VIDEO THAT MATTERS:

SIRUI WANG, PH.D. & ELAINE CHEN,

PH.D. AECT 2016

Enhancing student engagement through interactive video-centric program in online courses

WHY VIDEOS?

•By 2019 80% of Internet traffic will be online video

•Resource: White paper: Cisco VNI Forecast and

Methodology, 2015-2020

ACTIVE LEARNING & ENGAGEMENT

LITERATURE REVIEW

Students’ engagement

Active learning instructional

strategiesincrease students engagement by speaking with a

"partner, in a small group, or with the entire class"

(Eison, 2010, ¶.2), which is crucial to the success of

online education (Bayless, Biss, & Johnson, 2012;

Cherrett, Wills, Price, Maynard, & Dror, 2009; Choi &

Johnson, 2010; Vaughn, Orr, & Gorman, 2015;

Weatherly & Jennings, 2013).

THE STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

o Active learning is difficult to be reflected in actual

online courses;

o Less adequate student engagements and frequent

presence observed in online learning than expected.

YOUSEEU (YSU)

o Social connectedness

o Spontaneity

o Skills assessment

o Collaboration

o Feedback/coaching

o Accountability

YSU VIDEO-BASED ASSIGNMENTSo Video activity

o Question & Answer

o Individual video (tutorial)

o Video presentation

o Group project

o Synchronous activity (tutorial)

o In-class recording

o Text discussion

o Document submission

RESEARCH PURPOSE

o Discuss students and instructors experience

with YSU

o Explore students’ and instructor’s perceptions

of using video-centric programs to increase

student engagement in online learning.

RESEARCH DESIGN

o Thirty-four (34) students registered in the

course of "Analyze Workplace Learning" in Spring

2016 are divided into four (4) groups to present

group projects in weeks 3-4.

o Group memberships were automatically

assigned using the LMS-Canvas' Group Set

setting.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

o RQ1. What are the aspects of video-centric

program that participants reporting engaging?

o RQ2. What are the major differences of video-

centric programs versus traditional

lectures/assignments/presentations in online

courses from participants' perspectives?

o RQ3. What are the key challenges participants

experienced with video-centric programs?

DATA COLLECTIONS & ANALYSIS

o 33 enrolled students in EDOD 674

o Four groups (Ngroup1=9, Ngroup2=9, Ngroup3=7,

Ngroup4=8)

o 12/33 of the enrolled students submitted their

surveys

See Student Survey & Instructor Survey (follow-up survey was also included)

PARTICIPANTS’ TECHNOLOGY CONFIDENCE LEVEL

Positive YouSeeU

Exp.

Negative YouSeeU

Exp.

Confident with

Videos

41.7% 50%

Not confident with

videos

0% 8.3%

Table 1. Participants’ technology confidence level Vs. YSU experience:

PARTICIPANTS’ GROUP EXPERIENCE

Table 2. Participants’ group experience

Positive YSU

Experience

Negative YSU

Experience

Positive Group

experience

25% 33.3%

Negative Group

experience

16.7% 25%

PARTICIPANTS’ YOUSEEU EXPERIENCE

Table 3. Participants' YSU experience versus Group versus Future use of YSU (T=True, F=False):

Positive YouSeeU Exp. Group Worked Use YouSeeU in Future

N1 T T T

N2 F T T

N3 F T T

N4 T T T

N5 F F T

N6 T F T

N7 F F F

N8 F T F

N9 T F T

N10 T T T

N11 F T T

N12 F F F

PARTICIPANTS’ FUTURE USE OF YOUSEEU

Positive YouSeeU Exp. Use YouSeeU in Future

N1 T T

N2 F T

N3 F T

N4 T T

N5 F T

N6 T T

N7 F F

N8 F F

N9 T T

N10 T T

N11 F T

N12 F F

Table 4: participants' YSU experience versus future use of

YSU

(t=true, f=false)

RESULTS

o Group 1: recorded 2 individual videos in YSU

o Group 2: recorded 5 individual videos in YSU

o Group 3: recorded 7 individual videos and

combines into 1 group video in YSU for grading

o Group 4: did not record any videos in YSU

DISCUSSION

The 6 engaging aspects of video-centric

program:

o 1. Student engagement. Video-centric

program triggered more student engagement

and collaboration.

o 2. Real-world collaboration. Realistic

collaborative atmosphere helps students

prepare for work place.

o 3. Social connection. Collaboration among

DISCUSSION CONT’D

o 4. Authentic learning. Synchronous tools

provide students authentic feeling in a real

classroom.

o 5. Problem solving. Students in groups need

to overcome an array of obstacles in order to

complete group tasks.

o 6. Project management. Students in groups

working on assigned presentation need to

manage the project from the beginning to

CHALLENGES

The five challenges:

o 1. No prior experience with YouSeeU. Every

group had members mentioned the “lack of

information” regarding to YouSeeU and the

project.

o 2. Navigation issues of video centric program. As

one of the instructor pointed out, YouSeeU was

not quite user friendly. The “usability, navigation,

and sync with Canvas users” was difficulty to

CHALLENGES CONT’Do 3. Not enough scaffolding instructions and supportive

documents for either the YouSeeU or the assignment.

o 4. Group size plays an important role when interacting

with team members. Students found the “groups are

really large” and it was difficult to “collaborate with this

large of a group in cyber space.”

o 5. Different time zones create another layer of

challenge for group to meet virtually and

synchronically. There were quite a lot of discussions

and negotiations regarding to meeting time and

LIMITATIONS

o YouSeeU as the video-centric program for

online learning was a pretty new and young

product;

o The group size was too big for online

discussion and group presentation project.

o Not enough time for group members to get

acquainted and to prepare the project.

CONLCUSION

YouSeeU as a video-centric program provides an

advanced platform for students to gain

interactive online learning experience. The

performance of using YSU as a group video

presentation tool could be improved if YSU has a

more intuitive navigation system, a more

streamlined integration with the learning

management system, and more scaffolding

supports within the system.

REFERENCES

Bayless, M.L., Biss, J.L., & Johson, B.S. (2012). The oral presentation: enhancing the experience in an online business

communication course. Faculty Publications, paper 44. Retrieved from

http://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1043&context=businesscom_facultypubs

Center for research on learning and teaching (CRLT). (2015). Active learning. Retrieved from

http://www.crlt.umich.edu/tstrategies/tsal

Cherrett, T., Wills, G., Price, J., Maynard, S., & Dror, I.E. (2009). Making training more cognitively effective: making videos

interactive. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40 (6): 1124-1134. Retrived from

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00985.x/pdf

Choi, H.J. & Johnson, S.D. (2010). The effect of context-based video instruction on learning and motivation in online

courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(4), 215-227. Retrieve from

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15389286ajde1904_3

Eison, J. (2010). Using active learning instructional strategies to create excitement and enhance learning. Jurnal

Pendidikantentang Strategi Pembelajaran Aktif (Active Learning) Books, 2. Retrieved from

https://www.cte.cornell.edu/documents/presentations/Eisen-Handout.pdf

Student Engagement Definition. (August 06, 2015). Retrieved from http://edglossary.org/student-engagement/

Vaughn. S., Orr, M., & Gorman, N. (2015). Student’s Perceptions of Social Presence in an On-Line Course Using Student

Presentation Software. International Educative Research Foundation and Publisher, 60-70. Retrieved from

http://www.ijier.net/assets/student%E2%80%99s-perceptions- of-social-presence-ijier.net-vol-3-7-7.pdf

QUESTIONS?

Sirui.Wang@Colostate.edu

Elaine.h.Chen@Colostate.edu