CoI 2.0

In applying the Community of Inquiry (CoI) theoretical framework to analyze the use of video-based learning (VBL) for student well-being, my approach remained fluid. I have since identified two reasons for this which helped solidify my approach.

My first challenge to overcome is how CoI’s social presence tends to measure participation rather than an authentic and valued community involvement. Social presence does not include the finer consideration of complex learner emotions (Majewski et al., 2018) or processes, both of which are closely connected to mental well-being. In one article, Anderson (2018) accepts Shea and Bidjerano’s suggested fourth presence “learning presence” (2010, p. 1727) to account for these complex components of online learners.

Image from Shea & Bidgerano, 2010

 

This fourth component assists in focusing on student well-being by accrediting the influence of learner’s emotions and self-efficacy. Thereby, increasing the value of the social, teacher, and cognitive presence within the community of inquirers.

Secondly, I struggled to focus on VBL alone as in my current context of a K to 12 BC Public Distributed Learning school, videos are not used in isolation.  Equally challenging is the overlap in the research addressing social presence in online classes or computer-mediated communications alongside videos. As a result, my aim is to focus on design and instructor strategies for increasing learner and community presence in modes that are applicable to video.

My research through the past weeks has helped to form a more solid approach within a quickly changing field among complex learners.

References

Anderson, T. (2018). How communities of inquiry drive teaching and learning in the digital age. Teaching Online.ca https://teachonline.ca/tools-trends/how-communities-inquiry-drive-teaching-and-learning-digital-age.

Majeski, R. A., Stover, M., & Valais, T. (2018). The community of inquiry and emotional presence. Adult Learning, 29(2), 53–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045159518758696

Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2010). Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a communities of inquiry in online and blended learning environments. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1721-1731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.017

 

 

 

Did Video Really Kill the Radiostar?

While video may not guilty of killing radio it has definitely rewriting education “by machine and new technology” (Horn et al., 1979). As our team explores video as an educational technology tool, we look to consi. My participation with video-based learning (VBL) is dominated by  health and safety training videos for work and childrens’ sports teams. We chose the learning path “Becoming an Instructional Developer” from LinkedIn

I found the VBL course was useful for dusting off the cobwebs on previous learning. My overall reaction though, was disinterest as I craved the eye-content and personal connection. In this vein, leaders, designers and “educators must comprehend the effects of learning tools on both a person’s cognitive self and their emotional being” (Koster, 2018) In an asynchronous, video only learning scenario as this, the instructor is also not able to respond to the audiences’ non-verbal cues and adjust the course accordingly. In the initial review of the literature, it was found that VBL could increase social interactions (Yousef et al., 2014) but it can also increase student isolation (Kizilcec et al., 2014)  there can be some negative social consequences.

This relates to the specific issue of avoidance and lack of participation from highly anxious students to the learning event and technology. The challenge on the learner’s side is that feelings of anxiety or depression could worsen from the sense of isolation that comes from VBL alone. I wonder where the threshold at which the  negatives outway the positive benefits of video-based learning lies.  

References

Horn, T., Downes, G., & Woolley, B. (1979). Video killed the radio star. [Recorded by The Buggles]. US & UK: Island Records.

Kizilcec, R. F., Papadopoulos, K. and Sritanyaratana, L. (2014), Showing face in video instruction: Effects on information retention, visual attention, and affect, in ‘Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems’, CHI ’14, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 2095–2102

Köster J. (2018) Video for learning. In, Video in the Age of Digital Learning. Springer, Cham. https://doi-org.ezproxy.royalroads.ca/10.1007/978-3-319-93937-7_1

Yousef, A. M. F., Chatti, M. A., & Schroeder, U. (2014). The state of video-based learning: A review and future perspectives. Int. J. Adv. Life Sci, 6(3/4), 122-135.https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.680.9203&rep=rep1&type=pdf

***Edited April 19th to update references.