Designing and Developing Videos for Online Learning: A Seven-Principle Model
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i2.1449Keywords:
artificial intelligence, instructional videos, online learningAbstract
Despite the ubiquitous use of instructional videos in both formal and informal learning settings, questions remain largely unanswered on how to design and develop video lessons that are often used as the primary method for delivering instruction in online courses. In this study, we experimented with a model of seven principles drawn from instructional design theories for designing and developing video lessons for an online graduate course. Feedback was collected from students through surveys on their perceptions of the effectiveness of the video lessons and the overall course quality for eight semesters. This paper shares the instructors’ experience on the design and development of the video lessons as well as the survey findings. Implications of the findings for instructional design and future research are also discussed.
References
Aleamoni, L. M. (1978). Development and factorial validation of the Arizona Course/Instructor Evaluation Questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 38, 1063–1067.
Bangert, A. W. (2006). The development of an instrument for assessing online teaching effectiveness. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(3), 227–244. https://doi.org/10.2190/B3XP-5K61-7Q07-U443
Bimba, A. T., Idris, N., Al-Hunaiyyan, A., Mahmud, R. B., & Shuib, N. L. B. M. (2017). Adaptive feedback in computer-based learning environments: A review. Adaptive Behavior, 25(5), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059712317727590
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. 1991 ASHE-ERIC higher education reports. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, George Washington University.
Boucheix, J. M., Gauthier, P., Fontaine, J. B., & Jaffeux, S. (2018). Mixed camera viewpoints improve learning medical hand procedure from video in nurse training? Computers in Human Behavior, 89, 418–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.01.017
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Chen, Q., Chen, Y., Liu, D., Shi, C., Wu, Y., & Qu, H. (2016). Peakvizor: Visual analytics of peaks in video clickstreams from massive open online courses. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 22(10), 2315–2330. https://doi.org/10.1109/tvcg.2015.2505305
Chorianopoulos, K. (2018). A taxonomy of asynchronous instructional video styles. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i1.2920
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Cohen, P. A. (1981). Student ratings of instruction and student achievement: A meta-analysis of multisection validity studies. Review of Educational Research, 51(3), 281–309. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543051003281
Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98
Cronbach, L. J. (1988). Internal consistency of tests: Analyses old and new. Psychometrika, 53(1), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02294194
d’Apollonia, S., & Abrami, P. C. (1997). Navigating student ratings of instruction. American Psychologist, 52(11), 1198–1208. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.11.1198
De Koning, B. B., Hoogerheide, V., & Boucheix, J. M. (2018). Developments and trends in learning with instructional video. Computers in Human Behavior, 89, 395–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.08.055
Dempsey, J. V., & Sales, G. C. (1993). Interactive instruction and feedback. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Dewey, J. (1933). How the instructors think: A restatement of the reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston, MA: Heath.
Feldman, K. A. (2007). Identifying exemplary teachers and teaching: Evidence from student ratings. In R. P. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.), The teaching and learning in higher education: An evidence-based perspective (pp. 93–129). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Fiorella, L., van Gog, T., Hoogerheide, V., & Mayer, R. E. (2017). It’s all a matter of perspective: Viewing first-person video modeling examples promotes learning of an assembly task. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(5), 653–665. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000161
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2018). What works and what doesn’t work with instructional video. Computers in Human Behavior, 89, 465–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.015
Goel, A., & Joyner, D. (2016). An experiment in teaching artificial intelligence online. International Journal for Scholarship of Technology-Enhanced Learning, 1(1).
Goel, A., & Joyner, D. A. (2017). Using AI to teach AI: Lessons from an online AI class. AI Magazine, 38(2), 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v38i2.2732
Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., & Namey, E. E. (2011). Applied thematic analysis. London: Sage.
Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014). How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC Videos. Proceedings of the Second ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566239
Hansch, A., Hillers, L., McConachie, K., Newman, C., Schildhauer, T., & Schmidt, P. (2015). Video and online learning: Critical reflections and findings from the field. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2577882
Hollands, F. M., & Tirthali, D. (2014). MOOCs: Expectations and reality. Full report. Center for Benefit-Cost Studies of Education, Teachers College, Columbia University, NY. Retrieved December 20, 2018, from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED547237.pdf
Johnson, C. I., & Priest, H. A. (2014). The feedback principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 449–463). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139547369.023
Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 215–239). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kay, R. H. (2012). Exploring the use of video podcasts in education: A comprehensive review of the literature. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 820–831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.01.011
Kim, J., Guo, P. J., Cai, C. J., Li, S., Gajos, K. Z., & Miller, R. C. (2014a). Data-driven interaction techniques for improving navigation of educational videos. Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology—UIST ‘14. https://doi.org/10.1145/2642918.2647389
Kim, J., Guo, P. J., Seaton, D. T., Mitros, P., Gajos, K. Z., & Miller, R. C. (2014b). Understanding in-video dropouts and interaction peaks in online lecture videos. Proceedings of the first ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566237
Le, N. T. (2016). A classification of adaptive feedback in educational systems for programming. Systems, 4(2), 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems4020022
Li, N., Kidzinski, L., Jermann, P., & Dillenbourg, P. (2015). MOOC video interaction patterns: What do they tell us? In G. Conole, T. Klobučar, C. Rensing, J. Konert, & E. Lavoué (Eds.), Design for teaching and learning in a networked world (pp. 197–210). Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 9309). Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24258-3_15
Marsh, H. W. (1982). SEEQ: A reliable, valid, and useful instrument for collecting students’ evaluations of university teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 52(1), 77–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1982.tb02505.x
Marsh, H. W. (1991). Multidimensional students’ evaluations of teaching effectiveness: A test of alternative higher-order structures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(2), 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.83.2.285
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2014). Principles based on social cues in multimedia learning: Personalization, voice, image, and embodiment principles. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 345–368). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139547369.017
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02505024
Merrill, M. D. (2007). First principles of instruction: A synthesis. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (2nd ed., pp. 62–71). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
Moon, J. A. (1999). Reflection in learning and professional development: Theory and practice. London: Kogan Page.
Morgan, D. L. (2014). Integrating qualitative & quantitative methods: A pragmatic approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Kalman, H. K., & Kemp, J. E. (2012). Designing effective instruction (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
van Patten, J., Chao, C., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1986). A review of strategies for sequencing and synthesizing instruction. Review of Educational Research, 56(4), 437–471. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543056004437
Poquet, O., Lim, L., Mirriahi, N., & Dawson, S. (2018). Video and learning: A systematic review (2007–2017). Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge—LAK. https://doi.org/10.1145/3170358.3170376.
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequences decisions. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Volume II, pp. 425–454). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Reigeluth, C. M., & Keller, J. B. (2009). Understanding instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth & A. A. Carr-Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base (pp. 27–39). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Santos-Espino, J. M., Afonso-Suárez, M. D., & Guerra-Artal, C. (2016). Speakers and boards: A survey of instructional video styles in MOOCs. Technical Communication, 63(2), 101–115.
Scagnoli, N., Choo, J., & Tian, J. (2017). Students’ insights on the use of video lectures in online classes. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12572
Seaman, J. E., Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2018). Grade level: Tracking online education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group. https://onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/gradeincrease.pdf
Sinha, T., Jermann, P., Li, N., & Dillenbourg, P. (2014). Your click decides your fate: Inferring information processing and attrition behavior from MOOC video clickstream interactions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1407.7131. https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/w14-4102
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Theall, M., & Feldman, K. A. (2007). Commentary and update on Feldman’s (1997) “Identifying exemplary teachers and teaching: Evidence from student ratings.” In R. P. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.), The teaching and learning in higher education: An evidence-based perspective (pp. 130–143). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Uttl, B., White, C., & Gonzalez, D. (2017). Meta-analysis of faculty’s teaching effectiveness: Student evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are not related. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 54, 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.007
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions
