Abstract
This mixed methods study examines an explanatory video assignment designed to operationalize contemporary theory about cognition, metacognition, and inclusive teaching. This project grew from a professional learning community of post-doctoral teaching fellows who were involved in course redesign as part of a campus-wide active learning initiative. A team of pedagogical experts, teaching fellows, and faculty designed this video assignment to increase opportunities for students to share their perspectives while practicing a powerful learning strategy. Instructional teams implemented different versions of the video assignment in three courses across two departments. An experimental research component isolated the impact of the assignment on learning and confidence, and a mix of quantitative and qualitative analyses provided evidence about students’ experiences with the assignment. We found that students expressed learning and confidence gains beyond those due to typical course activities. Qualitative evidence suggested that students experienced the assignment as valuable for their learning and that the assignment enhanced self-expression. The assignment was effective in both face-to-face and remote settings, implemented either as a course requirement or extra-credit option. This versatile video assignment presents a practical way to enrich the student experience.
Keywords
Recent publications about active learning classify the active learning strategies that are currently in use (Allsop et al., 2020) and provide evidence of both academic (Theobald et al., 2020) and affective benefits (Lombardi et al., 2021) for students. Researchers have also begun to articulate how active learning and inclusive classroom approaches may be integrated or differentiated in practice (Dewsbury et al., 2022; Harris et al., 2020; Penner, 2018). Yet, there has been a dearth of rigorous evidence about specific active learning assignments that can be implemented across disciplines to benefit students. There have also been few studies that leverage experimental designs to isolate the impacts of instructional interventions. This mixed methods study fills this gap by examining the implementation of a video assignment that was based on theories about inclusive teaching and metacognition, and by utilizing an experimental design component to isolate the influence of that assignment. The project grew from a campus-wide active learning initiative in which faculty, teaching fellows, and education specialists collaborated to put theory into practice. We aim to contribute novel findings about a practical and inclusive active learning tool that can improve students’ learning experiences.
Theory-informed design
The intervention was an explanatory video assignment where students designed a short video explaining a complicated course concept as if they were teaching it to a peer. We designed the activity to operationalize concepts we studied in a professional learning community focused on active learning. The assignment design relied on ideas rooted in foundational research about active learning and the effectiveness of peer teaching (Bonwell & Eison, 1991, p. 50), about cognitive development and the power of self-explanation (Chi et al., 1989, 1994), about the metacognitive value of practicing activities that expose students to their own learning processes (Flavell, 1979), and about inclusive teaching in higher education (Marchesani & Adams, 1992). In each of these areas, contemporary research has reinforced the value of applying these concepts in classrooms.
This study emerged from collaboration in an active learning initiative where post-doctoral students explored how to redesign courses based on concepts from teaching and learning resources, such as Small Teaching (Lang, 2021), which described cognition research about self-explanation. Multiple studies have shown academic and affective benefits associated with constructivist, active learning approaches in practice. For example, Jensen et al. (2015) compared flipped and traditional classroom settings and found that either course format could yield academic benefits when students engage in constructivist learning activities, such as explaining the concepts they are learning. Another study of undergraduates over the course of a semester found that providing opportunities for students to discuss their reasoning yielded better accuracy and higher confidence (Tullis & Goldstone, 2020). Other researchers have examined the learning-by-teaching (LBT) concept to understand the characteristics that make these learning activities effective. Duran (2017) describes the historical background of LBT theories and highlights evidence about the types of teaching tasks that stimulate learning, such as making video tutorials. Further explicating the conditions for effective LBT activities, a recent synthesis of empirical studies posits that particular design features, such as oral rather than written delivery, make non-interactive teaching tasks more effective for learners (Lachner et al., 2022). A related meta-analysis found that creating teaching materials was associated with a statistically significant positive effect on student learning, especially for visual and audio-visual products (Ribosa & Duran, 2022). Creating drawings during the teaching task can be particularly effective for learning, possibly due to its tendency to promote metacognitive self-monitoring (Fiorella & Kuhlmann, 2020).
Considering the effectiveness of instructional activities that require students to practice metacognitive learning activities, researchers have noted the value of paraphrasing explanations (Flavell, 1979) and asking oneself questions about a topic (Livingston, 2003). McGuire (2015) highlighted the potential power of activities where students pretend to teach a topic because these activities necessarily expose gaps in understanding and show students what they still need to learn. This process of identifying and remedying knowledge gaps is referred to as “monitoring, evaluating, and correcting,” a component of self-regulated learning models (Cassidy, 2011, p. 993). Marley (2014) implemented a related video project where students created videos for a novice audience explaining how course concepts related to practical settings. Studies have also explored students’ experiences with instructional activities that require self-assessment and reflection because of their value as effective metacognitive practices (Mota et al., 2019; Riddell, 2015). A common theme among these publications is the value of having students identify what they do not yet know in a constructive way. Activities where students explain and self-question provide opportunities to practice using new knowledge, address nuances, and organize their thinking, all aspects of learning that can enable deeper understanding.
Student-created videos provide a uniquely rich opportunity for creating meaningful and engaging student experiences (Benedict & Pence, 2012) that can activate two cognitive channels, text and imagery, to deepen learning (Roberts, 2019). Video creation requires the intellectual planning and organization that metacognitive theories promote and typically requires higher order thinking skills as students gather information, plan video content, develop a script, and finally produce the video. Creating a video also typically requires repetition, thus providing practice to solidify students’ understanding. A recent synthesis of studies about student-generated videos analyzed 39 publications and found numerous benefits “including reduction of cognitive load, increase in creativity, increased cross-curriculum competencies, learner independence, and ability to apply knowledge in a meaningful way" (Epps et al., 2021, p. 414).
We also considered the affordances of student-created videos in terms of inclusive teaching.
Multiple papers highlight inclusive modes of instruction that are relevant for any type of course content. A model differentiating course content and instructional strategies as unique and integral components of teaching and learning for cultural diversity was introduced by Marchesani and Adams (1992) and later developed by Bell et al. (2016). They suggest that instructors must consider (1) the students’ identities, (2) the instructor’s social and cultural perspective, (3) diverse course content, and (4) teaching methods that engage diverse learners, in order to create learning environments that are respectful of social and cultural diversity. More recently, Lawrie et al. (2017) discussed conceptualizations of inclusion in educational contexts, including theories that focused on students with disabilities and those from other groups that have been historically marginalized. The authors also highlighted the difference between “inclusive curriculum design” where disciplinary norms can promote or challenge inclusion and “inclusive curriculum delivery” where learning philosophies that use interactive, multi-modal activities, and assessments can promote learning in equitable ways. One section of their theoretical model identified the importance of considering students’ experiences, identities, and interests in assessment. They built on a prior report by Hockings (2010) that specifically called for “flexible activities that allow students to draw on their own knowledge, interests and experiences” (p. 7). The Universal Design for Learning paradigm echoes the importance of providing multiple modes for students to both receive and submit information (Capp, 2017). As a mode of instruction, the video assignment shows a practical way to put these inclusive teaching ideas into action.
Multiple studies have shown affective benefits of student-generated media projects, including the generation and sharing of audio files improving student engagement (Bolliger & Des Armier, 2013) and video creation improving student motivation (Morgan, 2013), creativity and enjoyment (Pitts et al., 2011), and personalization of the learning experience (Franz, 2012). This personalization provides an important connection with inclusive teaching theories that aim to make learning activities more student-centered. For example, Ryan (2013) presented a video project where students “take ownership and hence responsibility for their knowledge production” (p. 35). Making students generators of learning content in this way is powerful in part because it reframes course content to reflect students’ perspectives and articulates course concepts in their voices.
The intervention and research questions
Based on the research literature about metacognition and inclusive teaching described above, we designed a video assignment to meet the following criteria: (1) The topic should be complex and important enough to warrant deeper study but bounded enough for a very short presentation; (2) Students should create something original; (3) Students should have autonomy in design choices for self-expression; (4) Students should plan and practice; and (5) Students should play the role of the teacher. We present the video assignment as an example of a practical instructional tool inspired by what we know helps learners.
The video assignment was used in both face-to-face and remote instructional settings, and it was assessed with various grading schemes that did not necessarily require additional instructional resources. We used the assignment structure in three undergraduate courses in two departments (Plant Science and Microbiology). In each course, students were asked to create a video project explaining a complex course topic as if they were teaching a peer. The assignment put a metacognitive theory into practice; teaching a topic promotes self-assessment and the motivation to fill knowledge gaps. It also provided an opportunity for students to reframe course content from their personal perspective, a noted inclusive teaching method. This assignment also produced videos that could easily be shared so students could benefit from seeing course content through the eyes of their peers.
We focused on three research questions: Does the video project improve students’ understanding of the topic they are assigned to study? Does the video project improve students’ self-perceived confidence about their understanding of that topic? What do students’ videos and open-ended survey responses reveal about their experience with the assignment? We isolated the assignment’s impact on students’ understanding and confidence by using an experimental design which improves the internal validity of our findings. Qualitatively, we examined open-ended survey responses and the students’ videos themselves to better understand how students perceived the activity and the types of learning artifacts it inspired.
Methods
Research design
This mixed methods study used qualitative data from student surveys and learning artifacts to deepen our understanding of quantitative findings. We tested the effects of a learning intervention using an alternative-treatments pre-post experimental design (Shadish et al., 2002, p. 261) which uses both randomized assignment and varied treatments to strengthen evidence for causation. The purpose was to isolate the effects of the video assignment, separately from the typical instruction that took place beforehand. In each class, students were assigned one of two topics for their video project, and in each case we used assessments before and after the assignment to measure learning and confidence gains. One of the goals of the project was to examine if the students show greater learning and confidence gains on the topic they studied for the video assignment compared to the topic they did not study (see Figure 1). The flow of participants through the intervention varied by course. In two courses, all enrolled students were allocated to one of two treatments depending on the alphabetical location of each student’s last name. In the third course, an automated online assignment alternated between Topic A or Topic B for each student based on when they began the assignment. Some students did not submit the assignment and others did not approve of their data being used for research, as quantified below. This research design relies on the assumption that the randomly assigned comparison groups will have similar pretest scores for the outcome variables of interest, and we found no statistically significant differences (see Supplemental Table S1).
Diagram illustrating the alternative-treatments design.
Data sample
The three undergraduate courses in this study had 289 students enrolled in total. Some students did not submit surveys or consent to research, so our sample size for this study ultimately included 124 students. For the two smaller courses where the video assignment was required, our data set included 38 students of 62 enrolled (61%) and 27 students of 35 enrolled (77%). For the large course where the assignment was optional, our data set included 59 students of 192 enrolled (31%). Overall, the students involved were predominantly first- and second-year undergraduates. The convenience sampling used in our study always raises questions of generalizability but applying the same design in three different courses strengthened the validity of our findings with replication.
Academic context
The assignment’s implementation plan, assessment strategy, and confidence items were identical across three courses that collaborated as part of an active learning initiative. The courses varied in terms of enrollment numbers, student demographics, grading requirements, and remote learning opportunities. In the large course (n = 192), the 80 students (42%) who chose to participate were mostly sophomores and juniors majoring in diverse fields, and the assignment was optional for a very small grading bonus. In the two smaller courses where the assignment was required, over 60% of students were in their first year of college and the majority were plant science majors. One course was taught completely in-person (n = 62), while the other was partially remote and the video project was administered online (n = 35).
The explanatory video assignment
In each course, we tailored the video assignments to specific course concepts that the instructional teams considered to be particularly complex and fundamental. We provided two similar concepts in each course to enable the alternative-treatments design: dark and light photosynthesis; phototropism and gravitropism; and carbon and nitrogen cycles. In each course, students experienced typical instruction about the topics (i.e. reading, lecture, and classroom discussions) before they took the pretest. Then, they were exposed to the assignment with a request to submit a video (3–5 min) explaining the complex topic as if teaching a peer.
