skip to main content
10.1145/3051457.3054007acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesl-at-sConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Criteria for Video Engagement in a Biology MOOC

Authors Info & Claims
Published:12 April 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

We have designed a Molecular Biology massive open online course (MOOC) for a global audience. Among the learning aids offered are two types of short video segments: lecture videos (delivered unscripted by a professor) and deep dives (fully scripted and animated). While the engaged learners overwhelmingly watched the lecture video segments through to completion, some watched only a portion of each deep dive. As the deep dives take pains to follow evidence-based best practices and are more labor-intensive to make, further study of this difference in viewer retention would inform future course development decisions. Notably, course organization, length of video, lack of on-screen narrator, and identity of narrator show no correlation with this trend. Interestingly, learners who complete lecture videos but not deep dives have slightly higher overall course grades on average. Thus, our model is that learners with a higher degree of knowledge about the subject matter may feel that they do not need to complete the deep dive videos, while they feel the lecture videos are valuable. Future research will test this model.

References

  1. Ruth Colvin Clark and Richard E. Mayer. 2008. e-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning, Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Philip J. Guo, Juho Kim, Rob Rubin. 2014. How video production affects student engagement: an empirical study of MOOC videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference, 41--50. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566239Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Tim N. Höffler and Detlev Leutner. 2007. Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction 17, 722--738. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Bruce D. Homer, Jan L. Plass, and Linda Blake. 2008. The effects of video on cognitive load and social presence in multimedia-learning. Computers in Human Behavior 24.3, 786--797. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Juho Kim, Philip J. Guo, Daniel T. Seaton, Piotr Mitros, Krzysztof Z. Gajos, Robert C. Miller. 2014. Understanding in-video dropouts and interaction peaks in online lecture videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference, 31--40. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566237Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Alendra Lyons, Stephen Reysen, and Lindsey Pierce. 2012. Video lecture format, student technological efficacy, and social presence in online courses. Computers in Human Behavior 28.1, 181--186. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Phillip McClean, Christina Johnson, Roxanne Rogers, Lisa Daniels, John Reber, Brian M. Slator, Jeff Terpstra, and Alan White. 2004. Molecular and Cellular Biology Animations: Development and Impact on Student Learning. CBE Life Sci Educ. 4.2, 169--179. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Criteria for Video Engagement in a Biology MOOC

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          L@S '17: Proceedings of the Fourth (2017) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale
          April 2017
          352 pages
          ISBN:9781450344500
          DOI:10.1145/3051457

          Copyright © 2017 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 12 April 2017

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • short-paper

          Acceptance Rates

          L@S '17 Paper Acceptance Rate14of105submissions,13%Overall Acceptance Rate117of440submissions,27%

          Upcoming Conference

          L@S '24
          Eleventh ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale
          July 18 - 20, 2024
          Atlanta , GA , USA

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader