Interactive Videos in Web-Based Education: Technology Proficiency and Digital Literacy Levels

Öz

The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of using interactive video in web-based courses on students' technology proficiency and digital literacy levels as well as the students' perspectives on this. For this purpose, the study was conducted with quasi-experimental patterns, one of the quantitative research approaches. The quantitative data collected with data collection tools were analyzed with the dependent and independent samples t-tests, and the qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis. The study's findings revealed that there was a significant difference between the technology proficiency and digital literacy pre-test and post-test scores of the students in the experimental group. Moreover, based on the study findings, it was seen that there was a significant difference favorable to the experimental group between the technology proficiency and digital literacy scores of the experimental and control groups. Study results showed that using interactive videos in web-based lessons can improve students' technology proficiency and digital literacy levels. This study will contribute to the literature in terms of the positive effects of using interactive video in web-based courses on students' technology proficiency and digital literacy levels as well as the students' perspectives on this.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• interactive video
• web-based teaching
• technology competencies
• digital literacy
• interactive

Web Tabanlı Eğitimde İnteraktif Videolar: Teknoloji Yeterlilikleri ve Dijital Okuryazarlık Düzeyleri

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, web tabanlı derslerde etkileşimli videoların kullanımının öğrencilerin teknoloji yeterlilikleri, dijital okuryazarlık düzeyleri ve bu yaklaşıma ilişkin algıları üzerindeki etkisini tespit etmektir. Bu amaca ulaşmak için çalışma, nicel araştırma yaklaşımının bir türü olan yarı deneysel desen kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırma grubu kolayda örnekleme yöntemi kullanılarak seçilmiştir. Veri toplama araçları yardımıyla toplanan nicel veriler bağımlı ve bağımsız örneklem t-testleri kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Nitel veriler ise içerik analizi kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Çalışmanın bulguları, deney grubundaki öğrencilerin teknoloji yeterliliği ve dijital okuryazarlık ön test ve son test puanları arasında anlamlı bir fark olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Ayrıca, bulgular grupların teknoloji yeterliliği ve dijital okuryazarlık puanları arasında anlamlı bir fark olduğunu ve deney grubunun daha üstün performans sergilediğini göstermiştir. Sonuçlar, web tabanlı derslerde etkileşimli video kullanımının öğrencilerin teknoloji yeterliliklerini ve dijital okuryazarlık düzeylerini artırabileceğini göstermiştir. Dolayısıyla çalışmanın bulgu ve sonuçları alana önemli bir katkı sağlayacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Etkileşimli video
• web-tabanlı öğretim
• teknoloji yeterlilikleri
• dijital okuryazarlık
• etkileşim

Kaynakça

1. Albanese, M. (2005). Coming to a medical school near you: full motion video medical education. Medical education, 39(11), 1081-1082. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02311.x.
2. Afıfy, M. K. (2020). Effect of interactive video length within e-learning environments on cognitive load, cognitive achievement and retention of learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(4), 68-89. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.803360.
3. Barut Tuğtekin, E., Dursun, O.O. (2022). Effect of animated and interactive video variations on learners' motivation in distance Education. Educ Inf Technol 27, 3247–3276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10735.
4. Brame, C. J. (2016). Effective educational videos: Principles and guidelines for maximizing student learning from video content. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15(4). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-03-0125.
5. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., Demirel, F. & Kılıç, E. (2013). Scientific research methods. Ankara: Pegem Akademi
6. Caamaño-Navarrete, F., Latorre-Román, P. Á., Párraga-Montilla, J., Jerez-Mayorga, D., & Delgado-Floody, P. (2021). Selective attention and concentration are related to lifestyle in chilean schoolchildren. Children, 8(10), 856.
7. Cardoso, A., & Santos, T. (2014). An interactive video to demonstrate the main features of the pendulum. In 11th International Conference on Remote Engineering and Virtual Instrumentation Remote Engineering and Virtual Instrumentation (REV), Porto, Portugal.
8. Chan, Y. M. (2010). Video instructions as support for beyond classroom learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1313-1318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.326.

9. Chen, C.-M., & Wu, C.-H. (2015). Effects of different video lecture types on sustained attention, emotion, cognitive load, and learning performance. Computers & Education, 80, 108-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.015.
10. Cherrett, T., Wills, G., Price, J., Maynard, S., & Dror, I. E. (2009). Making training more cognitively effective: Making videos interactive. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(6), 1124–1134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00985.x.
11. Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587.
12. Collier, L. (2013). Changes in writing instruction the challenge and the promise. The Council Chronicle, 6-9.
13. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. California: SAGE Publications.
14. Cummins, S., Beresford, A. R. and Rice, A. (2016). Investigating engagement with in-video quiz questions in a programming course. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 9(1), 57-66. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2015.2444374.
15. Çetin, E. (2021). Digital storytelling in teacher education and its effect on the digital literacy of pre-service teachers. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 39, 100760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100760.
16. Çetinoğlu, B (2024, January, 26). Discover the power of interactive videos. Enocta. https://www.enocta.com/blog/interaktif-videolarin-gucunu-kesfedin.
17. Çuhadar, C. (2018). Investigation of pre-service teachers’ levels of readiness to technology integration in education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 9(1), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6211.
18. Delen, E., Liew, J., & Willson, W. (2014). Effects of interactivity and instructional scaffolding on learning: Self-regulation in online video-based environments. Computers & Education, 78, 312-320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.018.
19. Dieck-Assad, G., Hinojosa-Olivares, J. M., & Colomer-Farrarnos, J. (2020). Study of the effectiveness of interactive videos in applied electronics courses. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 14(3), 983-1001. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-020-00689-2.
20. Domagk, S., Schwartz, R. N., & Plass, J. L. (2010). Interactivity in multimedia learning: An integrated model. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 1024-1033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.003.
21. Dong, C., & Goh, P. S. (2015). Twelve tips for the effective use of videos in medical education. Medical Teacher, 37(2), 140-145. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.943709.
22. Emirtekin, E. (2019). The effect of feedback types given to embedded questions in an interactive educational videos on the achievement and cognitive load of teacher candidates [Master's thesis, Ege University]. Head of higher education institution thesis center https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/TezGoster?key=4J_FzTwlrMCH4qBROpXPH8yu6aaCJuS0adrLR4XEMkxOsY3Foidqst0wcqNFOSco.
23. Edtech (2022, January, 19). How can you effectively use interactive videos in distance education?. Edtech Türkiye. https://edtechturkiye.com/uzaktan-egitimlerde-etkilesimli-videolari-nasil-etkili-bir-sekilde-kullanabilirsiniz.
24. Foulger, T. S., Graziano, K. J., Schmidt-Crawford, D., & Slykhuis, D. A. (2017). Teacher educator technology competencies. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 25(4), 413-448. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/181966/.
25. Fraenkel, J.R. & Wallen, N.E. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education. Maidenhead: McGraw Hill.
26. Geri, N., Winer, A., & Zaks, B. (2017). Probing the effect of interactivity in online video lectures on the attention span of students: A learning analytics approach. In 12th Chais Conference for the Study of Innovation and Learning Technologies: Learning in the Technological Era, Raanana, Israel.
27. Gijsen, M., Catrysse, L., De Maeyer, S., & Gijbels, D. (2024). Mapping cognitive processes in video-based learning by combining trace and think-aloud data. Learning and Instruction, 90, 101851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101851.
28. Heitink, M., Voogt, J., Verplanken, L., Braak, J., & Fisser, P. (2016). Teachers’ professional reasoning about their use of technology. Computers & Education, 101, 70–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.009.
29. Hrastinski, S., & Monstad, T. (2014). Exploring the relationship between the use of an interactive video website and organizational learning. New Media & Society, 16(4), 594-614. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813487961.
30. Instefjord, E., & Munthe, E. (2015). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology: An analysis of the emphasis on digital competence in teacher education curricula. European Journal of Teacher Education, 39(1), 77–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2015.1100602.
31. Jethro, O. O., Grace, A. M. and Thomas, A. K. (2012). E-learning and its effects on teaching and learning in a global age. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 2(1), 203.
32. Kasturi, L. I., Istiningsih, S., & Tahir, M. (2022). Pengembangan media pembelajaran video ınteraktif pada mata pelajaran ılmu pengetahuan alam (IPA) siswa kelas V SDN 2 batujai. Jurnal Ilmiah Profesi Pendidikan, 7(1), 116–122. https://doi.org/10.29303/jipp.v7i1.432.
33. Katz, M. L., Heaner, S., Reiter, P., van Putten, J., Murray, L., McDougle, L., . . . Slater, M. (2009). Development of an educational video to improve patient knowledge and communication with their healthcare providers about colorectal cancer screening. American Journal of Health Education, 40(4), 220-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/19325037.2009.10599097.
34. Kilic, E., & Yildirim, Z. (2010). Evaluating working memory capacity and cognitive load in learning from goal based scenario centered 3D multimedia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 4480-4486.
35. Kilic, E., & Yildirim, Z. (2012). Cognitive load and goal based scenario centered 3D multimedia learning environment: Learners' motivation, satisfaction and mental effort. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 47(3), 329-349.
36. Kolås, L. (2015). Application of interactive videos in education. In Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET), Lisbon , Portugal
37. Kreijns, K., Van Acker, F., Vermeulen, M., & Van Buuren, H. (2013). What stimulates teachers to integrate ICT in their pedagogical practices? The use of digital learning materials in education. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 217-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.08.008.
38. Küçük, S. (2015). Effects of learning anatomy via mobile augmented reality on medical students’ academic achievement, cognitive load, and views toward implementation [Doctoral dissertation, Ataturk University]. Head of higher education institution thesis center https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/TezGoster?key=sY7m19PfcL6F1NUw-cr80E8-MF1RuQPkmvdRgcRviYKeZgjJ5D5Rhot7l3RsBsFx.
39. Lakapu, D. E., Lakapu, P. A., & Taloim, D. (2023). Pengembangan media video ınteraktif pada pembelajaran bangun ruang bola bagi siswa SD. Junal Kependidikan Matematika, 4(2), 167–177. https://doi.org/https://journal.unwira.ac.id/index.php/ASIMTOT.
40. Liang, Q., de la Torre, J., & Law, N. (2021). Do background characteristics matter in children's mastery of digital literacy? A cognitive diagnosis model analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 122, 106850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106850.
41. List, A., Brante, E. W., & Klee, H. L. (2020). A framework of pre-service teachers’ conceptions about digital literacy: Comparing the United States and Sweden. Computers & Education, 148, 103788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103788.
42. Ljubojevic, M., Vaskovic, V., Stankovic, S. and 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). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i3.1825.
43. Lucas, M., Bem-Haja, P., Siddiq, F., Moreira, A., & Redecker, C. (2021). The relation between in-service teachers' digital competence and personal and contextual factors: What matters most? Computers & Education, 160, 104052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104052.
44. Mahmudovna, Z. F., Ko‘klanboy, G. Z., & Ergash, X. S., (2024). Development of a mobile application based on interactive videos from grade 5 computer science. PEDAGOG, 7(3), 445-453.
45. Mar, C., Sohoni, S., & Craig, S. D. (2017). The effect of embedded questions in programming education. In IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Indianapolis, USA.
46. Makers Consulting (2023, January, 10). What is digital literacy and why is it necessary? Makers consulting. https://makersconsulting.co/21-yy-yetkinlikleri-dijital-okuryazarlik-nedir-neden-gereklidir/.
47. Mayer, R. E. (2014). Incorporating motivation into multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 171-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.04.003.
48. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2010). Techniques that reduce extraneous cognitive load and manage intrinsic cognitive load during multimedia learning. In J. L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive load theory (pp. 131–152). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
49. McMillan, J.H., & Schumacher S. (2010). Research in education: Evidence-basedinquiry. Boston: Pearson. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development
50. Merkt, M., Weigand, S., Heier, A., & Schwan, S. (2011). Learning with videos vs. learning with print: The role of interactive features. Learning and Instruction, 21 (6), 687-704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.03.004.
51. Nelles, L. J., Smith, C. M., Lax, L. R., & Russell, L. (2011). Translating face-to-face experiential learning to video for a web-based communication program. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2011.1.8.
52. Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers & Education, 59(3), 1065–1078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.016.
53. Petan, S., Mocofan, M., & Vasiu, R. (2014). Enhancing learning in massive open online courses through interactive video. In The International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education, Bucharest, Romania
54. Reisoğlu, İ., & Çebi, A. (2020). How can the digital competences of pre-service teachers be developed? Examining a case study through the lens of DigComp and DigCompEdu. Computers & Education, 156, 103940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103940.
55. Rice, P., Beeson, P., & Blackmore-Wright, J. (2019). Evaluating the Impact of a quiz question within an educational video. TechTrends, 63(5), 522-532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00374-6.
56. Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory into practice, 47(3), 220-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802153916.
57. Schreiber, B. E., Fukuta, J., & Gordon, F. (2010). Live lecture versus video podcast in undergraduate medical education: A randomised controlled trial. BMC Medical Education, 10(1), 68. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-10-68.
58. Schwan, S., & Riempp, R. (2004). The cognitive benefits of interactive videos: Learning to tie nautical knots. Learning and Instruction, 14, 293–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.005.
59. Sever, S., Oguz-Unver, A., & Yurumezoglu, K. (2013). The effective presentation of inquiry-based classroom experiments using teaching strategies that employ video and demonstration methods. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29 (3). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.229.
60. Shen, C. X., Liu, R. D., & Wang, D. (2013). Why are children attracted to the Internet? The role of need satisfaction perceived online and perceived in daily real life. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 185-192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.08.004.
61. Smyth, R. (2011). Enhancing learner–learner interaction using video communications in higher education: Implications from theorising about a new model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(1), 113-127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00990.x.
62. Sorden, S. D. (2012). The cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Handbook of Educational Theories, 1(2012), 1-22.
63. Şahin, D., & Yılmaz, R. M. (2020). The effect of augmented reality technology on middle school students' achievements and attitudes towards science education. Computers & Education, 144, 103710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103710.
64. Taşlıbeyaz, E. (2015). The effect of interactive videos on achievement and decision making processes of students in medical education [Master's thesis, Ataturk University]. Head of higher education institution thesis center https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/TezGoster?key=WY5CM7tPNE2z_YM6pBu0twzJHvkjvGTAfmgIN_TW146q4JU3MmiciSw7TFZBqQGF.
65. Taşlıbeyaz, E., & Karaman, S. (2015). Who Should teach in lecture videos? Expert, instructor or a good speaker. Route Educational and Social Science Journal, 2(2), 423-433.
66. Taşlıbeyaz, E., Dursun, O. B., & Karaman, S. (2018). Examining of the experiences of students about interaction types used in digital materials. İnönü University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 19(2), 240-254.
67. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2017). Reimagining the role of technology in education: 2017 National Education Technology Plan update. Washington, DC.
68. Uğur, S., & Okur, M. R. (2016). Use of interactive video in open and distance learning. Journal of Open Education Practices and Research, 2(4), 104-126.
69. Üstündağ, M. T., Güneş, E. & Bahçıvan, E. (2017). Turkish adaptation of digital literacy scale and investigating pre-service science teachers’ digital literacy. Journal of Education and Future,12, 19-29.
70. Van Deursen, A. J., Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2016). Development and validation of the ınternet skills scale (ISS). Information, Communication & Society, 19(6), 804-823. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1078834.
71. Vural, O. F. (2013). The Impact of a question-embedded video-based learning tool on e-learning. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 13(2), 1315-1323.
72. 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), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-016-0033-3.
73. Wachtler, J., Khalil, M., Taraghi, B., & Ebner, M. (2016). On using learning analytics to track the activity of interactive MOOC videos. In LAK 2016 Workshop on Smart Environments and Analytics in Video-Based Learning, Edinburgh, Scotland.
74. Wang, Y., & Lu, H. (2021). Validating items of different modalities to assess the educational technology competency of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 162, 104081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104081.
75. Wilson, A.D. (2016). The flipped approach: The use of embedded questions in math videos.(Master's dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 10118228).
76. Yılmaz, R. M., Kucuk, S., & Goktas, Y. (2017). Are augmented reality picture books magic or real for preschool children aged five to six?. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(3), 824-841. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12452.
77. Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2016). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. Ankara: Seçkin.
78. Yıldırım, Z. (2016). Instructional technologies and message design. In K. Çağıltay & Y. Göktaş (Eds.), Fundamentals of ınstructional technologies: Theories, research, trends (2th ed., pp. 279-296). Ankara: Pegem.
79. Zhang, D., Zhou, L., Briggs, R.O., & Nunamaker, J.F. (2006). Instructional video in e-learning: Assessing the impact of interactive video on learning effectiveness. Information & Management, 43(1),15-2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2005.01.004.