Advertisement

Journal of Computing in Higher Education

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 160–177 | Cite as

Investigating students’ use and adoption of with-video assignments: lessons learnt for video-based open educational resources

  • Ilias O. Pappas
  • Michail N. Giannakos
  • Patrick Mikalef
Article
First Online:

Abstract

The use of video-based open educational resources is widespread, and includes multiple approaches to implementation. In this paper, the term “with-video assignments” is introduced to portray video learning resources enhanced with assignments. The goal of this study is to examine the factors that influence students’ intention to adopt with-video assignments. Extending the technology acceptance model by incorporating students’ emotions, we applied partial least squares structural equation modeling based on a sample of 73 students who systematically experienced with-video assignments in their studies. In addition, students’ activity was analyzed using aggregated time series visualizations based on video analytics. Learning analytics indicate that students make varying use of with-video assignments, depending on when they access them. Students are more likely to watch a greater proportion of the video when they use with-video assignments during the semester, as opposed to during the exams. Further, the findings highlight the important role of students’ emotions in adopting with-video assignments. In addition, perceived usefulness of with-video assignments increases their positive emotions and intention to adopt this medium, while perceived ease of use increases only their intentions. Together, these constructs explain 68% of the variance in students’ intention to adopt with-video assignments.

Keywords

With-video assignments Open educational resource Students’ adoption Video-based learning 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was carried out during the tenure of an ERCIM “Alain Bensoussan” Fellowship Programme. This study was funded by The Research Council of Norway, project FUTURE LEARNING (Grant Number 255129/H20). This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie Grant Agreement No 704110.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Agudo-Peregrina, Á. F., Hernández-García, Á., & Pascual-Miguel, F. J. (2014). Behavioral intention, use behavior and the acceptance of electronic learning systems: Differences between higher education and lifelong learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atif, A., Richards, D., Busch, P., & Bilgin, A. (2015). Assuring graduate competency: A technology acceptance model for course guide tools. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 27(2), 94–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barclay, L. J., & Kiefer, T. (2014). Approach or avoid? Exploring overall justice and the differential effects of positive and negative emotions. Journal of Management, 40(7), 1857–1898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beaudry, A., & Pinsonneault, A. (2010). The other side of acceptance: Studying the direct and indirect effects of emotions on information technology use. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 689–710.Google Scholar
  5. Brotherton, J. A., & Abowd, G. D. (2004). Lessons learned from eClass: Assessing automated capture and access in the classroom. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 11(2), 121–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buchanan, T., Sainter, P., & Saunders, G. (2013). Factors affecting faculty use of learning technologies: Implications for models of technology adoption. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 25(1), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavior science. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Association.Google Scholar
  8. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Day, J. A., & Foley, J. D. (2006). Evaluating a web lecture intervention in a human–computer interaction course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 49(4), 420–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. De Guinea, A. O., & Markus, M. L. (2009). Why break the habit of a lifetime? Rethinking the roles of intention, habit, and emotion in continuing information technology use. MIS Quarterly, 33(3), 433–444.Google Scholar
  11. Dhonau, S., & McAlpine, D. (2002). “Streaming” best practices: Using digital video-teaching segments in the fl/esl methods course. Foreign Language Annals, 35(6), 632–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Donkor, F. (2011). Assessment of learner acceptance and satisfaction with video-based instructional materials for teaching practical skills at a distance. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(5), 74–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Evans, C. (2008). The effectiveness of m-learning in the form of podcast revision lectures in higher education. Computers and Education, 50(2), 491–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fox, A. (2013). From moocs to spocs. Communications of the ACM, 56(12), 38–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gefen, D., Straub, D., & Boudreau, M.-C. (2000). Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications of the association for information systems, 4(1), 7.Google Scholar
  17. Giannakos, M. N. (2013). Exploring the video-based learning research: A review of the literature. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(6), E191–E195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Giannakos, M. N., Krogstie, J., & Aalberg, T. (2016a). Video-based learning ecosystem to support active learning: Application to an introductory computer science course. Smart Learning Environments, 3, 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Giannakos, M. N., Sampson, D. G., Kidziński, Ł., & Pardo, A. (2016b). Enhancing video-based learning experience through smart environments and analytics. In Paper presented at the workshop on smart environments and analytics in video-based learning (SE@ VBL).Google Scholar
  20. Giannakos, M. N., & Vlamos, P. (2013). Educational webcasts’ acceptance: Empirical examination and the role of experience. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(1), 125–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014). How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of mooc videos. In Paper presented at the proceedings of the first ACM conference on learning@ scale conference.Google Scholar
  22. Hannafin, M. J. (1984). Guidelines for using locus of instructional control in the design of computer-assisted instruction. Journal of instructional development, 7(3), 6–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Harley, D., Henke, J., Lawrence, S., McMartin, F., Maher, M., Gawlik, M., et al. (2003). Costs, culture, and complexity: An analysis of technology enhancements in a large lecture course at UC Berkeley. Center for Studies in Higher Education. http://escholarship.org/uc/item/68d9t1rm. Accessed 14 Jan 2017.
  24. Heilesen, S. B. (2010). What is the academic efficacy of podcasting? Computers and Education, 55(3), 1063–1068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hibbeln, M. T., Jenkins, J. L., Schneider, C., Valacich, J., & Weinmann, M. (2016). Inferring negative emotion from mouse cursor movements. MIS Quarterly. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2708108. Accessed 14 Jan 2017.
  26. Hox, J. J., & Bechger, T. M. (1998). An introduction to structural equation modeling. Family Science Review, 11, 354–373.Google Scholar
  27. Jadin, T., Gruber, A., & Batinic, B. (2009). Learning with E-lectures: The meaning of learning strategies. Educational Technology and Society, 12(3), 282–288.Google Scholar
  28. Jarvis, C., & Dickie, J. (2009). Acknowledging the ‘forgotten’and the ‘unknown’: The role of video podcasts for supporting field-based learning. Planet, 22(1), 61–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kay, R. H., & Loverock, S. (2008). Assessing emotions related to learning new software: The computer emotion scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1605–1623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kazlauskas, A., & Robinson, K. (2012). Podcasts are not for everyone. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 321–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Khalil, M., Kastl, C., & Ebner, M. (2016). Portraying MOOCs Learners: a Clustering Experience Using Learning Analytics. Research Track, 265.Google Scholar
  32. Kim, J., Guo, P. J., Cai, C. J., Li, S.-W. D., Gajos, K. Z., & Miller, R. C. (2014). Data-driven interaction techniques for improving navigation of educational videos. In Paper presented at the proceedings of the 27th annual ACM symposium on user interface software and technology.Google Scholar
  33. Kleftodimos, A., & Evangelidis, G. (2016). An interactive video-based learning environment supporting learning analytics: Insights obtained from analyzing learner activity data. In Y. Li, M. Chang, M. Kravcik, E. Popescu, R. Huang, Kinshuk, et al. (Eds.), State-of-the-art and future directions of smart learning. Lecture notes in educational technology (pp. 471–481). Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lee, M.-C. (2010). Explaining and predicting users’ continuance intention toward e-learning: An extension of the expectation–confirmation model. Computers and Education, 54(2), 506–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lee, M. K., Cheung, C. M., & Chen, Z. (2005). Acceptance of internet-based learning medium: The role of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Information and Management, 42(8), 1095–1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lee, B.-C., Yoon, J.-O., & Lee, I. (2009). Learners’ acceptance of e-learning in South Korea: Theories and results. Computers and Education, 53(4), 1320–1329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Leijen, Ä., Lam, I., Wildschut, L., Simons, P. R.-J., & Admiraal, W. (2009). Streaming video to enhance students’ reflection in dance education. Computers and Education, 52(1), 169–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Liu, C., & Forsythe, S. (2011). Examining drivers of online purchase intensity: Moderating role of adoption duration in sustaining post-adoption online shopping. Journal of retailing and consumer services, 18(1), 101–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ljubojevic, M., Vaskovic, V., Stankovic, S., & Vaskovic, J. (2014). Using supplementary video in multimedia instruction as a teaching tool to increase efficiency of learning and quality of experience. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(3), 275–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Maag, M. (2006). Podcasting and MP3 players: Emerging education technologies. Computers Informatics Nursing, 24(1), 9–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McCombs, S., & Liu, Y. (2007). The efficacy of podcasting technology in instructional delivery. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 123–134.Google Scholar
  42. McGreal, R., Sampson, D. G., Chen, N.-S., Krishnan, M. S., & Huang, R. (2012). The open educational resources (OER) movement: Free learning for all students. In Paper presented at the 2012 IEEE 12th international conference on advanced learning technologies.Google Scholar
  43. Mikalef, P., Pappas, I. O., & Giannakos, M. (2016). An integrative adoption model of video-based learning. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 33(4), 219–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ngai, E. W., Poon, J., & Chan, Y. (2007). Empirical examination of the adoption of WebCT using TAM. Computers and Education, 48(2), 250–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. O’brien, R. M. (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality and Quantity, 41(5), 673–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. O’brien, A., & Hegelheimer, V. (2007). Integrating CALL into the classroom: The role of podcasting in an ESL listening strategies course. ReCALL, 19(02), 162–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pappas, I. O., Giannakos, M. N., & Sampson, D. G. (2016a). Making sense of learning analytics with a configurational approach. In Paper presented at the proceedings of the workshop on smart environments and analytics in video-based learning (SE@ VBL), LAK2016.Google Scholar
  48. Pappas, I. O., Kourouthanassis, P. E., Giannakos, M. N., & Chrissikopoulos, V. (2014). Shiny happy people buying: The role of emotions on personalized e-shopping. Electronic Markets, 24(3), 193–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pappas, I. O., Kourouthanassis, P. E., Giannakos, M. N., & Chrissikopoulos, V. (2016b). Explaining online shopping behavior with fsQCA: The role of cognitive and affective perceptions. Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 794–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pappas, I. O., Mikalef, P., & Giannakos, M. N. (2016c). Video-Based Learning Adoption: A typology of learners. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the workshop on Smart Environments and Analytics in Video-Based Learning (SE@VBL), LAK2016.Google Scholar
  51. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rienties, B., & Rivers, B. A. (2014). Measuring and understanding learner emotions: Evidence and prospects. Learning Analytics Review, 1, 1–28.Google Scholar
  53. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. Bönningstedt: SmartPLS.Google Scholar
  54. Roca, J. C., & Gagné, M. (2008). Understanding e-learning continuance intention in the workplace: A self-determination theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1585–1604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Roehl, A., Reddy, S. L., & Shannon, G. J. (2013). The flipped classroom: An opportunity to engage millennial students through active learning. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 105(2), 44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Saadé, R., & Bahli, B. (2005). The impact of cognitive absorption on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in on-line learning: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Information and Management, 42(2), 317–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Scherer, K. R. (2005). What are emotions? And how can they be measured? Social Science Information, 44(4), 695–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ullrich, C., Shen, R., & Xie, W. (2013). Analyzing student viewing patterns in lecture videos. In Paper presented at the 2013 IEEE 13th international conference on advanced learning technologies (ICALT).Google Scholar
  60. Van Zanten, R., Somogyi, S., & Curro, G. (2012). Purpose and preference in educational podcasting. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), 130–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wachtler, J., & Ebner, M. (2015). Impacts of interactions in learning-videos: A subjective and objective analysis. In Paper presented at the EdMedia: World conference on educational media and technology.Google Scholar
  62. Wachtler, J., Hubmann, M., Zöhrer, H., & Ebner, M. (2016). An analysis of the use and effect of questions in interactive learning-videos. Smart Learning Environments, 3(1), 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ilias O. Pappas
    • 1
  • Michail N. Giannakos
    • 1
  • Patrick Mikalef
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer and Information ScienceNorwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)TrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options