellis et al. 17). Along with captions – which have been embraced as an accessibility feature by the entire student population (Ellis et al.) – the use of audio has increased (Peaty et al. 7).
Digital accessibility has typically focussed on the availability of captions, yet the experience of many students during COVID-19 pandemic-imposed remote learning activities shows that audio also offers great potential for personalisation, accessibility, and engagement. With audio options following the trajectory of captions in both education and entertainment contexts to become recognised as a personal preference (Ellis 167), this article examines whether higher education has responded to the ‘audio turn’. Moreover, it seeks to answer how students, as a diverse population, utilise audio as part of their learning experience.
The ‘audio turn’ refers to the recent period marked by the COVID-19 pandemic, alongside the increase in (and use of) audio platforms and features. However, it should also be acknowledged that this audio turn is also part of a longer history of technology-enabled audio pedagogy, encompassing transitions from vinyl to cassette tape, and analogue to digital. These specific changes over approximately the last five years have been captured in the literature on the rise of audio description (see for example Peaty et al.; Piñeiro-Otero and Pedrero-Esteban), audiobooks and “listening culture” (Snelling 648), studies on the uptake of podcasts and digital radio (St. Aubin), and popular articles (Forbes). In a relatively short period of time, audio book sales, podcasting, digital music consumption, and audio accessibility (including audio description) have increased significantly. The culmination of new business models (e.g., Spotify’s audio-first strategy; Kilberg and Spilker 156) and the specific remote learning/working, lockdown environments generated by COVID-19 mitigation policies further facilitated this audio turn. The rise of the value and use of audio also extended into the university context, which prompted new literature on audio learning strategies (Wake et al. 30; Jensen and Veprinska). However, the question arises: despite the increased interest in audio, has higher education pedagogy adapted to reflect learning options and preferences?
Audio in Higher Education
Over the past decade, a body of research has emerged that highlights opportunities for audio in the higher education context; however, there remains a lack of research on the potential of audio more broadly for learning personalisation and accessibility. Most of the existing research on audio supported pedagogy has centred around the value of audio feedback on assessments (Knauf 442; Sarcona et al. 47; Heimbürger 106). With over a decade of publications on this type of audio-supported learning, researchers have found audio feedback to be divisive, in part due to the varied nature in which it is applied and received (Hennesy and Forrester 778), but Sacona et al. (58) emphasise students’ desire for the availability of both modalities of feedback (audio and written). Other audio learning alternatives discussed in the literature on audio-supported pedagogy include podcasts (McGarr; Gunderson and Cumming 591; Gachago et al. 859) and, to a lesser degree, the role of audio description (Pintado et al.), which may in part be the result of the recency of use of audio description in the media more broadly. One of the key features of more recent (post-2020) research into various audio alternatives or audio-supported learning options was the consistent observation that audio is an important part of universal design for learning (UDL) and its value and appeal for an increasingly diverse student population.
UDL is an important concept in understanding the role of audio in higher education, as it is not simply focussed on ‘access to the classroom’, but the ways in which access to educational content, texts, and teaching is considered. It is centred on three principles: multiple means of representation, multiple means of engagement, and multiple means of expression (Cumming and Rose 1026). Pertinent to our research, UDL emphasises multiple formats for learning materials, including audio. Moreover, developed in the early 2000s, UDL recognises the role of digital technology in addressing the needs of an increasingly diverse student population (Edyburn 16). It is adapted from Universal Design (UD), which is based on a set of principles: equitable use, flexibility in use, simple and intuitive use, perceptible information, tolerance for error, low physical effort, and size and space for approach and use (Centre for Universal Design).
While acknowledging the broader research literature and debates around cognitive styles, learning strategies, learning styles, and their efficacy in instruction (Cassidy 420), this project uses the term ‘learning preferences’ to capture the preferred, individual approaches to a task or learning situation. Auditory preferences are common amongst most models of learning styles; however, the scope of this study did not extend to other learning preferences or alternatives. Instead, this pilot research project, informed by the ‘audio turn’ and increased interest in UDL, sought to better understand how students and staff in the university context perceive, utilise, and engage with audio, both in everyday life and in higher education.
Methodology
The rationale for this project is based on UDL theories of flipped learning (Wolf et al.) and the use of captions in teaching and learning (Ellis et al.). UDL seeks to remove barriers and emphasises the importance of creating learning environments that offer multiple ways of engaging with content, and of accessing and representing information (Behling and Tobin 2). Wolf et al.’s research on flipped learning (replacing traditional lectures with online recordings) discovered that students who self-diagnosed attention deficit issues preferred the online option as it allowed them to break learning into small chunks. The opportunity to personalise study experiences to meet individual learning preferences was valued by the entire cohort, including students who preferred on-campus and face-to-face learning.
These findings informed the development of a multimodal methodology in which participant responses are gathered from both researchers’ questions and from interaction and engagement with alternative learning formats. Firstly, a survey on the use of audio in everyday life and learning environments was created via Qualtrics and disseminated to students and staff. This was achieved in conjunction with the Digital Student Engagement Team, who promoted the survey via internal channels, Digital Screens, and Instagram stories. Several of the Faculties and Schools taking part in the research also distributed links to the survey via internal emails and the university’s learning platform. The survey was open for a ten-week period in the second half of 2023.
Secondly, this project trialled embedding audio in teaching resources within four different units across two Faculties (Humanities and Business and Law), and then obtained feedback from students on their interactions with these new learning formats. Specifically, we added audio description to key resources in each unit, provided the option for audio feedback on at least one assignment per unit, and offered an audio version of the assessment guide. Students in the participating units were then invited to partake in an end-of-study-period focus group that discussed their uptake of and experience with the additional audio resources. The semi-structured discussions were facilitated in-person for on-campus units, and online via WebEx for offshore and online cohorts. The qualitative results from the focus groups and survey underwent thematic analysis.
Research Findings
Across both the survey findings and focus group discussions it emerged that audio played a pivotal role in students’ everyday life, and that this role had both increased in the past four years and manifested into a desire to utilise more audio alternatives in their learning experiences. There was a clear awareness of individuals’ personal learning preferences and what format they best responded to, as well as recognition that peers may have other preferences. These different types of learning preferences were reflected in the varied responses to extra audio-based learning material; while some students appreciated audio feedback on assessments, others preferred written feedback, in particular for ease of referencing and in order to refer back to it at a later point in time. Through the learner lens, audio does not appear to have replaced written learning material; instead, it is seen as complementary – and vice versa.
Demographics
Of the 268 survey participants (supplemented by an additional 31 focus group participants), 16.5% were staff. The responses primarily came from first-year students (26%), with relatively similar percentages of second-, third-year, and postgraduate students. In keeping with these enrolment demographics, most respondents were between the ages of 18 and 24 (43%). Students and staff in the Faculty of Humanities were significantly represented (57%), and most participants studied or taught online for some or all of the time (33% stated that they studied or taught both in person and online).
Fig. 1: Age of participants
Fig. 2: Faculty participation
Fig. 3: Type of study
Research on UDL (Bracken and Novak 8) identifies that specific groups of students may benefit more from accessible learning options, thus we explored respondents' background further: 73% of our survey respondents spoke English as their first language, 21% were mature-age students (commencing university after 20 years of age), 16% were international students, and 2% were of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent. Universal design is particularly pertinent for students with disabilities, due to the provision of “multiple ways of engaging with content” (Behling and Tobin 2), including audio learning alternatives. While we acknowledge that students do not always identify as having a disability, for a variety of reasons (Roberts et al. 249), 16% stated that they had a disability, with the most commonly cited disability being Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Almost half of respondents with a disability cited multiple disabilities.
