Reviews in instructional video

This study investigates the effectiveness of a video tutorial for software training whose construction was based on a combination of insights from multimedia learning and Demonstration-Based Training. In the videos, a model of task performance was enhanced with instructional features that were intended to be particularly effective insofar as they addressed four key processes in observational learning (i.e., attention, retention, reproduction and motivation). An experiment with two conditions was reported. The control condition consisted of only demonstration videos. The experimental condition included a review after task demonstration to provide additional support for retention. The videos taught Word formatting tasks. The 73 participants came from elementary and secondary school. During training, video playing was followed by task practice. After training, a post-test was administered. Engagement data showed that demonstration videos were played almost completely (93%). Reviews fared worse (32%). Motivation increased significantly with training regardless of condition. Task performance also increased significantly from pre-test (29%) to training (84%) and post-test (71%). In addition, results for performance during and after training were significantly better for the experimental condition than the control condition. The discussion argues that the demonstration videos provide a viable way to support task completion. To further improve learning, better understanding of learners' retention processes is needed.

[1]  Martin Pergel,et al.  Personalized messages in a brewery educational simulation: Is the personalization principle less robust than previously thought? , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[2]  N. Cook.  Summaries: further issues and data , 1981 .

[3]  Sandra Berney,et al.  Does animation enhance learning? A meta-analysis , 2016, Comput. Educ..

[4]  Albert Bandura,et al.  On the Functional Properties of Perceived Self-Efficacy Revisited , 2012 .

[5]  Jack Koumi,et al.  Pedagogic Design Guidelines for Multimedia Materials: A Call for Collaboration between Practitioners and Researchers , 2013 .

[6]  Azar Pakdaman Savoji,et al.  Cognitive consequences of segmentation and modality methods in learning from instructional animations , 2011 .

[7]  N Mattheos,et al.  Computer-mediated instructional video: a randomised controlled trial comparing a sequential and a segmented instructional video in surgical hand wash. , 2005, European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe.

[8]  Katharina Scheiter,et al.  Signaling text-picture relations in multimedia learning: A comprehensive meta-analysis , 2016 .

[9]  Philip J. Guo,et al.  How video production affects student engagement: an empirical study of MOOC videos , 2014, L@S.

[10]  Hans van der Meij,et al.  Complex software training: Harnessing and optimizing video instruction , 2017, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[11]  Randy Jensen,et al.  Demonstration-Based Training: A Review of Instructional Features , 2010 .

[12]  A. Bandura.  Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory , 1985 .

[13]  Rolf Plötzner,et al.  A systematic characterisation of expository animations , 2012, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[14]  Alexander Renkl,et al.  Toward an Instructionally Oriented Theory of Example-Based Learning , 2014, Cogn. Sci..

[15]  R H Fletcher.  Writing an abstract , 1988, Journal of general internal medicine.

[16]  Ruth N. Schwartz,et al.  Effects of pacing and cognitive style across dynamic and non-dynamic representations , 2011, Comput. Educ..

[17]  R. Mayer.  The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning: Principles Based on Social Cues in Multimedia Learning: Personalization, Voice, Image, and Embodiment Principles , 2014 .

[18]  Wai-Tat Fu,et al.  Resolving the paradox of the active user: stable suboptimal performance in interactive tasks , 2004, Cogn. Sci..

[19]  Meera Komarraju,et al.  Self-efficacy and academic achievement: Why do implicit beliefs, goals, and effort regulation matter? , 2013 .

[20]  Belur V. Dasarathy.  Does length matter? , 2004, Inf. Fusion.

[21]  John M. Carroll,et al.  Principles and Heuristics for Designing Minimalist Instruction , 1998 .

[22]  Hans van der Meij,et al.  Demonstration-based training (DBT) in the design of a video tutorial for software training , 2016, Instructional Science.

[23]  Andrew J. Martin,et al.  Designing Instructional Text in a Conversational Style: A Meta-analysis , 2013 .

