Abstract
Automated editing technology offers notable efficiencies in educational video production. This study contrasts the time-saving benefits of automated editing against manual professional editing. Raw learning video footage was recorded in a professional studio with a green screen and presented in a frontal lecture style. The raw footage underwent editing by both an automated tool and professional editors. Time comparison results revealed significant savings with the use of automated tools. The paper further investigates the impact of automated editing on the learning video quality from the learners’ viewpoint. An online survey with 129 participants evaluated their perceptions of potential learning outcomes after viewing automatically and manually edited versions of two videos. The survey found a statistically significant difference in perceived learning potential from one of the videos, although not for both. Additionally, the study considers how differences in study group characteristics might influence these results. In summary, while automated editing presents a compelling case for production time reduction, its impact on the perceived quality of educational videos remains uncertain, necessitating additional research to understand the subtleties of learner interaction with video content.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Disclosure of Interests
The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
References
2and2/Google. The Values of YouTube (2017). https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/consumer-insights/consumer-trends/self-directed-learning-youtube-work-study-hobbies/. Visited 1 Sept 2022
Akhtar, Z., et al.: Why is multimedia quality of experience assessment a challenging problem? IEEE Access 7, 117897–117915 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2019.2936470
Berthouzoz, F., Li, W., Agrawala, M.: Tools for placing cuts and transitions in interview video. ACM Trans. Graph. 31(4), 1–8 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1145/2185520.2185563
Carpenter, S.K., Wilford, M.M., Kornell, N., Mullaney, K.M.: Appearances can be deceiving: instructor fluency increases perceptions of learning without increasing actual learning. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 20(6), 1350–1356 (2013)
Dancyger, K.: The Technique of Film and Video Editing: History, Theory, and Practice. FOCAL PR, p. 1138628395, 28 November 2018. https://www.ebook.de/de/product/28746041/ken_dancyger_the_technique_of_film_and_video_editing_history_theory_and_practice.html
Dror, I.E.: Technology enhanced learning. Pragmatics Cogn. 16(2), 215–223 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.16.2.02dro
Ebner, M., et al.: COVID-19 epidemic as e-learning boost? Chronological development and effects at an Austrian University against the background of the concept of “E-Learning Readiness”. Future Internet 12, 94 (2020). https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/12/6/94
Ebner, M., Schön, S.: Lern-und Lehrvideos: Gestaltung, Produktion, Einsatz. Handbuch E-Learning Erg. Lfg. 71, 1–14 (2017)
Ebner, M.: iMooX - a MOOC platform for all (universities). In: 2021 7th International Conference on Electrical, Electronics and Information Engineering (ICEEIE), pp. 1–5 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEEIE52663.2021.9616685
Fried, O., et al.: Text-based editing of talking-head video. ACM Trans. Graph. 38(4), 1–14 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3306346.3323028
Ghinea, G., Chen, S.Y.: Perceived quality of multimedia educational content: a cognitive style approach. Multimedia Syst. 11(3), 271–279 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00530-005-0007-8
Guo, P.J., Kim, J., Rubin, R.: How video production affects student engagement. In: Proceedings of the First ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale Conference - L@S 2014. ACM Press (2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566239
Honkomp-Wilkens, V., Wolf, K.D., Jung, P., Altmaier, N.: Informelles Lernen auf YouTube: Entwicklung eines Analyseinstruments zur Untersuchung didaktischer und gestalterischer Aspekte von Erklärvideos und Tutorials. MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung, pp. 495–528 (2022)
Huynh-Thu, Q., Ghanbari, M.: Temporal aspect of perceived quality in mobile video broadcasting. IEEE Trans. Broadcasting 54(3), 641–651 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1109/tbc.2008.2001246
de Lima, E.S., et al.: Automatic video editing for video-based interactive storytelling. In: 2012 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo. IEEE, July 2012. https://doi.org/10.1109/icme.2012.83
MacHardy, Z., Pardos, Z.A.: Evaluating the relevance of educational videos using BKT and Big Data. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, pp. 424–427 (2015)
Mayer, R.E.: Multimedia learning. Annu. Rep. Educ. Psychol. Japan 41, 27–29 (2002)
Mayer, R.E.: Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In: The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, vol. 41, pp. 31–48 (2005)
Millerson, G.: Video Production Handbook. Focal Press, Amsterdam, Boston (2008). ISBN: 9780240520803
Pew Research Center. Many Turn to YouTube for Children’s Content, News, How-To Lessons (2018). https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2018/11/07/many-turn-to-youtube-for-childrens-content-news-how-to-lessons/. Visited 1 Sept 2022
Rat für Kulturelle Bildung. Jugend/Youtube/Kulturelle Bildung - Horizont 2019 Studie: eine repräsentative Umfrage unter 12- bis 19-jährigen zur Nutzung kultureller Bildungsangebote an digitalen Kulturorten. Rat für Kulturelle Bildung e.V., Essen (2019). ISBN: 9783982017365
Smyrni, P., Nikopoulos, C.: Evaluating the impact of video-based versus traditional lectures on student learning. In: Educational Research, pp. 304–311, October 2010
Truong, A., et al.: “QuickCut”. In: Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, October 2016. https://doi.org/10.1145/2984511.2984569
Wedekind, J.: MOOCs - eine Herausforderung für die Hochschulen? In: Reinmann, G., Ebner, M., Schön, S. (eds.) Hochschuldidaktik im Zeichen von Heterogenität und Vielfalt. Doppelfestschrift für Peter Baumgärtner und Rolf Schulmeister, pp. 45–62. Books on Demand, Norderstedt (2013). https://www.ebook.de/de/product/20705828/hochschuldidaktik_im_zeichen_von_heterogenitaet_und_vielfalt.html
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Nußbaumer, D., Mair, B., Schön, S., Edelsbrunner, S., Ebner, M. (2024). Evaluating the Efficacy of Automated Video Editing in Educational Content Production: A Time Efficiency and Learner Perspective Study. In: Zaphiris, P., Ioannou, A. (eds) Learning and Collaboration Technologies. HCII 2024. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14722. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-61672-3_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-61672-3_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-61671-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-61672-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)