Video
This article or section is currently under construction
In principle, someone is working on it and there should be a better version in a not so distant future.
If you want to modify this page, please discuss it with the person working on it (see the "history")
Video
Peter Bishop, Memorial University of Newfoundland
Definitions and background
Videos, video and audio recording, which can be made available for students (Hamad Odhabi and Lynn Nicks-McCaleb, 2011) have been used in teachers’ classrooms since the 1950s for communication (Otrel-Class, Khoo, and Cowie, 2012). Videos are classified into two types, synchronous and asynchronous (Grifiths and Graham, 2010). Griffiths and Graham described synchronous video, or live-stream video, as video that allows for face-to face interactions among users by way of high-speed internet. Asynchronous video is described as pre-recorded video, which allows teachers and students to record information and send it at anytime (Griffiths and Graham, 2010).
Video has been used in classrooms, including the classrooms of Physical Education (Weir and Connor, 2009), Mathematics (Cihak and Bowlin, 2009), Science (Otrel-Cass et al., 2012), History (Zahn and Krauskopf, 2012), and Language Arts (McKenney and Voogt, 2011). As video technology continues to develop, it is being used more and more in classrooms (Hung, 2009). In fact it has become a normal tool for curriculum enhancement (Hung, 2009).
Affordances
Meaningful learning can be achieved through various approaches of video use, including designing, producing and watching videos (Hakkarainen, Saarelainen and Ruokamo, 2007). Jarvinen et al. (2012) found that producing a video project increased students’ results on their final exam. Kpanja (2001) found that students who were provided with video microteachings before a lesson were confident and enthusiastic; these students did better on post evaluations than did the group without video teachings.
Donkor (2011) reported “video increases learners’ interest in the subject, as well as motivation to learn” (p.75). This increased interest and motivation led to a high rate of acceptance of video teachings and thus perceived learning (Donkor 2011). Hung (2009) found that students using video to learn language were motivated because they were able to see their improvement. Choi and Johnson (2010) found that motivation of learners given video-based instruction was higher when compared with text-based instruction. According to Weir and Connor (2009) and Shyu (2000), the use of video produced increased enthusiasm and motivation.
Hung (2009) found that video helped direct and focus the learners’ attention through visualization, which helped students identify strengths and areas of weakness for improvement. According to Brecht (2012) video gives students the ability and control to skip the topics that they understand and focus on those that they do not. Video allows students to see what they are doing right and wrong (Hung, 2009). Hung found that students who are learning new languages could review videos of them performing language tasks, which could allow for reflection and improvement.
Kearney and Schuck (2006) reported that students using digital video were motivated to do well because other users would view their videos. Videos also allow for the use of simulations or models (Cihak and Bowlin, 2009; Weir and Connor, 2009) and give users the flexibility of when to send data and when to read it (Griffiths and Graham, 2010). Cihak and Bowlin found that learning disabled students showed improvement when they were able to use video models when doing geometry problem. In a study by Donkor (2010) it was found that video-based instructional materials produced better summative evaluation results than did print-based methods. Weir and Connor found that the video simulation provided a natural link between lessons and served as a significant teaching and learning aid.
Constraints
According to Krauskopf, Zahn, and Hesse (2012), in order for any video teaching to have value teachers must have adequate integration of technology into their teaching methods. Without sufficient pedagogical knowledge the affordances of asynchronous video such as Youtube cannot be met (Krauskopf et al. 2012).
Borup et al., (2013) found that when interviewed, an English language learner (ELL) felt uncomfortable when expected to use asynchronous video as a means of communication. According to Borup et al. the ELL students lacked the language skills to participate fully in the class. Lack of technology experience can also pose problems for some students when using video along with other technologies (Borup et al., 2013). Griffith and Graham (2010) reported that some of the subjects of their study lacked expertise in using the appropriate software, and making the files of a manageable size. When students are not provided with the necessary instruction, this leads to a feeling of being overwhelmed (Zahn and Krauskopf, 2012) and student anxiety (Hung, 2009).
Students’ knowledge of and familiarity with videos and how they can be used most effectively can also be considered. Although when using video students can manipulate the rate of viewing by using pause, forward and reverse buttons, Kay and Edwards (2012) found that most middle-school students studied did not avail of these features. Furthermore, they found that for those who did use these features, few reported liking having this ability. Kay and Kletskin (2012) found that one third of students studied did not use video podcasts when they were available. Students reported that lack of use was due to time limitations, various technical difficulties, and mainly because they felt they already knew the information in the video.
In order for asynchronous video to be viable, appropriate hardware must be used. Griffith and Graham (2010) posited that students that did not have adequate infrastructure had problems and delays when making video. Students had purchased equipment that was fairly inexpensive which caused problems (Griffith and Graham, 2010).
Finally, Odhabi and McCaleb (2011) reported accessibility issues that surround the use of video in the classroom, namely human resources to set up equipment along with the need for dedicated areas for audio-visual learning. Hartsell and Yuen (2006) also identified that if human resources are not available, then synchronous video is not a possibility.
Links