Video as an anticipatory tool to deepen and to generate questions. A case study in higher education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7346/sird-022021-p140Keywords:
higher education, video, systematic codification, case studyAbstract
Videos are today one of the most used tools in higher education, especially because of their practicality and efficacy: videos are easy to be filmed or to be found on the web and they can be used in many didactic or formative actions. Moreover, videos are able to enhance learning because they are more efficient than a static picture or frame. However, literature doesn’t show any evidence on the questions students develop after watching the video. Based on the previous considerations, we present a case study about a didactic event that has been redesigned, including some anticipatory videos as an innovative element. The overall aim of this study is to verify the video efficacy in terms of satisfaction and perceived impact on learning processes, interpreted through to the theoretical reference proposed by Schwartz and Hartman. The second aim is to understand how the anticipatory video helps students to deepen topics and to formulate specific and relevant questions. Data analysis shows that students perceive videos as useful tools to improve their engagement and motivation; to better understand some theoretical elements; and to focus on some details that would have been left out. The codification procedure shows that student’s questions are specific and coherent to the topic and that the students asked not only minimal explanations or clarifications but also some in-depth analysis of the experience. Considering that, we can say that videos could enhance preliminary and precise knowledge of the debated topic.
References
Armstrong, J., & Franklin, T. (2008). A review of current and developing international practice in the use of social net- working (Web 2.0) in higher education. York, England: Franklin Consulting.
Aureli, T., & Perucchini, P. (2014). Osservare e valutare il comportamento del bambino. Bologna: Il Mulino. Ausubel, D. P. (2004). Educazione e processi cognitivi. Guida psicologica per gli insegnanti (Vol. 25). Milano: Franco-
Angeli.
Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1987). Applying observational methods: A systematic view. In J. D. Osofsky
(Ed.), Handbook of infant development (pp. 818-854). New Jersey: Wiley.
Becker, S.A., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Glesinger Hall, C. & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC
Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
Botelho, M. G., Gao, X., & Jagannathan, N. (2019). A qualitative analysis of students’ perceptions of videos to
support learning in a psychomotor skills course. European Journal of Dental Education, 23(1), 20-27.
Bullen, M., & Morgan, T. (2015). Digital learners in higher education: Implications for teaching, learning & te-
chnology. Teaching and learning in digital worlds: Strategies and issues in higher education, 11-19.
Chambel, T., Zahn, C., & Finke, M. (2006). Hypervideo and cognition: Designing video-based hypermedia for individual learning and collaborative knowledge building. In E. A. Alkhalifa (Ed.), Cognitively informed systems: Utilizing practical approaches to enrich information presentation and transfer (pp. 26-49). Pennsylvania: IGI Glo-
bal.
Chiu, P. S., Chen, H. C., Huang, Y. M., Liu, C. J., Liu, M. C., & Shen, M. H. (2018). A video annotation learning
approach to improve the effects of video learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 55(4),
-469.
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and psychological measurement, 20(1),
-46.
Conole, G., & Alevizou, P. (2010). A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in Higher Education. UK: The Open
University.
Cummins, S., Beresford, A. R., & Rice, A. (2015). Investigating engagement with in-video quiz questions in a pro-
gramming course. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 9(1), 57-66.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the
evidence. Review of educational research, 74(1), 59-109.
Goldberg, E. (2010). La sinfonia del cervello. Milano: Ponte alle Grazie.
Goldberg, E., & Podell, K. (1999). Adaptive versus veridical decision making and the frontal lobes. Consciousness
and Cognition, 8(3), 364-377.
Jacques, F. (1985). L’espace logique de l’interlocution. Feni: Presses Universitaires de France.
Haagsman, M. E., Scager, K., Boonstra, J., & Koster, M. C. (2020). Pop-up questions within educational videos:
Effects on students’ learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(6), 713-724.
Hartmann, H. (1965). Saggi sulla psicologia dell’Io. Torino: Boringhieri.
Hintze, J. M., Volpe, R. J., & Shapiro, E. S. (2002). Best practices in the systematic direct observation of student
behavior. Best practices in school psychology, 4, 993-1006.
Hobbs, R. (2006). Non optimal uses of video in the classroom. Learning, media and technology, 31(1), 35-50. Höffler, T. N., Schmeck, A., & Opfermann, M. (2013). Static and Dynamic Visual Representations. Individual
Differences in Processing. In G. Schraw, M. T. McCrudden, & D. Robinson (Eds.), Learning Through Visual
Dysplays Charlotte (pp. 133-163). Information Age Publishing.
Kandel, E. R. (2010). Alla ricerca della memoria. La storia di una nuova scienza della mente. Torino: Codice Edizioni. Lapitan, Jr. L. D., Tiangco, C. E., Sumalinog, D. A. G., Sabarillo, N. S., & Diaz, J. M. (2021). An effective blended online teaching and learning strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Education for Chemical Engineers, 35,
-131.
Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. London:
Routledge.
Laurillard, D. (2014). Insegnamento come scienza della progettazione. Costruire modelli pedagogici per apprendere con
le tecnologie. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
Lowenthal, P., Borup, J., West, R., & Archambault, L. (2020). Thinking beyond Zoom: Using asynchronous video
to maintain connection and engagement during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Technology and Teacher
Education, 28(2), 383-391.
Mazur, E. (1991). Can we teach computers to teach? Computers in physics, 5(1), 31-38.
Messick, S. (1983). Assessment of children. In P.H. Mussen (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 477-
. New York: Wiley & Sons.
Neira, E. A. S., Salinas, J., & Crosetti, B. B. (2017). Emerging Technologies (ETs) in education: A systematic review
of the literature published between 2006 and 2016. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning,
(5), 128-149. doi:10.3991/ijet.v12i05.6939.
Norman, H., Din, R., Nordin, N., & Ryberg, T. (2014). A review on the use and perceived effects of mobile blogs
on learning in higher educational settings. Asian Social Science, 10(1), 209-222.
Pedro, L. F. M. G., de Oliveira Barbosa, C. M. M., & das Neves Santos, C. M. (2018). A critical review of mobile
learning integration in formal educational contexts. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher
Education, 15(1), 1-15.
Pinto, M., & Leite, C. (2020). Digital technologies in support of students learning in Higher Education: literature
review. Digital Education Review, (37), 343-360.
Rivoltella, P. C. (2012). Neurodidattica. Insegnare al cervello che apprende. Milano: Raffaello Cortina.
Rivoltella, P. C. et al. (2013). Fare didattica con gli EAS. Episodi di Apprendimento Situato (pp. 5-241). Brescia: La
Scuola.
Rivoltella, P. C. (2016). Che cos’ è un EAS: l’idea, il metodo, la didattica. Brescia: La Scuola.
Rivoltella, P. C. (2020). Nuovi alfabeti. Educazione e culture nella società post-mediale (Vol. 124, pp. 5-220). Brescia:
Scholé-Morcelliana.
Schwartz, D.L., & Hartman, K. (2007). It’s not Video Anymore: Designing Digital Video for Learning and Asses-
sment. In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Barron, & S.J. Derry (Eds.), Video Research in the Learning Sciences (pp. 335-
. New York: Erlbaum.
Selwyn, N. (2016). Is technology good for education? New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Sherer, P., & Shea, T. (2011). Using online video to support student learning and engagement. College Teaching,
(2), 56-59.
Sleeman, J., Lang, C., & Lemon, N. (2016). Social Media Challenges and Affordances for International Students:
Bridges, Boundaries, and Hybrid Spaces. Journal of Studies in International Education, 20(5), 391-415.
doi:10.1177/1028315316662975.
Sweller, J., Merrienboer, V., & Paas, J. J. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational
Psychology Review, 10, 251-296.
Terrenghi, I., Diana, B., Zurloni, V., Rivoltella, P. C., Elia, M., Castañer, M., ... & Anguera, M. T. (2019). Episode
of situated learning to enhance student engagement and promote deep learning: preliminary results in a high
school classroom. Frontiers in psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01415.
Tversky, B., Morrison, J. B., & Betrancourt, M. (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate? International Journal of
Human–Computer Studies, 57, 247-262.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Technical Editorial Staff
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors who publish in this magazine accept the following conditions:
- The authors retain the rights to their work and give the magazine the right to first publish the work, simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons License - Attribution which allows others to share the work indicating the intellectual authorship and the first publication in this magazine.
- Authors may adhere to other non-exclusive license agreements for the distribution of the version of the published work (eg deposit it in an institutional archive or publish it in a monograph), provided that the first publication took place in this magazine.
- Authors can disseminate their work online (eg in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and increase citations of the published work.