Use of Audio in Everyday Life
Participants were asked a series of questions about their use of audio in everyday life. Students acknowledged audio as an important and consistent part of everyday life, with music playing a significant role. It was clarified that audio is perceived as important for many reasons; used to multitask, for information and entertainment, for mental stimulation and in order to ‘get into the zone’ (e.g., for exams), for relaxation, and as a way of ‘filling space’ and avoiding silence. Though the most popular audio platforms were streamed music (71% of respondents stating they used apps like Spotify or Apple Music daily), podcasts were also consumed daily or a few times a week by 43% of respondents. The age of respondents did impact on the type of audio formats used – respondents under the age of 24 were less likely to listen to audio books (81% stated they rarely or never did), but 93% listened to streamed music. Importantly, the suggested rise of the importance of audio during the ‘pandemic years’ (Peaty et al. 7; St. Aubin) aligned with our research findings: 64% of respondents stated that their use of audio content had increased over the last four years.
Expectations and Uptake of Audio in Higher Education
Across both the focus groups and the survey, learners expressed a clear interest in using more audio learning options. 53% of all respondents stated that they would use more audio content in their higher education experience if it was offered. Only 5% said they would not. The most popular audio option was audio recordings of lectures and/or tutorials, with 46% stating they would use this option, while audio books or text-to-speech conversions for readings and academic articles were also desired.
Fig. 4: Audio learning preferences
For audio assessments and audio feedback on assessments, the results were more divisive, which is in line with extant research (Knauf 442; Sarcona et al. 47). From the comments provided, it was evident that personal learning and assessment preferences impacted on whether these options would suit individuals. Being able to quickly refer back to key points was also highlighted as an advantage of written feedback, or at least access to a transcript of the audio feedback. However, audio feedback was also perceived as providing advantages: “tonality really helps when communicating feedback, more easily emotionally received. Potential to be conversational – in my experience of getting feedback in person conversation has always been more beneficial.” International students, in particular, emphasised that written feedback can come across as harsh and impersonal. Being able to hear the educator’s voice was perceived as making feedback more personal and digestible. However, whilst written feedback enables leaners to skim over comments and in particular challenging points, audio feedback requires deeper engagement, which was not always considered as welcome. Staff were more reluctant to use audio learning alternatives (only 32% said they would use more audio content, a further 57% said they might, and 11% said they would not), citing concerns around workload and applicability to subject/unit.
Improving Accessibility and the Role of Audio
There was an array of alternative suggestions for improving the accessibility of higher education, either through increased audio options or other approaches. The use of captions (or descriptions) for lectures, podcasts for tutorials, and more interaction options for online tutorials emerged as a key theme.  As one student explained, audio formats can allow for increased accessibility: “I like the idea of podcasts and audio books – this would help people like me who struggle with sitting down and fully focussing on reading material, people who experience neurodiversity”.
Students again showed a clear understanding of how different learning formats could align with personal learning preferences. Moreover, they demonstrated critical awareness of the capabilities (and deficits) of existing university platforms and formats:

the user experience for [the online learning platform] is poorly designed and not interactive enough… . I think online learning should incorporate visual image and video, live interactive quizzes, drop out rooms with students and interactive participation.

Participants expressed a clear interest in accessible audio materials – audiobooks, audio recordings, convertible formats – and often this was aligned with the reasons for why students used accessibility features: more accessible content allows them to absorb information more easily, multitask, and to be efficient and effective in study. Noticeable was their awareness that accessible learning options were more inclusive and were aligned with a diverse student population. Participants reported that learning strategies, such as using text-to-audio conversion to check the syntax and flow of written assignment, or audio-to-text conversion for early assessment drafts, were largely self-discovered solutions to meet personal needs and preferences. Comments indicate a lack of formally taught strategies and audio-linked toolkits, further suggesting skills gaps – and possibly a preference for more traditional learning approaches – among teaching staff.  
Discussion
While this pilot project provided limited reflections on the value of audio in higher education due to being limited to a single higher education institution, there are several clear themes that have emerged from our research that require further investigation and replication across multiple institutions, disciplines, and cohorts. Importantly, our findings highlight students’ desire for more audio, and accessible audio, in their learning experience; an awareness of individual learning preferences; and a gap between students’ expectations of multiple learning formats and the ability of the university to provide audio-supported pedagogy.   
