Exploring student engagement with Padlet

Technology has long been part of education, but its role has rapidly evolved in recent years. Classrooms now increasingly incorporate artificial intelligence, adaptive platforms, and immersive tools such as virtual and augmented reality (Holmes et al., 2019; Luckin et al., 2016). These innovations support more personalised and engaging learning, with game-based approaches enhancing motivation and understanding (Makransky & Petersen, 2019). As a result, modern education reflects a blend of traditional and advanced digital practices (OECD, 2021).

This approach is underpinned by social constructivist theory, which views learning as a collaborative process developed through interaction, dialogue, and shared knowledge construction (Vygotsky, 1978). In this context, Padlet functions as a digital learning space that supports communities of practice, enabling students and colleagues to co-construct understanding and learn from collective participation within technology-enhanced environments (Lave and Wenger, 1991).

This blog focuses on the use of Padlet, a tool that can be used by academics.

Padlet is an online collaborative platform where users can post text, images, links, and multimedia on a shared virtual board, supporting interaction, reflection, and knowledge sharing (Dahlstrom, Brooks & Bichsel, 2014; Redecker, 2017). To create a Padlet, a user signs up, selects a board layout, and adds prompts or sections for contributions. Participants can then post notes, upload files, and comment on others’ posts, making it a flexible tool for class activities, asynchronous engagement, assessment support, sharing best practices and feedback collection.

Exploring student engagement with Padlet

As an educational researcher, I explored how Padlet supports student engagement and collaboration across professional-focused and other modules at the University of Derby. Students shared reflections, resources, and peer feedback through interactive learning boards, promoting discussion, motivation, and peer learning (Dahlstrom, Brooks & Bichsel, 2014; Redecker, 2017; Holmes, Bialik & Fadel, 2019). I also used Padlet during an open day session, where applicants actively participated and reported learning something new, as many had not previously encountered such tools in school or college.

Supporting asynchronous learning

During COVID-19 at Coventry University, students recorded key takeaways from lecture videos on Padlet, which I reviewed with short audio feedback. This promoted reflection and self-directed learning, aligning with studies on digital engagement in online environments (Redecker, 2017; Jisc, 2020).

Facilitating assessment queries

Padlet centralised assessment-related questions, enabling peer responses and reducing emails. This enhanced accessibility, transparency, and collaborative problem-solving, consistent with research on digital discussion platforms (Jisc, 2020; Dahlstrom, Brooks & Bichsel, 2014).

Collecting feedback and supporting staff

I used Padlet to support mentoring among progress coaches, where senior staff shared anonymised experiences and junior colleagues posed questions, enabling knowledge transfer and reflective practice. Padlet was also used to collect feedback from student representatives and module leaders, further supporting collaborative reflection (Holmes, Bialik & Fadel, 2019; Redecker, 2017). One module leader noted appreciation for the transparent handling of student feedback, which encouraged collective programme improvement and helped foster a strong sense of community.

Newsletters and task management

Padlet was also adapted as a newsletter and task-scheduling tool, showing its versatility in promoting communication, engagement, and transparency in academic teams (Jisc, 2020; Dahlstrom, Brooks & Bichsel, 2014).

References

Padlet: Creative tools for visual thinkers and learners

Dahlstrom, E., Brooks, D.C. and Bichsel, J. (2014) The Current Ecosystem of Learning Management Systems in Higher Education. Louisville, CO: EDUCAUSE.

Holmes, W., Bialik, M. and Fadel, C. (2019) Artificial Intelligence in Education: Promises and Implications for Teaching and Learning. Boston: Center for Curriculum Redesign.

Jisc (2020) Digital capabilities: The six elements defined. Available at: https://www.jisc.ac.uk (Accessed: 25 March 2026).

Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M. and Forcier, L.B. (2016) Intelligence Unleashed: An Argument for AI in Education. London: Pearson.

Makransky, G. and Petersen, G.B. (2019) ‘Immersive virtual reality and learning: A meta-analysis’, Educational Psychology Review, 31(4), pp. 1–40.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2021) OECD Digital Education Outlook 2021: Pushing the Frontiers with Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain and Robots. Paris: OECD Publishing.

Redecker, C. (2017) European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators (DigCompEdu). Luxembourg: European Commission.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.