Publishing-Oriented Learner-Generated Video Production to Bridge the Media Gap

Author(s):

Laura Palmgren-Neuvonen(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2016

Network:

06. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures

Format:

Paper

Session Information

06 SES 12, Creation of Videos and their Adoption

Paper Session

Time:

2016-08-26

09:00-10:30

Room:

NM-Theatre M

Chair:

Stefan Iske

Contribution

Background

Adolescents produce and publish media content in social media but such activating learning environments are rarely employed at school (McVerry et al., 2015). Meanwhile, ever younger learners’ school motivation tends to be reduced. This is partly explained by the gap between media that is used in formal and informal learning environments making learners regard learning as meaningless (Salmela-Aro et al., in press). The impaired motivation has also been recognized internationally by large research projects such as PIRLS (Progress in International Reading Literacy Study) (Kupari et al., 2012).

Learner-generated video production has pedagogical potentials to enhance engagement and motivation (Schuck & Kearney, 2006) by allowing creativity and collaboration which are crucial 21st century skills. It fulfills the broad conception of texts: multimodality, production of texts and a socio-cultural approach. Introducing the conception, the national core curriculum (FNBE 2004) aimed to address the changing media world and make literacy practices meaningful (Räisänen & Korkeamäki, 2015). Through online publishing of the videos, the process implements ‘sharism’ (Ackermann, 2011) and new literacies (Coiro et al., 2008).

Acknowledging the significance of social interaction in teaching, learning and collaboration, this research study addresses the above-described challenge by examining pedagogical potentials of learner-generated video production through investigating social interaction within the process. Online publishing as a natural continuation, the process offers opportunities for multilevel social interaction, including societal interaction between the school and society.

This research builds an understanding of social interaction in creative tasks in the context of contemporary media culture. It suggests a framework to improve the processes and conditions of more successful interaction at each level and thus enhance the educational value of digital video (DV) production.

Social interaction in publishing-oriented DV production

Many researchers have hoped instruction to transform from teacher recitation to the interactive process of teaching-and-learning where teachers and learners contribute to joint meaning making (Staarman & Mercer 2010). Alexander (2005) recommended employing dialogic teaching to invite students to participate and contribute in extended interactions. Leftstein (2010) suggested employing pair and group settings to minimize teacher-centeredness. However, teacher-centered textbook-based literacy practices still adhere to school education (Korkeamäki & Dreher, 2011) and dialogic teaching is still scarce (e.g. Lehesvuori et al., 2013b). Group interaction, if applied, is uncooperative and of little educational value (Mercer & Littleton, 2007).

The pedagogical interaction is socially constructed not only among a learning community but also beyond the walls of the school. Online publishing allows interaction between school and homes about and around the DV production. As the published videos, exposing learners and their products, may have far-reaching consequences of indirect interaction enabled by open online activity and communication (Jaakkola, 2010), this dimension calls for guidance to help children create a responsible online presence (boyd, 2008) in order to become productive citizens.

Learner-generated DV production involves open-ended divergent tasks and creative collaborative learning. In such settings, teaching and interaction differ from convergent subject-based pedagogical interaction appearing in science education. The teacher is an ‘orchestrator of learning’ (Salomon 1992), needed to appropriately support the learners to develop their creative thinking and scaffold the group collaboration.

As teacher–student interaction and peer interaction should not be considered separately in classroom practice (Mercer & Howe, 2012), this research examines interaction not only at peer group and whole-class levels involving teacher(s) and learner(s), but also at the societal level. The research questions are: 1) What kinds of social interaction emerge in the context of publishing-oriented learner-generated digital video production? 2) How can the interaction at different levels be promoted and enhanced?

Method

The research employs a combination of mixed methods in both data collection and analysis to strengthen its reliability and offer complementary insights and understandings (Darbyshire et al., 2005). Identifying several interaction levels, three case studies were conducted to examine interaction at crucial levels. First, the data for investigating teacher–student(s) and small group interaction were collected in a primary school in three DV production projects with four teachers and 57 students aged 10–12 participating. The activities of the DV projects were observed and video recorded as they happened, without any pedagogical interventions nor providing the participants with guidelines how to interact or organize discussion. Group interaction was analyzed through transcription and qualitative annotations of the 50-hour video data. The most interesting group dialogues were coded employing the quantifying IPA method (Bales, 1950). The final investigation focused on one group to compare the interaction and its development across individuals and sessions. To examine teacher–student(s) interaction, relevant episodes representing different types of teachers’ communicative settings were selected from the same data. Qualitative research coding procedures (Strauss & Corbin, 1990) were employed to identify various types of discursive scaffolding which the teachers used to encourage and develop both teacher–student and peer–peer dialogue. Second, the data for the examination of school–society interaction were collected in nine schools (both primary and secondary) by observing and video recording discussions in DV projects. For online publishing of the videos, a YouTube-based video repository was established. Students aged 7–14, teachers and parents, totaling 67 informants, were interviewed. Representatives, known for employing DV production in their classroom curriculum, from schools not participating in the online activities were also recruited for interviews to expand the perspectives on online publishing. The transcribed interviews were analyzed through constant comparison (Glaser & Strauss 1967) to depict the interviewees’ different stances towards online publishing and the students’ willingness or reluctance to publish videos.

Expected Outcomes

The findings emphasize the crucial role of the teacher in orchestrating social interaction at all levels. First, the observed peer group was actively involved in planning their joint video story, but the open-ended fictional task challenged interaction. Despite initially disputational and modest discussion the group learned to ‘intercreate’ due to minimal scaffolding provided by the teacher. However, ground rules for productive group talk would facilitate the opening of task assignment and improve group interaction. Second, whole-class discussions were dominated by the teacher and two to three students. The open-ended and fictional nature of the DV assignments challenges not only the group interaction but also teacher scaffolding. The teacher is needed to facilitate a shared understanding of an abstract collaborative media representation in a process of ‘shared meaning making’. Findings suggest DV projects to call for proper planning and pre-project arrangements to prevent ‘orchestration load’. Well-introduced and informed group activities with responsive implicit scaffolding are recommended. Third, interaction was scarce between students, teachers and parents even though they were invited to discuss the media ground rules of online publishing. Online publishing of the videos appeared to generate contradictory feelings. In primary schools videos were largely published online, but in secondary-aged students were more reluctant to publish their school-context videos. The teacher needs to encourage the students, parents and colleagues to enable societal interaction. The societal interaction involves the spirit of the era that refers to trends, discourses and youth culture represented in new media. This interaction should be reciprocal and allow not only the opening of a window from the school beyond its walls but also let the spirit of the era shape the practices of the school in promoting new literacies and 21st century skills.

References

Alexander RJ (2005) Culture, dialogue and learning: Notes on an emerging pedagogy. Keynote at IACEP conference. Durham, UK. Bales RF (1950) Interaction process analysis. A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge MA, Addison-Wesley. boyd d (2008) Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In: D. Buckingham (ed) Youth, identity, and digital media. Cambridge, MIT Press: 119–143. Coiro J et al. (2008). Central issues in new literacies and new literacies research. In: Coiro J et al. (eds) The handbook of research in new literacies. Mahwah NJ, Erlbaum: 1–22. FNBE (Finnish National Board of Education) (2004) Perusopetuksen opetussuunnitelman perusteet 2004. Helsinki, National Board of Education. Jaakkola M (2010) Uuden julkisuuden sääntöjä luomassa: Keskustelevat vuorovaikutussuhteet keinona sukupolvien välisen digitaalisen kuilun kaventamiseen. In: M. Meriranta (ed) Mediakasvatuksen käsikirja. Helsinki, Unipress: 37–62. Korkeamäki RL & Dreher MJ (2011) Early literacy practices and the Finnish national core curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies 43(1): 109–137. Kupari P et al. (2012) Enemmän iloa oppimiseen. Neljännen luokan oppilaiden lukutaito sekä matematiikan ja luonnontieteiden osaaminen. Kansainväliset PIRLS-ja TIMSS-tutkimukset Suomessa. University of Jyväskylä. Lefstein A (2010) More helpful as a problem than a solution. In: Howe C & Littleton K (eds) Educational Dialogues: Understanding and Promoting Productive Interaction. London, Routledge: 170–191. McVerry JG et al. (2015) Guiding students as they explore, build, and connect online. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 58(8): 632–635. Mercer N & Howe C (2012) Explaining the dialogic processes of teaching and learning: The value and potential of sociocultural theory. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction 1(1): 12–21. Mercer N & Littleton K (2007) Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking: A sociocultural approach. London: Routledge. Räisänen S & Korkeamäki R-L (2015) Implementing the Finnish literacy curriculum in a first-grade classroom. Classroom Discourse 6(2): 143–157. Salmela-Aro K et al. (In press) School burnout and engagement profiles among digital natives in Finland: A person-oriented approach. European Journal of Developmental Psychology. Schuck S & Kearney M (2006) Capturing learning through student-generated digital video. Australian Educational Computing 21(1): 15–20. Staarman JK & Mercer N (2010) The guided construction of knowledge: Talk between teachers and students. In: Littleton K et al. (eds) International handbook of psychology in education. Bingley UK, Emerald: 75–104. Strauss A & Corbin JM (1990) Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications.

Author Information

Laura Palmgren-Neuvonen (presenting / submitting)

University of Oulu

Department of Educational Sciences and Teacher Education

OULUNSALO

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.