Transcript שקופית 1
Students’ Perspective on Teaching and Learning using Video Technology The Open University of Israel Shoham – Department of Technologies In Distance Education Department of Assessment and training DIVERSE, Portland, Main, July, 2010 Yael Steimberg, Eva Guterman, Boaz Mermelstein, Relly Brickner, Yael Alberton, Ronit Sagi, Tsily Liebermann The Open University of Israel Facts Open admissions Distance learning 45,000 students 700 courses Face to Face Asynchronous Synchronous Synchronous learning at the OUI 5 online video studios 5 video conference classrooms 80 courses with online video groups 40 Virtual Class (WebEx) groups 4500 students 22,000 unique users Intro to Statistics Synchronous learning at the OUI (live & VOD) Hours “B term” Final exam. 22,000 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Fall 2010, all Fall 2010 – 226,870 hours 7 8 9 10 11 12 Fall 2010 students 13 14 15 16 Fall 2010 Live 17 18 19 20 Weeks The Video Survey – Fall 2010 (Initial findings) Learning group Survey Population: • Fall 2010 • 74 courses • 17,828 students • 13,824 face to face stu. (24% response, n= 4,655) • 4004 live video stu. (37% response) • 14,058 unique video users Survey: • 50 items (clustered) • Open questions Watched recorded lessons Yes (Rec.) No (N0 Rec) Video F2F n=1,331 N=1,739 N=95 N=1,490 Students’ Characteristics - Credit Video Group - Credit 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% • 0 1-6 7-30 No Rec (n=92) 31-72 Low usage of video in the entry-level courses 73+ Rec (n=1,264) F2F Group – Credit (*) 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 0 1-6 7-30 No Rec (n=1,436) 31-72 73+ Rec (n=1,631) (*Significant) Academic Departments Video Group 70% 60% 50% No Rec (n=95) 40% 30% 20% Rec (n=1,331) 10% 0% F2F Group 70% 60% 50% 40% No Rec (n=1,490) 30% 20% 10% Rec (n=1,739) 0% -10% The Live Video Groups: Registration and Participation Registered to live video Group 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% The Live Video Groups: Registration and Participation Participated in live video Group 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Connection with Connection the tutor With other Immediate stud. Routine feedback timeframe for learning Else The Live Video Groups: Registration and Participation Why I did not participate the live video lesson 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% .0% Not match Prefer Pace is too Pace is too Not match Technical my learning watching the slow fast my schedule problems style VOD Else Students’ attitudes 120.0% (n=4,386) (4,392) 48.9% 52.8% (4,363) 100.0% (4,386) (4,385) 80.0% 60.9% 60.0% 90.3% high Medium 88.9% 40.0% 20.0% Low 0.0% F2F tutoring is more Live video tutoring efficient than Video can replace F2F tutoring tutoring Direct contact with tutor is very important Live video lessons I would like a set of can promote recorded lessons in understanding all courses (All significant) Students’ attitudes: Video vs. F2F Live video tutoring can replace F2F tutoring F2F tutoring is more efficient than Video tutoring 120.0% 100.0% 80.0% (n=92) (1,252) (493) (866) 34.6% 48.9% (1,248) (1,432) 34.7% 53.6% 72.7% 60.0% (n=92) 63.0% (1,614) 41.8% 68.5% 40.0% High Medium Low 20.0% .0% rec. no rec. Video no rec. rec. Face to Face no rec. rec. Video no rec. rec. Face to Face (All significant) Students attitudes: Learning with Video Watching video tutoring may improve understanding 120.0% 100.0% (1,246) (n=92) (1,431) (1,617) 80.0% 60.0% 72.8% 79.4% High Medium 94.8% 97.5% 40.0% Low 20.0% .0% rec. no rec. Video no rec. rec. Face to Face (All significant) Students’ attitudes: Learning with Video Learning with video can be a positive experience 120.0% 100.0% (n=92) (1,253) (1,618) (1,440) 80.0% 69.6% 70.3% 60.0% 90.5% High Medium 94.8% 40.0% Low 20.0% .0% No Rec Rec Video no rec. rec. Face to Face (All significant) Students’ attitudes: Learning with Video Would you consider registering for a video course? (*) 120.0% 100.0% (n=91) 80.0% 46.2% (459) (492) 32.8% 60.0% Yes (1,262) 53.8% 81.6% 40.0% Haven't decided yet 20.0% No .0% rec. no rec. Video no rec. rec. Video Group / Credit Face to Face 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% No Rec (n=92) (*Significant) Rec (n=1,264) .0% 0 1-6 7-30 31-72 73+ Students’ achievements • 14,058 unique users (by username) • 208,122 views* Survey population’s (n=17,828) sub-pop.: • Watched more than 40% of the clips • Watched less than 40% of the clips 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 44 869 1694 2519 3344 4169 4994 5819 6644 7469 8294 9119 9944 10769 11594 12419 13244 Courses’ video clips viewed: Views Examined parameters (for each group): • Attended final exam. (%) • Passed the final exam. (%) • Mean score *View: one user watching one clip one time or more during one day Unique users Students’ achievements (Samples from initial findings1) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Attended final exam 10126* (n=1,675) 10131* (n=2,505) 30111* (n=3,278) 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 Passed the final exam 10126* (n=1,202) 10131 (n=1,861) 30111 (n=2,410) Mean score Watched more then 40% of the course's clips 10126* (n=1,202) 1All 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% three are introductory courses 10131 (n=1,861) 30111 (n=2,410) Watched less then 40% of the course's clips Summary (initial summery) Past usage is the best predict for future use • Novice students have low tendency to watch video • Active exposure to video is needed (and to technologies at large) Routine timeframe is impotent • Persuade students to participate synchronous remote lessons • Create self-learning synchronous groups (virtual classroom, Skype, etc’) Different patterns of use between academic departments • Is it content related? • Is it academic stuff’s attitude related? F2F recorded lessons Vs. remote video groups recorded lessons • Most of OUI video lessons were especially made for remote students Asynchronous use of recorded lessons • Accessibility (“is it there when & where the student need it?”) • Relevancy (“if the teacher is not using the video for teaching, student will not use it for learning”) Thank You Thank You Boaz Mermelshtien, [email protected]