Digital video: The impact on children’s learning experiences in primary physical education

Assessment for learning and self-assessment

Assessment has been identified as a key principle to support learning in the primary classroom (Wragg, 2001). Assessment for Learning (Af L) methods have also been acknowledged as one of the most powerful ways to enhance student achievement and motivation (Cauley and McMillan, 2010; Condie et al., 2005; Hallam et al., 2004). Af L approaches frame assessment as a part of the teaching and learning process, with the information gained from ongoing assessment informing and shaping the process. Af L responds to the requirement that learners ‘need more than summary grades if they are to develop expertise intelligently’ (Sadler, 1989: 3). One salient feature of Af L is the sharing of the learning intention and making the criteria for success explicit to learners (Torrance and Pryor, 2001). Provision of feedback about the particular qualities of the learner with advice on what he or she can do to improve is central to Af L (Black and Wiliam, 1998). These assessments should inform, for the purpose of optimising learning, teachers’ subsequent planning and pedagogy (Black and Wiliam, 1998; Hay, 2005; Shepard, 2000). Physical education researchers have found that use of Af L approaches has resulted in an improvement in the quality of student learning (McPhail and Halbert, 2010; Ní Chróinín and Cosgrave, in press; Weir and Connor, 2009).

Jannelle et al. (1997) suggest that the classroom environment should allow ‘for guidance but provide an environment in which one is encouraged to learn for oneself’ (Jannelle et al., 1997: 277). This suggests a role for self-assessment. Self-assessment occurs when learners look at their own work in a reflective way, identify aspects that could be improved and then set learning targets (Black and Wiliam, 1998; National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, 2007). Self-assessment has been identified as an important strategy for use within the primary school. This type of assessment also has a close relationship with the concept of self-regulation from the psychological literature. Zimmerman (1994) defines self-regulation as ‘the degree that individuals are metacognitively, motivationally and behaviourally active participants in their own learning process’ (Zimmerman, 1994: 3). Research on learning has suggested that self-regulated learners become more active participants in the learning process, demonstrating increased motivation, adapting to performance criteria and thinking creatively to make progress (Zimmerman, 1989; Zimmerman et al., 1996). Research from the physical education domain by Lidor (2004) has demonstrated the effectiveness of using self-regulation with children. Enhancing students’ self-regulation therefore would appear to be a desirable educational goal.

Self-assessment can support learners to regulate their own learning. Pupils involved in this process assess and evaluate their own performance and create specific targets. This approach can ‘increase students’ responsibility for their own learning and make the relationship between teachers and students more collaborative’ (Shepard, 2000: 12). Research has shown self-assessment to be widely accepted by students and teachers as a part of the teaching and learning process (McDonald and Boud, 2003). The effectiveness of self-assessment as a valid and meaningful type of assessment has been partly attributed to its motivational effect (Chen et al., 2002; Rolheiser and Ross, 2001). McMillan and Hearn (2008) describe how the use of self assessment helps achievement as it promotes ‘intrinsic motivation, internally controlled effort … and more meaningful learning’ (McMillan and Hearn, 2008: 40). Stiggins (2001) suggests that involving students in the assessment process allows teachers to ‘tap an unlimited wellspring of motivation that resides within each learner’ (Stiggins, 2001: 43). Self-assessment use has been linked to improved performance in official examinations (McDonald and Boud, 2003), to greater interest in the criteria for success and feedback on performance (Klenowski, 1995) and to greater honesty amongst students when reporting about their work (Klenwoski, 1995). Siedentop and Tannehill (2000) highlight the role of self-assessments in supporting learning in physical education:

‘…if our intent is to make assessment an educative process to improve their own performance, then students must be able to assess and modify their own performance’ (Siedentop and Tannehill, 2000: 200).

Teachers can effectively support Af L and self-assessment processes in primary physical education (Ní Chróinín and Cosgrave, 2012).

Validity in terms of self-assessment typically means agreement with teacher judgments (Ross, 2006). Black and Wiliam (1998) suggest that learners are remarkably dependable and objective in assessing themselves. This corresponds with researchers from the wider educational field (Fitzgerald et al., 2003; Ross et al., 2002). However, Dunning and colleagues (2004) take a different view. Their review of research into self-assessment found that its relationship with actual performance tends to be ‘meagre to modest’ (Dunning et al., 2004: 85). Ross (2006) describes how students’ self-assessments are often perceived as having ‘inflated perceptions of their accomplishments and that they may be motivated by self-interest’ (Ross, 2006: 2). This is a commonly held view regarding the accuracy of student self-assessment. Ross (2006) suggests that children may over-estimate, because they lack the cognitive skills to critically analyse their performance, and are more vulnerable to wishful thinking. Researchers have found that the correlations of self-appraisals with external judgments were higher for boys than girls (Phillips and Zimmerman, 1990) and that self-assessments can draw a different reaction from the girls than from the boys (Andrade et al., 2009). They argue that girls tend to derive satisfaction and confidence from self-generated evidence of progress whereas boys ‘tend to be more concerned with showing someone else that they are capable’ (Andrade et al., 2009: 296). Various strategies have been identified to improve self-assessment precision. Providing criteria for evaluation through rubrics helps students to structure their evaluations by providing concrete expectations (McMillan and Hearn, 2008). Another recommended strategy is for the learners to review a video of their action (Dunning et al., 2004). With video feedback, Hamlin (2005) allowed students to watch their own performances individually and found that students were able to analyse errors independently using checklists. This suggests a role for digital video in the self- assessment process.

Technology, learning and assessment

Schwartz and Hartmann (2007) present a model (Figure 1) for teaching and learning with digital video. In it, they outline four major learning outcomes for learning with digital video: engaging, doing, seeing and saying. Children engage in learning with video when it shows relevant knowledge to raise interest and make sense of subsequent instruction. Video can also present human behaviours (the ‘doing’). They describe video as a means of helping people see things that are new to them or familiar things demonstrated in a different way. Lastly, they stress that audio knowledge (‘saying’) can be gleaned from digital video.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1

Schwartz and Hartman's (2007) model for learning with digital video.

Research from a broad spectrum of educational environments has reported a motivational effect on children when digital video was integrated into the classroom (Goldman, 2004; Kearney and Schuck, 2006). Schwartz and Hartmann (2007) have outlined the reasons behind the motivational and engaging aspects of digital video. The use of video ‘can help people bring to bear relevant knowledge to raise interest and make sense of subsequent instruction’ (Schwartz and Hartmann, 2007: 10). Digital video can be particularly suitable in physical education where much of the learning is practical and can only be demonstrated by practical performance. One advantage of using digital video to facilitate assessment is its ability to serve as a means of augmented feedback for skill learning. Studies have shown that video feedback can have a positive effect on pupil performance (Herbert and Landin, 1994). These researchers suggest that seeing one’s movement with video feedback prompts corrections and subsequently enhances performance. Rather than merely stating the errors made or verbally praising the correct aspects of the execution, video adds another dimension to the augmented feedback by visually portraying the student and their skill attempts. Video feedback has been shown to be effective in skills such as the ball toss (Janelle et al., 1997) and swimming strokes (Hazen et al., 1990). Furthermore, providing a self-regulating environment, as might be present in a self-assessment process, can enhance the effectiveness of this video feedback. A study by Jannelle et al. (1997) compared self-regulated learners using video feedback with learners who received scheduled feedback. The self-regulated learners requested feedback when required. Results showed that participants who controlled the quantity of feedback they received from the instructor performed better than those in the scheduled feedback group. Janelle et al. (1997) suggested that allowing this self-control of the video feedback ‘may indirectly have a beneficial effect on learning due to motivational influences on cognitive processes’ (Janelle et al., 1997: 277).

Using technology to support assessment in physical education

As the above research suggests, digital video technology has been used extensively to provide video feedback opportunities. However, technology and digital video can also be used in a variety of ways to support learning and assessment in physical education (Burden and Kuechel, 2004; Mohnsen, 2010). Weir and Connor (2009) used digital video in the compilation of electronic learning portfolios. They found that these portfolios were an enjoyable and interesting means through which the children showed development and learning. Digital video can also support the accuracy of self-assessment in physical education. Kibble and Cayley (2003) investigated the use of digital video cameras in British schools and found that ‘the ability of short video clips to help pupils analyse and evaluate their own and other pupils’ performances brings unique value to lessons’ (Kibble and Cayley, 2003: 2). The use of technology as part of the physical education programme can also improve children’s attitudes to the subject. Researchers found increased levels of motivation and effort amongst learners when video was incorporated into physical education lessons (Jambor and Weekes, 1995; Kibble and Cayley, 2003; Weir and Connor, 2009). Janelle et al. (1997) advise that learners may benefit from choosing when they view demonstrations, therefore taking greater responsibility for their own learning.

Purpose of the study

Teacher-centred approaches to assessment using summative or formal evaluation techniques (Hay, 2005) continue to dominate approaches to assessment in Ireland despite a core emphasis in policy documents on Af L as a part of teaching and learning in primary schools (Department of Education and Science Inspectorate, Ireland, 2005; National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, 2005, 2007). In these documents emphasis is placed on assessment as a support to the learning process through motivation and feelings of success and learning. The self-regulation of learning through self-assessment and video feedback can help learners become more active participants in the learning process. Weir and Connor (2009), when investigating the use of digital video in physical education with secondary school children in Ireland, found that there was a significant improvement in student motivation levels during the period of the project. Little is known about the impact of digital video on children’s self-assessment experiences in primary physical education. The potential of digital video to provide feedback, support self-regulation of learning and act as a motivating force in this context merits investigation. This study examined the impact of digital video on skill learning in primary physical education. It explored the children’s experiences of using digital video as a form of feedback and as part of a self-assessment process in physical education. Children’s perspectives (benefits and challenges) on using digital video to facilitate their skill learning in physical education were also investigated.

Participants and setting

The study was conducted in a rural primary school in the west of Ireland and led by the teacher/researcher within his own class during the school year 2010–2011. Following informed consent by both the children and their parents 12 boys and 10 girls, aged 9–10 years participated in the study.

The intervention

The 10-week intervention focused on the learning of basketball skills within the games strand of the Primary School Physical Education Curriculum (Department of Education and Science, 1999). The intervention was carefully planned taking cognisance of Wood (2005), who suggests that ICT must be used to enhance physical activity, not distract from it, and that its effective use requires systematic planning and considerable initiative. The work area was prepared in advance and several video cameras were provided to help minimise delays. The programme was divided into two five-week blocks and design was informed by Af L principles. Three skills were concentrated on in each five-week period. The free throw, chest pass and dribble were covered in the first block and the bounce pass, jump shot and lay up were covered in the second block. Throughout the five-week block, the children practised each skill and applied the skills in a variety of mini-games activities focused on developing skill performance. The teacher/researcher provided feedback and direction throughout this process. The children used digital video grounded in Schwartz and Hartman’s (2007) model for learning with digital video (engage, see, say, do) to self-assess their basketball skill learning in week 5 and week 10 of the intervention.

Data collection

The epistemological framework of this study was based on what Patton (2002) calls an orientational qualitative inquiry approach. Data was collected both pre and post intervention, in a number of ways. Consistent with much qualitative research that attempts to gain insight into participants’ interpretations, we used interviews to gather data (Patton, 2002). Semi structured focus group interviews were conducted with a sample of five children pre and post intervention. Students were selected through a stratified random process and included a balance of gender and ability level as assessed by the teacher/researcher. These interviews were conducted by the teacher in the general purpose room of the school and were of approximately twenty minutes in duration. The interviews explored attitudes and perspectives on physical education, assessment and digital video. As the researcher was a participant-observer in this project, it was necessary to identify any past experiences, biases, prejudices and orientations which could compromise the integrity of the result (Patton, 2002). The teacher/researcher’s main personal bias at the outset was a belief that the use of digital video in physical education had the potential to enhance the child’s learning and his pedagogical practice. The teacher/researcher was aware of this bias throughout the project and was determined that his reporting would be impartial. To this end, a researcher diary was used to track the teacher/researcher’s involvement in the study. The diary was also utilised throughout the process to record children’s verbal and non-verbal behaviour and to identify how the quality of teaching and learning changes as a result of the use of digital video. This process was completed through answering the following questions:

What worked well and why?

Data analysis

Data analysis was ongoing throughout the data collection process. Transcriptions of interview data and research journal entries were analysed qualitatively through constant comparison (Miles and Huberman, 1994; Strauss and Corbin, 1998). In this process, pieces of data were manually reviewed, and repeatedly and continually coded, seeking similarities and differences, categories, patterns and items of particular significance. Themes were then extracted from these categories. Data was then selectively coded for examples that illustrated the themes (Neuman, 1994). Data trustworthiness was strengthened through prolonged and regular engagement between the teacher/researcher and the participants. In addition, teacher/researcher observations and interview data were examined to identify areas of similarity and dissimilarity between teacher/researcher and student perceptions (Merriam, 1998). Finally, methodological triangulation (Robson, 2002) was achieved by the use of interviews, a teacher/researcher diary and pupils’ self-assessments. This afforded the teacher/researcher a greater picture of the views of those involved in the research and increased confidence in the validity of the findings.

Skill learning and performance

Overall, the children valued the learning process and asserted that they had improved their performance in all six skills, as Jenny and Rory describe:

‘When I started I was doing the dribble all wrong, and now I can do it nearly perfectly’ (Jenny, focus group, post).

‘It helped me to improve. Even now when we play basketball, I think about how to improve my free throw’ (Rory, focus group, post).

Prior to the commencement of this project, the children had only previous experience with oral feedback from the teacher. When asked how they would know if they were performing skills correctly in the past James and John explained:

‘Well sometimes, the teacher would tell you if you were doing good or not’ (James, Focus Group, post).

‘Or the teacher might say “Well Done” or “Try Again”’ (John, focus group, post).

While for the majority of children overall improvements in skill performances were evident, not all children showed improvements. Some children were not able to use the feedback through examination of the video and the self-assessment rubric process to improve their performance. The teacher/ researcher noted the difficulties of Niamh in using the feedback to improve her performance:

‘Despite being extremely interested in improving her skills, Niamh finds some of them difficult particularly the layup and free throw. She displayed little progress when compared to some of the other children. While she examined self-assessments, she is unable to correct her technique’ (research diary, 13 April 2011).

Self-assessment and self-regulation of learning

The children’s only previous experience of assessment was a traditional teacher-centred approach. Even though they had little experience previous experience with self-assessment, the children were open and attracted to being involved in their own assessment and to being more in control of the process. The children believed that avoiding verbal corrections from the teacher, or ‘giving out’, and being in control of the assessment process were potential benefits of this kind of assessment:

‘It would be nice to do it yourself because you wouldn’t be worried about the teacher giving out if you got a bad mark’ (Niamh, focus group, pre).

‘Usually it’s always the teacher who tests you like in spelling or maths, so it would be good to give yourself a mark’ (John, focus group, pre).

Regarding differences in terms of gender, it seems that the girls in the class enjoyed the self-regulation involved:

‘Yeah I liked it; the videos make it very easy to give yourself marks’ (Deirdre, focus group, post).

Despite these differences there was little difference in the relative accuracy of their self-assessments as this comment from the research diary indicates:

‘In undertaking the teacher’s assessment and comparing the results to the teacher’s assessment, there is little disparity regarding how accurate boys were and how girls were in self-assessing. Both were closely linked to the teacher’s assessment.’ (research diary, 13 April 2011).

Using digital video to support learning

Before the intervention began it was clear that the participants were looking forward to seeing themselves on video and having the opportunity to analyse their performances. Participants suggested that the video might act as a motivation to learning:

‘If you were watching yourself and you saw yourself not doing good, you’d want to try to improve’ (Roisín, focus group, pre).

‘Yeah, you’d like to look good when the camera is on you’ (John, focus group, pre).

The children were able to use the digital video to complete the process successfully:

‘…there were initial requests regarding how to pause their video clips and where to find their clips on the laptop. However, once they started assessing using their self-assessment sheets, they only need a small amount of support’ (research diary, 7 March 2011).

However, some children reported the amount of time being taken up to be a negative element of the self-assessment using digital video.

While children remained active for the majority of time during the physical education classes, there were occasions when the children had to wait to be recorded. This became an issue of frustration for some:

‘Alan and Cory became restless waiting to be recorded. They seemed anxious to have a game. They asked if they could be recorded at break so they would have enough time for a longer game’ (research diary, 11 April 2011).