The qualities and availability of different video formats offer many opportunities within the context of Higher Education (Hansch et al., 2015; Johnson et al., 2016; van Huystee, 2016). There is a shift within Higher Education to transition from the traditional face to face approach, to a more ‘blended’ approach in which face to face and online delivery of content are blended (Bates, 2015). More delivery of content is now provided online in video format, viewed before the class, as part of a flipped classroom (Bishop & Verleger, 2013; Yousef, Chatti, & Schroeder, 2014) and this is impacting the traditional role of the lecturer from ‘sage on the stage’, to ‘guide on the side’ (Tapscott, 2009). When creating video, a lecturer needs to have an understanding of the particular pedagogic affordances of the different types of video (Koumi, 2014; Thomson, Bridgstock, & Willems, 2014) and to know how to implement and embed these effectively into the teaching environment as part of a blended approach (Dankbaar, Haring, Moes, & van Hees, 2016; Fransen, 2006; Woolfitt, 2015). There needs to be awareness of how to embed the video from a didactic perspective to create meaningful learning (Karppinen, 2005) and an understanding of some of the financial and technical issues which include the relationship between cost of video production and the user experience (Hansch et al., 2015) and creating the correct combination of multimedia visual and audio elements (Colvin Clark & Mayer, 2011). As the role of the lecturer changes, there are a number of challenges when navigating through this changing educational environment. Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) provide lots of data for analysis and research shows that students in this environment stop watching videos after about six minutes (Guo, Kim, & Rubin, 2014) and that the most common video style used in MOOCs was the talking head with Power Point (Reutemann, 2016). Further research needs to be conducted regarding student preferences of video styles and correlation between video styles and course drop-out rates. As part of its research, the Inholland research group ‘Teaching, Learning and Technology’ (TLT) examines the use of ICT and video to support teaching and learning within Inholland. In 2015-2016, several pioneers (Fransen, 2013) working at Inholland explored different approaches to using video to support the teaching and learning process within a number of educational environments. TLT supported the pioneers in establishing their role within their faculty, creating a framework within which the pioneer can design the video intervention, collecting data and reflecting on what was learned through this process. With some of the projects, a more formal research process was followed and a full research report could be compiled. In other cases, the pioneer took a more exploratory and experimental approach. In these cases, the pioneer may not have conducted the video intervention under a formal research framework. However, during this process the pioneer may have uncovered interesting and valuable practical examples that can inspire and be shared with other educators. This current report falls under the category Research Type 3 as defined by TLT. It describes and assesses an ICT application (in this case, video) in order to share the original approach that could have high potential to be implemented in a broader educational context.
Video was used in a variety of formats during a third year elective Inholland course ‘Levensbeschouwing’ at the Faculty Onderwijs en Innovatie (education and innovation) in Amstelveen. From April to June (2017), 30 part-time and full-time students on the Tweedegraads Leraren Opleiding chose to follow the course for the ten week study period. Students used a variety of video formats to support and enhance their learning process. This research evaluates how the didactic embedding of video supported the teaching and learning on the course. The objective of the research was to gain insight into the ways in which video supports the learning and teaching process in the course and into the perceived practicality and effectiveness of this video support. The research examined how video was integrated into the course structure, how students and lecturers perceived the practicality of the use of video, and whether they considered it effective. The conversational framework of Laurillard (2002), was used as a framework in which to examine the interaction between students and teachers at the conceptual and application level. An overview was made of the different forms of videos used during the course (both teacher and student generated), how they were viewed and the value of them to the students. A survey was collected on the last day of the course in which students could share feedback on the ways in which video had contributed to their learning process. At the end of the course, a group interview was held with six student representatives (one from each group) and with the lecturers on the course to collect additional qualitative feedback on how video contributed to the learning process.
The research examined the ways in which Student Generated Video supported the learning process on the course ‘Levensbeschouwing’ (Life Philosophy) on the third year on the teacher training course at Inholland in Amsterdam. The central question examined was: In which ways does the student generated video on the Inholland course ‘Life Philosophy’ contribute to students gaining insight, developing deeper knowledge, and achieving the course learning goals? The 30 students on the course participated in the research. During the course, they were involved in creating three video interviews per project group that examined the question of life philosophy from the perspective of personal life, life philosophy traditions and school life. Video production was segmented into four phases; pre-production, production, post-production and reflection. At each phase, students answered short open questions online, and on the final day completed a survey. A group of seven students participated in a group interview on the final day.
