Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Videos in der Lehre: Wirkungen und Nebenwirkungen

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Lernen mit Bildungstechnologien

Part of the book series: Springer Reference Psychologie ((SRP))

Zusammenfassung

Lernvideos zählen zu den wichtigsten digitalen Medien in der Hochschullehre. Kein anderes multimediales Format ist so unkompliziert herzustellen und zu publizieren wie das Lernvideo. Überdies ist keines so gut wissenschaftlich untersucht. Dieses Kapitel nimmt zunächst eine Begriffsbestimmung der verschiedenen Videoformate für die Lehre vor, beginnend bei der Vorlesungsaufzeichnung bis zum 360° Virtual Reality Video. Anschließend wird der typische Produktionsprozess eines Lernvideos beschrieben, Herausforderungen identifiziert und Lösungen benannt. Nach der Vorstellung verschiedener Einsatzmöglichkeiten in Präsenzveranstaltungen, Blended Learning Szenarien und kollaborativen Lernformaten wird ein ausführlicher Blick auf die vielfältige und nicht immer ganz widerspruchsfreie Wirkungsforschung zum Einsatz von Videos in der Hochschullehre geworfen.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  • Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2015). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: Definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research and Development, 34(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baltruschat, A. (2018). Exkurs 2: Videos und Filme in der Lehrerbildung. In Didaktische Unterrichtsforschung (S. 155–172). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Basu Roy, R., & McMahon, G. T. (2012). Video-based cases disrupt deep critical thinking in problem-based learning. Medical Education, 46(4), 426–435.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, S. A., Freeman, A., Hall, C. G., Cummins, M., & Yuhnke, B. (2016). NMC Horizon Report: 2016 K (S. 1–52). Austin: The New Media Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berk, R. A. (2009). Multimedia teaching with video clips: TV, movies, YouTube, and mtvU in the college classroom. International Journal of Technology in Teaching & Learning, 5(1), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billings-Gagliardi, S., & Mazor, K. M. (2007). Student decisions about lecture attendance: Do electronic course materials matter? Academic Medicine, 82(10), 73–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolliger, D. U., Supanakorn, S., & Boggs, C. (2010). Impact of podcasting on student motivation in the online learning environment. Computers & Education, 55(2), 714–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bongey, S., Cizadlo, G., & Kalnbach, L. (2006). Explorations in course-casting: Podcasts in higher education. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 23(5), 350–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bos, N. R. (2016). Effectiveness of blended learning: Factors facilitating effective behavior in a blended learning environment. Doctoral dissertation, Maastricht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulet, G. (2012). Gamification: The latest buzzword and the next fad. eLearn, 12, 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brecht, H. D. (2012). Learning from online video lectures. Journal of Information Technology Education, 11, 227–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, P., & Doyle, E. (2016). Gamification and student motivation. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(6), 1162–1175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardall, S., Krupat, E., & Ulrich, M. (2008). Live lecture versus video-recorded lecture: Are students voting with their feet? Academic Medicine, 83(12), 1174–1178.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chambel, T., Zahn, C., & Finke, M. (2006). Hypervideo and cognition: Designing video-based hypermedia for individual learning and collaborative knowledge building. In Cognitively informed systems: Utilizing practical approaches to enrich information presentation and transfer (S. 26–49). Hershey: IGI Global.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y. T. (2012). The effect of thematic video-based instruction on learning and motivation in e-learning. International Journal of Physical Sciences, 7(6), 957–965.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, I., Lee, S. J., & Jung, J. W. (2008). Designing multimedia case-based instruction accommodating students’ diverse learning styles. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 17(1), 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane, T. D., Stretton, T., Aiello, S., Britnell, S., Cook, S., & Narayan, V. (2018). Authentic interprofessional health education scenarios using mobile VR. Research in Learning Technology, 26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Codish, D., & Ravid, G. (2014). Personality based gamification-Educational gamification for extroverts and introverts. In Proceedings of the 9th CHAIS conference for the study of innovation and learning technologies: Learning in the technological era (Bd. 1, S. 36–44). Ra’anana, Israel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connor-Greene, P. A. (2000). Assessing and promoting student learning: Blurring the line between teaching and testing. Teaching of Psychology, 27(2), 84–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Copley, J. (2007). Audio and video podcasts of lectures for campus-based students: Production and evaluation of student use. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(4), 387–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danan, M. (2004). Captioning and subtitling: Undervalued language learning strategies. Meta: Journal des traducteurs/Meta:Translators' Journal, 49(1), 67–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, J., & Foley, J. (2006). Evaluating web lectures: A case study from HCI. In CHI’06 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (S. 195–200). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demetriadis, S., & Pombortsis, A. (2007). E-lectures for flexible learning: A study on their learning efficiency. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(2), 147–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denny, P. (2013). The effect of virtual achievements on student engagement. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (S. 763–772). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinis, F. M., Guimarães, A. S., Carvalho, B. R., & Martins, J. P. P. (2017). Virtual and augmented reality game-based applications to civil engineering education. In Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) 2017 IEEE (S. 1683–1688). New York: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, L., & Mathis, D. (1985). College student learning from televised versus conventional classroom lectures: A controlled experiment. Higher Education, 14(2), 165–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Figlio, D., Rush, M., & Yin, L. (2013). Is it live or is it internet? Experimental estimates of the effects of online instruction on student learning. Journal of Labor Economics, 31(4), 763–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, S., Lowe, R. K., & Schwan, S. (2008). Effects of presentation speed of a dynamic visualization on the understanding of a mechanical system. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22(8), 1126–1141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, P., Rodriguez, F., & McComb, J. (2001). Why students do and do not attend classes: Myths and realities. College Teaching, 49(4), 124–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frydenberg, M. (2006). Principles and pedagogy: The two P’s of podcasting in the information technology classroom. In Proceedings of the information systems education conference 2006, v23 (Dallas).

