Advertisement

Design of Instructional Videos

  • Jonas Köster
Chapter

Abstract

The instructional design of a video—which crafts the narrative of how the information is structured and how the learning goals are met—is the foundation of an instructional video and fundamental to the overall learning experience. The design of instructional videos can be approached by looking at three critical aspects: the physical design, the cognitive design, and the affective design. Enhancing memory and retention is key to designing a video that can meet defined learning goals.

Keywords

Instructional design Physical design Cognitive design Affective design Enhancing attention and memory Self-regulated learning Attention and video length Improving attention Cognitive overload 

References

  1. Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown, G. L. (1927). A cause of mind wandering and inferior scholarship. The Journal of Educational Research, 15, 276–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Butler, D. L., & Schnellert, L. (2012). Collaborative inquiry in teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(8), 1206–1220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carliner, S. (2000). Physical, cognitive, and affective: A three-part framework for information design. Technical Communication, 47(4), 561–576.Google Scholar
  5. Carpenter, S. K. (2012). Testing enhances the transfer of learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 279–283.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721412452728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chorianopoulos, K., Giannakos, M. N., & Chrisochoides, N. (2014). Open system for video learning analytics. In L@S ’14 Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@Scale conference (pp. 153–154). Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2567855
  7. Gauntlett, D., & Horsley, R. (Eds.). (2004). Web.Studies (2nd ed.). London: Arnold.Google Scholar
  8. Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., & Keener, M. C. (2008). Metacognition in education: A focus on calibration. In J. Dunlosky & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of metamemory and memory (pp. 429–455). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  9. Homer, B. D., Plass, J. L., & Blake, L. (2008). The effects of video on cognitive load and social presence in multimedia-learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 786–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ibrahim, M., Anotonenko, P. D., Greenwood, C. M., & Wheeler, D. (2012). Effects of segmenting, signaling, and weeding on learning from educational video. Learning, Media and Technology, 37(3), 220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Keren, G. (1991). Calibration and probability judgments: Conceptual and methodological issues. Acta Psychologica, 77, 217–273.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(91)90036-Y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Khan, S. (2012). The one world school house: Education reimagined. London: Hodder & Stoughton.Google Scholar
  13. Kim, J., Guo, P. J., Seaton, D. T., Mitros, P., Gajos, K. Z., & Miller, R. C. (2014, March). Understanding in-video dropouts and interaction peaks in online lecture videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@Scale conference (pp. 31–40). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  14. Koller, D. (2011). Death knell for the lecture: Technology as a passport to personalized education. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/06/science/daphne-koller-technology-as-a-passport-to-personalized-education.html?pagewanted_all&_r_0
  15. Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mayer, R. E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 125–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognitive judgments and control of study. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(3), 159–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition. In Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 1–25). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. Risko, E. F., Anderson, N., Sarwal, A., Engelhardt, M., & Kingstone, A. (2012). Everyday attention: Variation in mind wandering and memory in a lecture. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(2), 234–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Risko, E. F., Buchanan, D., Medimorec, S., & Kingstone, A. (2013). Everyday attention: Mind wandering and computer use during lectures. Computers & Education, 68, 275–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schacter, D. L., & Szpunar, K. K. (2015). Enhancing attention and memory during video-recorded lectures. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(1), 60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2006). The restless mind. Psychological bulletin, 132(6), 946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Swarts, J. (2012). New modes of help: Best practices for instructional video. Technical Communication, 59(3), 195–206.Google Scholar
  25. Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Australian education review, no. 43. New York: PCS Data Processing.Google Scholar
  26. Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2011). Self-regulated learning and performance. In Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 1–12). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonas Köster
    • 1
  1. 1.Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institut für MedienwissenschaftBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations