Video learning artifacts have been used in education for many decades now, with little research into its benefit to student learning. As the effectiveness of video is still being researched this poster aims to provide some practical effective options to educators creating video.
Often a conflict between ease of production versus video sophistication dictates our choices of video output. However, as with the creation of all effective learning activities, taking into account the learning objectives and considering the most effective way of getting these across to the students is probably more important than choosing the first option open to us.
A recent Cisco study states that by 2019, 80% of the world’s Internet traffic will be video (Marshall, 2015). This growth in video use has been mirrored in education. More teachers are wishing to use video to assist with creating effective learning activities for their students. Institutions are investing in self-service video studios and capture software to meet this demand.
Much of this video produced comes in two dominant styles; ‘talking heads’ and ‘voice over PowerPoint’. These are just a digitisation of a face to face lecture, and doesn’t take advantage of the full scope of delivery options that video can offer. This is using a new technology in an ‘old’ paradigm.
A number of researchers (Guo, et al. (2014), Hansch, et al. (2015), and Lodge, et al. (2016)) have categorised different video production styles in order to assist in discovering if one style is more effective for student engagement and learning. The literature on the success of these differing styles is lean. More research is needed in this area.
The instructional design of the video appears to be more important than the typology or gene for both learning effectiveness and engagement. This poster has been developed as a quick reference guide to get teaching staff to consider other styles when they make their production style decisions.
It outlines many of the different styles of video production used in the University of Melbourne MOOCs over the past four years. These videos have received many positive feedback comments from students about their high video quality as well as their engagement compared to videos from other institutions.
Supporting research and justification of each style is provided where available. Also a simple rating system assists in selection and choice of the best video tool to use for the learning outcomes for the students.
Guo, P.J, KIm, J, and Rubin, R. (2014). How Video Production Affects Student Engagement: An Empirical Study of MOOC Videos ACM Conference on Learning at Scale (L@S).
Hansch, A. et.al. (2015). Video and Online Learning: Critical Reflections and Findings From the Field. HIIG Discussion Paper Series.
Lodge, J., Horvath, J., and Hortin, A. (2016). Video killed the lecturer? A systematic analysis of video use in higher education. http://melbourne-cshe.unimelb.edu.au/events/video-killed-the-lecturer-a-systematic-analysis-of-video-use-in-higher-education accessed 10 November 2016.
Marshall, C. (2015). By 2019, 80% of the world’s Internet Traffic will be video [Cisco Jared Horvath <email@example.com> Study]. http://tubularinsights.com/2019-internet-video-traffic/ accessed 10 November 2016.