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghinea, G., & Thomas, J. T. (2005). Quality of perception: User quality of service in multimedia presentations. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 7(4), 786–789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giannakos, M. N., Chorianopoulos, K., & Chrisochoides, N. (2015). Making sense of video analytics: Lessons learned from clickstream interactions, attitudes, and learning outcome in a video-assisted course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(1), 260–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grabe, M., & Christopherson, K. (2008). Optional student use of online lecture resources: Resource preferences, performance and lecture attendance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, P., Coates, H., Mcinnis, C., & James, R. (2003). The development of an extended course experience questionnaire. Quality in Higher Education, 9(3), 259–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, D., Pietri, E. S., Anderson, G., Moyano-Camihort, K., & Graham, M. J. (2015). Increased preclass preparation underlies student outcome improvement in the flipped classroom. CBE Life Sciences Education, 14(4), ar36.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014, March). How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of mooc videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference (S. 41–50). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haggerty, G., & Hilsenroth, M. J. (2011). The use of video in psychotherapy supervision. British Journal of Psychotherapy, 27(2), 193–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work?-a literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In System sciences (HICSS) 2014, 47th Hawaii international conference on (S. 3025–3034). Piscataway: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, E. R., Rosenberg, J. M., & Akcaoglu, M. (2016). The substitution augmentation modification redefinition (SAMR) model: A critical review and suggestions for its use. TechTrends, 60(5), 433–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Handke, J. (2014). The inverted classroom mastery model-A diary study. In E.-M. Großkurth & J. Handke (Hrsg.), The inverted classroom model: The 3rd German ICM-conference proceedings. Oldenburg: De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handke, J. (2015). Handbuch Hochschullehre Digital. Leitfaden für eine moderne und mediengerechte Lehre. Marburg: Tectum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrington, C. M., Kavanagh, D. O., Ballester, G. W., Ballester, A. W., Dicker, P., Traynor, O., Hill, A., & Tierney, S. (2017). 360° Operative videos: A randomised cross-over study evaluating attentiveness and information retention. Journal of Surgical Education, 75(4), 993–1000.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, J. L., & Nelson, A. (2011). New technology, new pedagogy? Employing video podcasts in learning and teaching about exotic ecosystems. Environmental Education Research, 17(3), 393–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hove, M., & Corcoran, K. (2008). If you post it, will they come? Lecture availability in introductory psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 35(2), 91–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jang, D. P., Kim, I. Y., Nam, S. W., Wiederhold, B. K., Wiederhold, M. D., & Kim, S. I. (2002). Analysis of physiological response to two virtual environments: Driving and flying simulation. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 5(1), 11–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, S. A. (2011). In-class versus online video lectures: Similar learning outcomes, but a preference for in-class. Teaching of Psychology, 38(4), 298–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kibble, J. (2007). Use of unsupervised online quizzes as formative assessment in a medical physiology course: Effects of incentives on student participation and performance. Advances in Physiology Education, 31(3), 253–260.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J., Guo, P. J., Seaton, D. T., Mitros, P., Gajos, K. Z., & Miller, R. C. (2014). Understanding in-video dropouts and interaction peaks inonline lecture videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference (S. 31–40). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klass, B. (2003). Streaming media in higher education: Possibilities and pitfalls. Campus Technology. https://campustechnology.com/articles/2003/05/streaming-media-in-higher-education-possibilities-and-pitfalls.aspx.

