Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-17T18:23:22.698Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pause for Thought: Designing Video Content that Doesn't Overwhelm Learners

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 February 2023

Charlie Brampton
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Easy-to-use software and apps have made video creation achievable and affordable for many library and information professionals. While there are parallels between delivering library training in-person and via a pre-recorded video, video creation does present additional challenges as well as exciting opportunities. This paper, by Charlie Brampton, uses Clark and Mayer's model of cognitive processing as a framework, and explores how video watching can lead to extraneous, essential and generative processing. These three concepts are explored individually, and practical advice is given about controlling each type of processing. The related topic of video accessibility is discussed, from both a legal and a practical perspective.

Keywords

cognitive processingvideo information processingteachinglearningtechnologies
Type
BIALL Annual Conference 2022: A Selection of Papers
Information
Legal Information Management , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , December 2022 , pp. 196 - 200
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by British and Irish Association of Law Librarians

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Footnotes

1 Brenton, Sam ‘Effective Online Teaching and Learning’ in Fry, Heather, Ketteridge, Steve and Marshall, Stephanie (eds), A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. (4th edn, Routledge 2015) 140Google Scholar.

2 ibid 149.

3 Adapted from: Clark, Ruth Colvin and Mayer, Richard E, E-learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning (4th edn, Wiley 2016) 54CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Miller, George A, ‘The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information’ (1956) 63 Psychological Review 81CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

5 Mathieson, Sue ‘Student Learning’ in Fry, Heather, Ketteridge, Steve and Marshall, Stephanie (eds), A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. (4th edn, Routledge 2015) 65Google Scholar.

6 Benjamin E Schreiber, Junaid Fukuta and Fabiana Gordon, ‘Live lecture versus video podcast in undergraduate medical education: A randomised controlled trial’ (2010) BMC Med Educ, 2010 Oct 8;10:68. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-10-68.

7 Sweller, John, Ayres, Paul L and Kalyuga, Slava, Cognitive Load Theory (Springer 2011)Google Scholar.

8 Clark, Ruth Colvin and Mayer, Richard E, E-learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning (4th edn, Wiley 2016) 55CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Garner, Ruth, Gillingham, Mark G and Stephen, C White, C, ‘Effects of seductive details on macroprocessing and microprocessing in adults and children’ (1989) 6 Cognition and Instruction 41CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Clark and Mayer (n 8) 173–177.

11 Clark and Mayer (n 8) 152–155.

12 Clark and Mayer (n 8) 55.

13 Beatty, Brian J, Merchant, Zahira and Albert, Michael, ‘Analysis of Student Use of Video in a Flipped Classroom’ (2019) 63 TechTrends 376CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 376.

14 Roxana Moreno ‘Optimising Learning from Animations by Minimising Cognitive Load: Cognitive and Affective Consequences of Signalling and Segmentation Methods’ (2007) 21 Applied Cognitive Psychology 765.

15 ibid 778.

16 Beatty, Merchant and Albert (n 13) 383.

17 Clark and Mayer (n 8) 55.

18 Clark and Mayer (n 8) 201.

19 Beck, Isabel l and others ‘Questioning the Author: A Year Long Classroom Implementation to Engage Students in Text’ (1996) 96 Elementary School Journal 385CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 Clark and Mayer (n 8) 250.

21 The Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018, SI 2018/952.

22 Central Data and Digital Office, ‘CDDO Accessibility Regulations Campaign Information for Education’ (Online Accessibility Regulations Campaign: Supporter Pack, 20 April 2021) <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-accessibility-regulations-campaign-supporter-pack/gds-accessibility-regulations-campaign-information-for-education#how-this-will-impact-schools-higher-education-and-further-education> accessed 11 September 2022.

23 World Wide Web Consortium, ‘Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1’ (05 June 2018) <https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/> accessed 11 September 2022.

24 Thompson, Terrill, ‘Video for All: Accessibility of Video Content and Universal Design of a Media Player’ in Burgstahler, Sheryl E (ed) Universal Design in Higher Education: From Principles to Practice (2nd edn, Harvard Education Press 2015) 259Google Scholar.

25 ibid 260.