Accessible, personalised and audio formats have become an expectation both within and outside of higher education (driven in part by increasing options in the broader media landscape). While the most common accessibility feature used by students (within and outside of higher education) is captions, students showed a clear interest in, and use of, audio formats (books, lectures, academic articles) and audio-described lectures. However, it should be noted that audio description is currently underutilised in higher education, and, while increasingly available (Peaty et al. 4), also not a standard inclusion in the broader media context. Therefore, we anticipate that audio description will begin to play a more significant role, particularly with the increase in AI.
There was a clear awareness amongst students of their own learning preferences, and how audio alternatives and accessibility features might facilitate their personal education experience. Moreover, there was an understanding of the diversity of learning preferences amongst other students: “I am a visual learner, but I know for other students, audio might be more useful”. In the learning environment, students reflected not only on their use of audio materials, but of a range of formats. Several students noted that their preference was to engage with a combination of audio-visual materials, or to use audio as a “back-up” if information was missed or misunderstood. One student noted that they would record themselves reading their own essay once they had written it as a way of picking up mistakes. Students demonstrated a range of innovative strategies or tools to aid in learning or assessments, but these were largely personalised approaches outside of the tools or affordances the university offered. The different types of learning preferences identified in the focus groups were reflected in the varied responses to the extra audio-based learning material that had been provided to them during the semester. While some students appreciated audio feedback on assessments, others preferred written feedback. This confirmed responses from the earlier survey.
The results of our pilot study reveal several key ‘disconnects’ between the perceptions, desires, and practices of students and staff, and the practical, effective implementation of audio learning strategies in the university context. As previously noted in relation to the use of captions in universities (Ellis et al.), higher education fails to be both at the forefront of and responsive to audio accessibility and audio format opportunities. The results allude to several reasons for this deficit: insufficient communication of what is available and how to access it, outdated or insufficient platforms that support audio learning options, lack of investment in new tools and technologies, limited professional opportunities to upskill staff, workload implications, and a lack of essential infrastructure (e.g. recording studios).
For example, despite the provision of extra audio formats in the units involved in this research project, there were many students who were not aware of them, and during the focus groups students had to be prompted several times and provided with cues in order for them to remember these options. Moreover, students had also not been aware of audio options that currently exist as built-in features – such as voice notes to record audio feedback on assessments – and very few had ever experienced these audio learning options in the university setting, in part due to the lack of uptake of this feature by staff. Indeed, there are fundamental deficits in the utilisation of audio alternatives and accessibility features by staff. As one staff member explained, “audio can be far more personal and engaging. However, a big caveat here … . Audio production of content for teaching requires professional audio editing support. It is not something that can easily be added to academic workload”. Here, staff identify the extra ‘work’ and professional skills involved in the utilisation and production of accessible audio formats. For example, including audio description for a lecture involves media production skills, the navigation (and employment of) specific audio description software, as well as fundamental accessibility knowledge – all of which is rarely taught or provided for in higher education.
We found gaps in the awareness of and the ability (both in terms of time and professional skills) of university staff to employ the ‘access work’ and ‘media work’ (Ellcessor 325; Hickman 6), and a lack of understanding of the opportunities for and benefits of audio-supported pedagogy. In our survey, while staff similarly engaged with audio regularly in their everyday lives, they were more reluctant to use audio learning alternatives in a higher education setting, citing concerns around workload and applicability to subject or unit.

I teach units that deal primarily with writing, so I'm more interested in speech-to-text rather than the other way round. I feel that audio submissions of assessments widen the digital and linguistic divide, particularly for mature-age students and international students, who form a major cohort of many online units that I teach.

Furthermore, the casualisation of teaching in higher education often places (typically unpaid) responsibility on tutors to upskill and self-navigate options for accessible teaching.
Conclusion
This study indicates that learners are frequently much more aware of their own needs, preferences, and potential tools to address these, than the facilitators of higher education learning experiences. Findings call for a rethink of higher education learning experiences, away from a standard delivery model – as often preferred by learning institutions – to mixed-mode experiences that both keep learners engaged and respond to the ‘audio turn’.
One such example is the traditional lecture, which over the past years has increasingly moved online. However, delivery approaches have hardly changed. The assumption remains of the lecturer as expert, who talks to an audience that very much engages with a commentary to lecture slide content in real time. What these recordings – either of in-class deliveries or pre-recorded content – fail to acknowledge is shortened attention spans, as well as the fact that an increasing number of learners exclusively engage with learning content ‘on the go’ or whilst multi-tasking. Rather than putting text – or lecture slides and other visual materials – first, a rethink of the traditional lecture as ‘podcast’, with an increased focus on verbal cues, descriptions, and storytelling techniques could enable facilitators to meet students ‘where they are’: on the go, multitasking, and wanting to listen. Rather than interpreting changing consumption patterns of learning content as a sign of disengagement, mixing up learning content and delivery modes, and especially a shift to an ‘audio-first’ model of delivery could result in deeper, more meaningful, and impactful learning experiences.
References
Behling, Kirsten, and Thomas Tobin. Reach Everyone, Teach Everyone: Universal Design for Learning in Higher Education. Morgantown: West Virginia UP, 2018. <https://muse.jhu.edu/book/62887>.
Bracken, Sean, and Katie Novak, eds. Transforming Higher Education Through Universal Design for Learning: An International Perspective. London: Routledge, 2019. <https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351132077>.
Cassidy, Simon. “Learning Styles: An Overview of Theories, Models, and Measures.” Educational Psychology 24.4 (2004): 419-444. <https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341042000228834>.
Centre for Universal Design, The. “Guidelines for Use of the Principles of Universal Design.” North Carolina State University, 1997. <https://projects.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_ud/docs/use_guidelines.pdf>.
Cumming, Therese, and Megan Rose. “Exploring Universal Design for Learning as an Accessibility Tool in Higher Education: A Review of the Current Literature.” Australian Education Research 49 (2022): 1025–43. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-021-00471-7>.
Edyburn, Dave. “Universal Design for Learning.” Special Education Technology Practice 7.5 (2005): 16-22. <https://www.ocali.org/up_doc/UDL_SETP7.pdf>.
Ellis, Katie. Disability and Digital Television Cultures: Representation, Access, and Reception. New York: Routledge, 2019.
Ellis, Katie, Mike Kent, and Gwyneth Peaty. “Captioned Recorded Lectures as a Mainstream Learning Tool.” M/C Journal 20.3 (2017). <https://journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal/article/view/1262>.
Ellis, Katie, Kai-Ti Kao, and Tim Pitman. “The Pandemic Preferred User.” Fast Capitalism 17.2 (2020): 17-28. <https://doi.org/10.32855/fcapital.202002.002>.
Ellcessor, Elizabeth. “Three Vignettes in Pursuit of Accessible Pandemic Teaching.” Communication, Culture and Critique 14.2 (2021): 324–327. <https://doi.org/10.1093/ccc/tcab010>.
Forbes. “Digital Audio Proves Resilient during the Pandemic.” 12 May 2021. <https://www.forbes.com/sites/forrester/2021/05/12/digital-audio-proves-resilient-during-the-pandemic/>.
Gachago, Daniela, Candice Livingston, and Eunice Ivala. “Podcasts: A Technology for All?” British Journal of Educational Technology 47.5 (2016): 859–872. <https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12483>.
Gunderson, Jamie, and Therese M. Cumming. “Podcasting in Higher Education as a Component of Universal Design for Learning: A Systematic Review of the Literature.” Innovations in Education and Teaching International 60.4 (2023): 591-601. <https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2022.2075430>.
Heimbürger, Anneli. “Using Recorded Audio Feedback in Cross-Cultural e-Education Environments to Enhance Assessment Practices in a Higher Education.” Advances in Applied Sociology 8.2 (2018): 106-124. <https://doi.org/10.4236/aasoci.2018.82007>.
Hennessy, Claire, and Gillian Forrester. “Developing a Framework for Effective Audio Feedback: A Case Study.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 39.7 (2014): 777-89. <https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.870530>.
Hickman, Louise. “Transcription Work and the Practices of Crip Technoscience.” Catalyst: Feminism, Theory, Technoscience 5.1 (2019): 1–10. <https://doi.org/10.28968/cftt.v5i1.32081>.
Jensen, Sarah E., and Anna Veprinska. “Ability, Academia, and Audiobooks: In Conversation.” New Explorations: Studies in Culture and Communication 2.2 (2022). <https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/nexj/article/view/38582>.
Kent, Mike, Katie Ellis, Gwyneth Peaty, Natalie Latter, and Kathryn Locke. “Mainstreaming Captions for Online Lectures in Higher Education in Australia: Alternative Approaches to Engaging with Video Content at Curtin University.” 2017. <https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/publications/4074/?doing_wp_cron=1493183232.7519669532775878906250>.
Kiberg, Håvard, and Hendrik Spilker. “One More Turn after the Algorithmic Turn? Spotify’s Colonization of the Online Audio Space.” Popular Music and Society 46.2 (2023): 151-71. <https://doi.org/10.1080/03007766.2023.2184160>.
Knauf, Helen. “Reading, Listening and Feeling: Audio Feedback as a Component of an Inclusive Learning Culture at Universities.” Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 41.3 (2016): 442-9. <https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1021664>.
McGarr, Oliver. “A Review of Podcasting in Higher Education: Its Influence on the Traditional Lecture.” Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 25.3 (2009): 309-21. <https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1136>.
Peaty, Gwyneth, Kathryn Locke, Kai-Ti Kao, Hersinta and Katie Ellis. “A Series of Lively Impressions: Quality Narration and the Rise of Audio Description.” Media International Australia (2023). <https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X231183286>.
Pintado Gutiérrez, Lucía, and Gloria Torralba. “New Landscapes in Higher Education: Audio Description as a Multilayered Task in FL Teaching.” The Language Learning Journal (2022). <https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2022.2158209>.
Piñeiro-Otero, Teresa, and Luis-Miguel Pedrero-Esteban. “Audio Communication in the Face of the Renaissance of Digital Audio”. Profesional de la información 31.5 (2022). <https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2022.sep.07>.
Roberts, Jodi, Laura Crittenden, and Jason Crittenden. “Students with Disabilities and Online Learning: A Cross-Institutional Study of Perceived Satisfaction with Accessibility Compliance and Services.” The Internet and Higher Education 14.4 (2011): 242–50.
Rose, David, and Anne Meyer. Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age. Alexandria, VA: ASCD, 2002. <http://www.cast.org/teachingeverystudent/ideas/tes/>.
Sarcona, Alessandra, Dara Dirhan, and Patricia Davidson. “An Overview of Audio and Written Feedback from Students’ and Instructors’ Perspective.” Educational Media International 57.1 (2020): 47-60. <https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2020.1744853>.
Snelling, Maria. “The Audiobook Market and Its Adaptation to Cultural Changes.” Pub Res Q 37 (2021): 642–56. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-021-09838-1>.
St Aubin, Christopher. “Audio and Podcasting Fact Sheet.” Pew Research Centre, 15 June 2023. <https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/audio-and-podcasting/>.
Wake, Alex, Kim Fox, and Catherine Strong. "Pandemic Podcasting: From Classroom to Bedroom." Teaching Journalism and Mass Communication, 10.1 (2020): 29-33. <http://www.aejmc.us/spig/journal>.
Wolf, Katharin, Lydia Gallant, Aneeshta Gunness, and Bridget Tombleson. “Flipping the Perspective: Exploring Flipped Learning through the Student Lens.” Paper presented at the West Australian Teaching and Learning Forum. Fremantle, WA: Notre Dame University, 1 Feb. 2019. <https://espace.curtin.edu.au/bitstream/handle/20.500.11937/75218/75458%20Abstract.pdf?sequence=3>.