  • Kleinknecht, M., & Poschinski, N. (2014). Eigene und fremde Videos in der Lehrerfortbildung. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 60(3), 471–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinknecht, M., Schneider, J., & Syring, M. (2014). Varianten videobasierten Lehrens und Lernens in der Lehrpersonenaus-und-fortbildung – Empirische Befunde und didaktische Empfehlungen zum Einsatz unterschiedlicher Lehr-Lern-Konzepte und Videotypen. Beiträge zur Lehrerinnen-und Lehrerbildung, 32(2), 210–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krathwohl, D. R., & Anderson, L. W. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing. New York: David McKay Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook II: Affective domain. New York: David McKay Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kukulska-Hulme, A., Foster-Jones, J., Jelfs, A., Mallett, E., & Holland, D. (2004). Investigating digital video applications in distance learning. Journal of Educational Media, 29(2), 125–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, H. E. (2010). „But they won’t come to lectures ...“ The impact of audio recorded lectures on student experience and attendance. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. H., Sergueeva, K., Catangui, M., & Kandaurova, M. (2017). Assessing Google Cardboard virtual reality as a content delivery system in business classrooms. Journal of Education for Business, 92(4), 153–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, N., Verma, H., Skevi, A., Zufferey, G., & Dillenbourg, P. (2014). MOOC learning in spontaneous study groups: Does synchronously watching videos make a difference? Proceedings of the European MOOC Stakeholder Summit 2014 (No. EPFL-CONF-196608, S. 88–94). PAU Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, N., Kidziński, Ł., Jermann, P., & Dillenbourg, P. (2015). MOOC video interaction patterns: What do they tell us? Design for teaching and learning in a networked world (S. 197–210). Barcelona: Springer International Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Liou, H. H., Yang, S. J., Chen, S. Y., & Tarng, W. (2017). The influences of the 2D image-based augmented reality and virtual reality on student learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(3), 110–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marks, B. P. (2002). Web-based readiness assessment quizzes. Journal of Engineering Education, 91(1), 97–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazzolini, M., & Maddison, S. (2003). Sage, guide or ghost? The effect of instructor intervention on student participation in online discussion forums. Computers & Education, 40(3), 237–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meisel, S. (1998). Videotypes: Considerations for effective use of video in teaching and training. Journal of Management Development, 17(4), 251–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Microsoft Research. Project Tuva (2009). http://research.microsoft.com/apps/tools/tuva/index.html.

