Study of Video Annotations In External Practices Of University Learning

Author(s):

Manuel Cebrián de la Serna(presenting / submitting)Juan José Mondero Moya(presenting)Daniel Cebrián Robles(presenting)

Conference:

ECER 2015

Network:

16. ICT in Education and Training

Format:

Poster

Session Information

16 SES 05.5 PS, General Poster Session

General Poster Session

Time:

2015-09-09

12:30-14:00

Room:

Poster Area

Chair:

Contribution

The digital video as code and learning technology has extensive scientific literature (Bartolome, 1997; Aguaded and Sánchez, 2008). However, the increase of digital video services on the Internet has facilitated and increased the use of video for education. With a recent important increase of videos as contained in the MOOC (Massive Open Online Course).

This context has also created the expansion of educational practices based on models for collaborative learning and mediated by technology (Computer Supported Learning collaborative -CSCL-). The study of these practices is proving to be effective for teachers in service and initial training practices if it is analyzed collectively (Hosack, Br tools, 2010;. Picci, Calvani, & Bonaiuti, 2012; Etscheidt & Curran, 2012; Ingram , 2014). There is interest in literature reviews on the reflective capabilities with the use of video for initial teacher training (Orland-Barak & Rachamim, 2009; Rich and Hannafin 2009; Rich & Trip, 2011) to which we expand in (Wallet, Cebrian & Desenne, 2015).

This work is part of a research project in progress [1] which aims to implement a federated portfolio model of multimedia evidences. This model uses a digital portfolio (from now on we will call ePortfolios) with three different federated tools (1. Digital rubric or eRubric, 2. Webquest and 3. Open Video Annotations -Ova-) created by our research and development group Gtea [2 ].

The OVA tool was created within the MOOC of edX in collaboration with Harvard University in 2013 [3]. So it, we need to create another standalone tool to design their own interface to use this tool in this project. This design was evaluated through user usability and satisfaction (Monedero, Cebrian & Desenne, 2015).

This study focuses on the ease and functionality of the OVA tool so that students to collect evidence on their digital multimedia portfolios. Especially, analyzes the competences that students show when annotate video in order to explain their learning experiences and respond to the skills that are required in the eRubrics in different teaching contexts (external and laboratory practices).

Method

The study was developed for pedagogy students in their external practices at Malaga University during the course 2014-15. Video annotations of a group of 32 students were stored in their eportfolios as evidence of their learning in the external practices. The data analysis are annotations on OVA platform videos and text annotations contained within the rubrics, and dealing with videos uploaded to the platform of the university. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected comparing the type of evidences and annotations with these research designs: a) The differences in text annotations added in the videos uploaded to the platform of the university versus text annotations added to the videos uploaded inside OVA. b.) Different video annotations of the external practice students according to their context (business vs. educational centers). c.) Usability and satisfaction using OVA tool versus the platform of the university. For the usability and satisfaction of the tool it will be used a validated instrument previously used for other different contexts (Serrano Angulo & Cebrian Robles, 2014). For the analysis of annotations is used different tools such as OVA statistics and content analysis with category systems (Andréu Abela, 2015) and different tools for text analysis [4].

Expected Outcomes

The project collects data during the course 2014-15 of two groups of students. The first group will be in two semesters ranging from October to November and the second from February to June. So it, we can not provide the results right now, but we hope to have them at the end of the course and for the presentation of the poster. The type of expected results are different in nature: -Results that inform us of the functionality within OVA statistical tool for analyzing video annotations. -Data about usability and user satisfaction using different tools for video annotation -Detect evidences that are easier or more difficult to explain with video annotations. -When using different content analysis tools found on the Internet[4], we can know what are the most effective in the context of the experience.

References

Aguaded, J.I. y Sánchez, J. (2008). Niños adolescentes tras el visor de la cámara: experiencias de alfabetización audiovisual. Revista estudios sobre el mensaje periodístico V.14, pp. 293-308. Andréu Abela, J. (2015). Las técnicas del análisis de contenido: una revisión actualizada. http://public.centrodeestudiosandaluces.es/pdfs/S200103.pdf [11/01/2015] Bartolomé, A. (1997). Uso interactivo del video. En J. Ferrés i Pere Marqués (Coord.) Comunicación educativa y nuevas tecnologías. Barcelona: Praxis. pp 320(1-13). Etscheidt, S. & Curran, Chr. (2012). Promoting Reflection in Teacher Preparation Programs: A Multilevel Model. Teacher Education and Special Education 35(1) pp.7-26. (DOI: 10.1177/0888406411420887). Hosack, B. (2010). VideoANT: Extending online video annotation beyond content delivery. TechTrends, V. 54, nº3. pp. 45-49. Ingram, J. (2014). Supporting student teachers in developing and applying professional knowledge with videoed events. European Journal of Teacher Education, Vol.37 (1), pp. 51-62. (DOI:10.1080/02619768.2013.801074). Picci, P., Calvani, A. & Bonaiuti, G. (2012). The use of digital video annotation in teacher training: the teachers’ perspective. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 69, pp. 600–613. (DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.452). Monedero, J.J., Cebrián, D. & Desenne, P. (2015). Usability and Satisfaction in Multimedia Annotation Tools for MOOCs.Comunicar, 44, 55-62. (DOI: 10.3916/C44-2015-06). Orland-Barak, L. & Rachamim, M. (2009). Simultaneous reflections by video in a second-order action research-mentoring model: lessons for the mentor and the mentee. Reflective Practice, Vol. 10, No. 5, pp.601–613. (DOI:10.1080/14623940903290653). Rich, P. & Hannafin, M. (2009). Video Annotation Tools. Technologies to Scaffold, Structure, and Transform Teacher Reflection. Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 60, nº 1, pp. 52-67. (DOI: 10.1177/0022487108328486). Rich, P. & Trip, T. (2011). Ten Essential Questions Educators Should Ask When Using Video Annotation Tools. TechTrends, Vol.55, nº6, pp. 16-24. Serrano Angulo, J. & Cebrian Robles, D. (2014). Usability and Satisfaction of e-Rubric. Revista de docencia universitaria. Vol. 12 (1), 177-195. http://red-u.net/redu/index.php/REDU/article/view/775/pdf

Author Information

Manuel Cebrián de la Serna (presenting / submitting)

Málaga University, Spain

Juan José Mondero Moya (presenting)

Málaga University, Spain

Daniel Cebrián Robles (presenting)

Universidad de Málaga

Rincon de la Victoria

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.