YouTube

The educational technology and digital learning wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

YouTube

Keith Pender, Memorial University of Newfoundland

Definitions and background

Affordances

  • Bulleted list item

Constraints

Lee and Lehto (2013) noted the perception of YouTube as a medium for entertaining, resulting in the platform not being recognized for its educational content in motivating student learning. Krauskopf et al. (2012) found that students considered YouTube “as a tool for entertainment and taking a break from learning” (p. 1204). Krauskopf et al. (2012) also indicated that participants considered the entertaining function of the video to be of higher importance than the material. Tan and Pearce (2011) report that participants interacting on YouTube often view and rate videos based on their entertainment value, which may not always align with the educational value of the content.

An additional constraint related to the use of YouTube for learning relates Bromley (2008) observation that searching for an appropriate learning resource relevant to a specific teaching outcome involves a considerable amount of browsing time. Tan and Pearce (2011) found that students felt professors should be cognizant of the video’s length and appropriate inclusion of resources, indicating that the selection of shorter videos may be better suited for learning as well as ensuring the video’s content is relevant to course materials. When searching for information on YouTube, Tímár et al. (2011) indicate that videos are sometimes tagged inappropriately, suggesting that programmers revise tagging protocols and include guidelines for users when uploading videos to the platform. In an analytical study of videos about disabilities, Bromley (2008) used thirteen key word tags for searching the YouTube database and observed examples of videos containing inaccurate content and unsupported evidence. Snyder and Burke (2008) identified that inappropriate content is uploaded to YouTube and instructors should preview any video before sharing it in the classroom.

Another constraint relates to the anonymous nature of YouTube (Halpern and Gibbs, 2013). Halpern and Gibbs (2013) found that because subscribers are not required to provide personal information, often results in impolite behaviors by users with anonymous profiles in this environment. Koh (2013) also identified the problem related to anonymity that participants potentially exhibit unfriendly behaviors.

A further constraint of learning pertains to, as Krauskopf et al. (2012) indicated, the training in technologies to support the participant’s professional content knowledge. Snyder and Burke (2008) identified that instructors should request professional development practices in learning how to use YouTube in order to develop the technological content knowledge for participants to feel comfortable with developing and incorporating video resources in their courses and lectures.

Links

About YouTube

Official YouTube Blog

Engaging the YouTube Google-Eyed Generation

Educause - 7 Things you should know about YouTube

YouTube Pedagogy: Finding Communities of Practices in Distributed Learning World

Works Cited

Abendroth, M., Golzy, J., O'Connor, E. (2011). Self-created YouTube recordings of microteachings: Their effects upon candidates’ readiness for teaching and instructors’ assessment. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 40(2), 141-159. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/ET.40.2.e.

Bromley, B. (2008). Broadcasting disability: An exploration of the educational potential of a video sharing web site. Journal of Special Education Technology, 23(4), 1-13.

Courtois, C., Mechant, P., Ostyn, V., and De Marez, L. (2013). Uploaders' definition of the networked public on YouTube and their feedback preferences: A multi-method approach. Behaviour & Information Technology, 32(6), 612-624. DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2011.586727.

Halpern, D., and Gibbs, J. (2013). Social media as a catalyst for online deliberation? Exploring the affordances of Facebook and YouTube for political expression. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1159-1168. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.008.

Keegan, H., and Bell, F. (2011). YouTube as a repository: The creative practice of students as producers of open educational resources. European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning. Date of publication 20 December 2011. Retrieved October 3, 2013 from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/special/2011/Keegan_Bell.pdf.

Koh, C. (2013). Exploring the use of web 2.0 technology to promote moral and psychological development: Can YouTube work? British Journal of Educational Technology. Article first published online 6 June 2013. DOI: 10.1111/bjet.12071.

Krauskopf, K., Zahn, C., and Hess, F. (2012). Leveraging the affordances of YouTube: The role of pedagogical knowledge and mental models of technology functions for lesson planning with technology. Computers & Education, 58(4), 1194-1206. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.010.

Kruse, N., and Veblen, K. (2012). Music teaching and learning online: Considering YouTube instructional videos. Journal of Music, Technology & Education, 5(1), 77-87. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/jmte.5.1.77_1.

Lee, D., and Lehto, M. (2013). User acceptance of YouTube for procedural learning: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Computers & Education, 61(2), 193-208. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.001.

O'Connor, E.A. (2011). The effect on learning, communication, and assessment when student-created YouTubes of microteaching were used in an online teacher-education course. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 39(2), 135-154. DOI: 10.2190/ET.39.2.d.

Seilstad, B. (2012). Using tailor-made YouTube videos as a preteaching strategy for English language learners in Morocco: Towards a hybrid language learning course. Teaching English with Technology, 12(4), 31-47. Retrieved October 3, 2013 from http://www.tewtjournal.org/VOL%2012/ISSUE4/ARTICLE3.pdf.

Snelson, C., Rice, K., and Wyzard, C. (2012). Research priorities for YouTube and video-sharing technologies: A Delphi study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1) 1, 119–129. Article first published online 4 March 2011. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01168.x.

Snyder, S., and Burke, S. (2008). Students’ perceptions of YouTube usage in the college classroom. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 5(11). Retrieved October 3, 2013 from http://itdl.org/Journal/Nov_08/article02.htm.

Tan, E., and Pearce, N. (2011). Open education videos in the classroom: exploring the opportunities and barriers to the use of YouTube in teaching introductory sociology. Research in Learning Technology, 19(1). Published: 31 August 2011. DOI: 10.3402/rlt.v19s1/7783.

Tan, E. (2013). Informal learning on YouTube: Exploring digital literacy in independent online learning. Learning, Media and Technology, 38(4), 463-477. DOI: 10.1080/17439884.2013.783594.

Tímár, S., Kárpáti, A., and Kokovay, Á. (2011). Teaching with YouTube: Quality assessment of English and Hungarian videos in physical education. European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning. Date of publication: 29 September 2011. Retrieved October 3, 2013 from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/special/2011/Timar_Karpati_Kokovay.htm.