  • Moore, S., Armstrong, C., & Pearson, J. (2008). Lecture absenteeism among students in higher education: A valuable route to understanding student motivation. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 30(1), 15–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morales, C., Cory, C., & Bozell, D. (2001). A comparative efficiency study between a live lecture and a web-based live-switched multi-camera streaming video distance learning instructional unit. In Proceedings of 2001 information resources management association international conference (S. 63–66). Toronto, Ontario.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moro, C., Stromberga, Z., & Stirling, A. (2017). Virtualisation devices for student learning: Comparison between desktop-based (Oculus Rift) and mobile-based (Gear VR) virtual reality in medical and health science education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(6), 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owston, R., Lupshenyuk, D., & Wideman, H. (2011). Lecture capture in large undergraduate classes: Student perceptions and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 14(4), 262–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pantelidis, V. S. (1993). Virtual reality in the classroom. Educational Technology, 33(4), 23–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Procter, R., Hartswood, M., McKinlay, A., & Gallacher, S. (1999). An investigation of the influence of network quality of service on the effectiveness of multimedia communication. In Proceedings of the international ACM SIGGROUP conference on Supporting group work (S. 160–168). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiners, T., Wood, L. C., Chang, V., Gütl, C., Herrington, J., Teräs, H., & Gregory, S. (2012). Operationalising gamification in an educational authentic environment. IADIS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronchetti, M. (2010). Perspectives of the application of video streaming to education. In Streaming media architectures, techniques, and applications: Recent advances (S. 411). Hershey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sage, K. (2014). What pace is best? Assessing adults’ learning from slideshows and video. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 23(1), 91–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos-Espino, J. M., Afonso-Suárez, M. D., & Guerra-Artal, C. (2016). Speakers and boards: A survey of instructional video styles in MOOCs. Technical Communication, 63(2), 101–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, N. E., Gallagher, A. G., Roman, S. A., O’brien, M. K., Bansal, V. K., Andersen, D. K., & Satava, R. M. (2002). Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: Results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Annals of Surgery, 236(4), 458.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Sherer, P., & Shea, T. (2011). Using online video to support student learning and engagement. College Teaching, 59(2), 56–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, B. J. (1966). The classification of educational objectives: Psychomotor domain. Illinois Journal of Home Economics, 10(4), 110–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinha, T., Jermann, P., Li, N., & Dillenbourg, P. (2014). Your click decides your fate: Inferring information processing and attrition behavior from MOOC video clickstream interactions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1407.7131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, S. E. (2003). Text-structuring metadiscourse, intonation and the signalling of organisation in academic lectures. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(1), 5–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Traphagan, T., Kucsera, J. V., & Kishi, K. (2010). Impact of class lecture webcasting on attendance and learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(1), 19–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tulving, E., & Kroll, N. (1995). Novelty assessment in the brain and long-term memory encoding. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2(3), 387–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuma, R., Schnettler, B., & Knoblauch, H. (2013). Videographie. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Virtanen, M. A., Kääriäinen, M., Liikanen, E., & Haavisto, E. (2017). Use of Ubiquitous 360 learning environment enhances students’ knowledge in clinical histotechnology: A Quasi-Experimental study. Medical Science Educator, 27(4), 589–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Konsky, B. R., Ivins, J., & Gribble, S. J. (2009). Lecture attendance and web based lecture technologies: A comparison of student perceptions and usage patterns. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(4).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wachtler, J., & Ebner, M. (2015). Impacts of interactions in learning-videos: A subjective and objective analysis. In EdMedia: World conference on educational media and technology (S. 1611–1619). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Norfolk, Virginia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wannemacher, K., von Imke Jungermann, U. M., Scholz, J., Tercanli, H., & von Villiez, A. (2016). Digitale Lernszenarien im Hochschulbereich. Im Auftrag der Themengruppe „Innovationen in Lern-und Prüfungsszenarien“ koordiniert vom CHE im Hochschulforum Digitalisierung, Arbeitspapier, (15).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, D., Zhou, L., Briggs, R. O., & Nunamaker, J. F. (2006). Instructional video in e-learning: Assessing the impact of interactive video on learning effectiveness. Information & Management, 43(1), 15–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psychologisches Institut, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Mainz, Deutschland

    Malte Persike

Authors
  1. Malte Persike
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Malte Persike .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken, Germany

    Helmut Niegemann

  2. Lehrstuhl für Bildungstechnologie, Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken, Saarland, Germany

    Armin Weinberger

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Persike, M. (2019). Videos in der Lehre: Wirkungen und Nebenwirkungen. In: Niegemann, H., Weinberger, A. (eds) Lernen mit Bildungstechnologien. Springer Reference Psychologie . Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54373-3_23-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54373-3_23-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-54373-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-54373-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Referenz Psychologie

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation