How to Boost Engagement, Feedback, and AI in Higher Education: A Practical Case from Nanyang Technological University

Student engagement, meaningful feedback, and the integration of AI in teaching are no longer “nice to have” in higher education. They are essential. Yet, in many compulsory courses, motivating students to actively participate remains a daily challenge.

During a recent Wooclap in Practice webinar, Roger Winder, Senior Lecturer at the Language and Communication Centre of Nanyang Technological University, shared how he leverages Wooclap to tackle exactly this issue. With the support of Lara McEvoy, Customer Success Manager at Wooclap, he demonstrated how engagement, feedback, and AI can work together to transform classroom dynamics.

If you teach in higher education and are looking for practical, field-tested strategies to increase participation without losing control of your class time, this story is for you.

When Engagement Is a Challenge, Not a Given

Roger teaches Engineering Communication, a compulsory course for engineering undergraduates. His students meet him once a week for 1 hour and 45 minutes, in groups of up to 25. Like many of you, he faces a familiar situation: not all students are naturally eager to speak up.

As he explains:

On top of that, cultural and linguistic factors come into play. Some students hesitate to speak publicly because they are less confident in English. Others dominate discussions. The result? Uneven participation and limited visibility into who is truly engaged.

At NTU, 15% of the course grade is linked to class participation. Roger needed a fair, transparent, and scalable way to measure engagement and provide actionable feedback, without spending hours managing spreadsheets or calling on students one by one.

This is where structured interaction through Wooclap became a turning point.

Turning Engagement into Measurable Participation and Feedback

Rather than seeing engagement as something abstract, Roger makes it visible and measurable.

He uses Wooclap to:

• Take attendance
• Track participation
• Collect multiple responses simultaneously
• Download results and integrate them into grading

By counting the number of responses each student submits throughout the semester, he links participation directly to assessment. This ensures fairness while encouraging consistent engagement.

But beyond grading, the real impact lies in feedback loops.

With live responses displayed in real time, Roger instantly sees whether students have understood key concepts. If many answers are incorrect, he adjusts on the spot. If responses show confusion, he revisits explanations. In other words, engagement becomes diagnostic.

This approach aligns with what research on active learning consistently highlights: immediate feedback significantly enhances learning outcomes (see for example the work synthesized by the National Academies of Sciences: https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/24783/how-people-learn-ii).

In practice, Roger uses:

• Open questions to collect reflections
• Word clouds to surface key ideas
• Matching exercises to revisit previous lessons
• Clickable image questions to identify errors in citations

Instead of asking, “Does everyone understand?”, he asks them to show it.

Using AI to Save Time and Enrich Engagement

One of the most interesting parts of Roger’s webinar was his use of AI within Wooclap, not as a gimmick, but as a time-saving and creativity-enhancing tool.

When participants shared open-ended responses during the session, Roger demonstrated how AI could instantly analyze and cluster answers into themes. In large classes, this is particularly powerful. Instead of manually scanning dozens of comments, you receive structured insights in seconds.

He also showed how to generate questions using the “Create with AI” feature. By entering a short prompt, for example, about student engagement tools — the system automatically produced brainstorming questions that could be added directly to the event.

For busy lecturers, this matters.

Designing engaging questions often takes time, especially when you want variety beyond multiple choice. AI reduces preparation time while maintaining pedagogical quality. It also encourages experimentation with less commonly used formats, such as brainstorming or reflection prompts.

In a context where AI is reshaping higher education (as discussed by UNESCO’s guidance on AI in education: https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/education), Roger’s approach is pragmatic: use AI to enhance pedagogy, not replace it.

The key takeaway? AI supports engagement and feedback — it does not substitute the teacher’s expertise.

Encouraging Dialogue, Not Just Clicking

A common misconception about student response systems is that they reduce interaction to “just clicking”. Roger’s approach proves the opposite.

Before launching a question, he often asks students to:

• Discuss in pairs
• Consult official guidelines (APA, IEEE)
• Review previous course materials

Only then do they submit their responses via Wooclap.

This sequence, Think, discuss, respond, creates layered engagement. The digital tool does not replace peer interaction; it structures and amplifies it.

For example, when revisiting citation formats, Roger displays a sample with deliberate mistakes. Students must identify the errors by clicking on the image. This transforms a potentially dry topic into an active investigation.

The result is not only higher engagement, but deeper processing.

He also emphasizes accessibility and ease of use:

“The website I find is really easy. You don’t have to… it’s fairly easy.”

Ease of use matters more than we sometimes admit. If students struggle to connect or respond, engagement drops immediately. If teachers struggle to create or adjust questions, they stop using the tool altogether.

Simplicity enables consistency, and consistency builds culture.

From Silent Classrooms to Visible Learning

One of the most powerful aspects of Roger’s use case is how it levels the playing field.

In traditional classroom discussions:

• Confident students speak often.
• Shy students stay silent.
• The teacher hears only a fraction of the class.

With Wooclap, every student has a voice, even those who would never raise their hand.

Anonymous or semi-anonymous responses reduce the fear of “getting it wrong in public.” Students can test their understanding without social pressure. Meanwhile, the teacher gains a complete picture of the room.

This shift transforms engagement from performance to participation.

It also reframes feedback. Instead of feedback flowing only from teacher to student, it becomes multidirectional:

• Students receive instant correction.
• The teacher receives insight into misconceptions.
• The whole class sees aggregated patterns.

In other words, engagement, feedback, and AI combine to create visible learning.

What Higher Education Teachers Can Take Away

If you are teaching in higher education, especially in large or compulsory courses, Roger’s experience offers three practical lessons:

1. Make engagement measurable.
2. Link participation to structured interactions, not just verbal contributions.
3. Use feedback as a teaching compass.
4. Let real-time responses guide your pacing and explanations.
5. Leverage AI strategically.
6. Use it to save preparation time and analyze responses — not to replace your pedagogical judgment.

You do not need to redesign your entire course. Start small:

• Add one reflective question at the beginning of class.
• Use a matching exercise to revisit last week’s content.
• Experiment with AI-generated brainstorming prompts.

Engagement, Feedback, and AI: A sustainable model for the future

Higher education is evolving rapidly. Students expect interaction. Institutions demand measurable outcomes. AI is reshaping workflows.

Roger Winder’s approach shows that these elements do not have to compete. Engagement, feedback, and AI can reinforce one another, provided they are grounded in sound pedagogy.

By embedding structured interaction into every session, he has transformed participation from a vague expectation into a concrete, assessable, and inclusive practice.

The question is no longer whether engagement matters. It is how you design it.