[24]  Ahmet Naci Çoklar,et al.  Information literacy and digital nativity as determinants of online information search strategies , 2017, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[25]  T. Gog,et al.  The Effects of Practice Schedule and Critical Thinking Prompts on Learning and Transfer of a Complex Judgment Task. , 2011 .

[26]  Franck Amadieu,et al.  The attention-guiding effect and cognitive load in the comprehension of animations , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[27]  K. Stordahl,et al.  The effect of organizational aids on comprehension and retention. , 1955 .

[28]  David K. Farkas.  The Logical and Rhetorical Construction of Procedural Discourse , 1999 .

[29]  Eduardo Vidal-Abarca,et al.  Summary versus Argument Tasks when Working with Multiple Documents: Which Is Better for Whom?. , 2010 .

[30]  Allen Newell,et al.  The psychology of human-computer interaction , 1983 .

[31]  Helmut M. Niegemann,et al.  Talk to me personally: Personalization of language style in computer-based learning , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[32]  Krzysztof Z. Gajos,et al.  Crowdsourcing step-by-step information extraction to enhance existing how-to videos , 2014, CHI.

[33]  M. David Merrill,et al.  First principles of instruction , 2012 .

[34]  Hans van der Meij.  Developing and Testing a Video Tutorial for Software Training , 2014 .

[35]  A. Bandura,et al.  Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[36]  Carol Westby,et al.  Summarizing Expository Texts , 2010 .

[37]  Fred Paas,et al.  Learning by generating vs. receiving instructional explanations: Two approaches to enhance attention cueing in animations , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[38]  Peter E. Doolittle,et al.  Multimedia learning and individual differences: Mediating the effects of working memory capacity with segmentation , 2009, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[39]  J. Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and Complex Learning: Recent Developments and Future Directions , 2005 .

[40]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  A Personalization Effect in Multimedia Learning: Students Learn Better When Words Are in Conversational Style Rather Than Formal Style. , 2004 .

[41]  Sung-Hee Jin,et al.  Visual design guidelines for improving learning from dynamic and interactive digital text , 2013, Comput. Educ..

[42]  Alexander D. Stajkovic,et al.  Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. , 1998 .

[43]  James Hartley,et al.  The Role and Position of Summaries: some issues and data , 1979 .

[44]  Eduardo Salas,et al.  Using Instructional Features to Enhance Demonstration-Based Training in Management Education , 2013 .

[45]  H. van der Meij,et al.  A test of the design of a video tutorial for software training , 2015, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[46]  Richard Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning , 2001, Visible Learning Guide to Student Achievement.

[47]  Hans van der Meij,et al.  Eight guidelines for the design of instructional videos for software training , 2013 .

[48]  Jan van der Meij,et al.  A comparison of paper-based and video tutorials for software learning , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[49]  Elke Sumfleth,et al.  Learning with summaries: Effects of representation mode and type of learning activity on comprehension and transfer , 2013 .

[50]  Slava Kalyuga.  Expertise Reversal Effect and Its Implications for Learner-Tailored Instruction , 2007 .

[51]  Richard K. Lowe,et al.  An Eye Tracking Comparison of External Pointing Cues and Internal Continuous Cues in Learning with Complex Animations , 2010 .

[52]  Hans van der Meij,et al.  The effects of reviews in video tutorials , 2016, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[53]  T. Gog,et al.  Segmentation of Worked Examples: Effects on Cognitive Load and Learning , 2012 .

[54]  Stephan Schwan,et al.  How does interactivity in videos affect task performance? , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[55]  Mark Guzdial,et al.  Subgoal-labeled instructional material improves performance and transfer in learning to develop mobile applications , 2012, ICER '12.

[56]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Principles for managing essential processing in multimedia learning: Segmenting, pre-training, and modality principles. , 2005 .

[57]  Erol Özçelik,et al.  Why does signaling enhance multimedia learning? Evidence from eye movements , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..