Data collection tools
Our research design required survey data collection before and after the video assignment intervention, including knowledge assessment questions and self-rated items about students’ confidence related to those topics. The post-test also included an open-ended question about whether and how the assignment supported their learning.
The different types of survey items required different design processes. We critiqued the knowledge assessments as “instructor-made tests that are used to evaluate student performance,” an assessment type that can benefit from evaluation with The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing but is generally assumed to function in less standardized ways (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education, 2014, p. 2). We took steps to ensure validity during the design process, while privileging the functional perspective of classroom assessment where the tool needs primarily to “be practical and useful in fulfilling the main goal of classroom assessment: promoting effective teaching and learning” (Kane & Wools, 2019, p. 12). We used suggested validity practices including mapping content topics to particular items and engaging the instructional teams to qualitatively review the items for student accessibility (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education, 2014), and considered likely student responses to judge whether the items were appropriately difficult for showing pre-post change.
Because the research design intended to compare student knowledge gains on different subtopics, it required assessment items with adequate coverage of each sub-topic (e.g. phototropism and gravitropism). In each course, we created multiple items for each video topic except for the Carbon Cycle, a subtopic that was excluded from our analysis due to having too few assessment items. We designed items that would elicit multiple levels of knowledge, rather than solely correct/incorrect responses. The number of items varied from three to six items per topic, and we coded the assessments as either raw points or percent of all points achieved, such that the change in scores represents an improvement in classroom assessment performance. (See example items in Supplemental Table S2.) The items took the form of exam questions and used language that was common in the course. They included both open-ended and closed-ended formats and students’ open-ended responses showed that they interpreted the questions in normative ways in the eyes of the instructional team. We acknowledge that our small samples limited psychometric analyses, which we believe is moderated by the complementary mixed methods data we present.
This study also required a measure of students’ self-reported confidence about understanding the topics they studied. We designed a simple Likert-type rating-scale item to show students’ perceived sense of confidence about each sub-topic. Rating scale items, as used here for students’ self-assessment of confidence, align with examples in the research literature about the value and consistency of even single-item measures for general psychology constructs (Robins et al., 2001).
To complement other findings, we also asked an open-ended question in the post-test about whether the video assignment helped them learn the material and how so. Throughout this study, we chose to focus on data about the students’ perspectives, especially because those crucial perspectives are often devalued in research studies.
Beyond following the protocols approved by the Institutional Review Board (#1708007347; #2009009851), we considered the impact of the experiment on the students, prioritizing fairness and minimizing disruption. For example, we offered alternative assignments to students at the same point in the course to ensure they felt they had equally valuable learning experiences, and the primary instructors decided whether the assignment was required or graded based on course norms.
Analyses
Both quantitative and qualitative analyses informed the findings to help us understand the student experience. The quantitative analyses involved scoring the assessments and comparing pre- and post-intervention survey responses. Each video topic had between two and six items on the assessments, and we used those with at least three items to create sum scores for measuring the change between pre-test and post-test, referred to in this paper as pre-post change. We analyzed the sum scores as ordinal variables, given that they have a limited number of possible values due to the small number of items, the gap between scores is not likely to be equidistant due to varying item difficulties, and there was evidence of skewness. Similarly, the self-rated confidence items were ordinal and based on a five-point scale. We used medians to best describe the central tendencies for knowledge and confidence measures. To examine whether the students showed pre-post gains we conducted the non-parametric sign test in Stata 15 (e.g. signtest; StataCorp, 2017) which was an alternative to the more common Wilcoxan signed-rank test because we could not assume the pre and post distributions were equal. We used one-tailed tests based on our hypothesis that student scores would improve. We also hypothesized that students would show greater pre-post gains on knowledge and confidence assessments that were focused on their video topic when compared to an alternative course topic. For example, students whose video projects were about gravitropism would show statistically significant pre-post gains on the gravitropism assessment that were greater than their gains on the phototropism assessment.
We used qualitative data analyses to extract themes among students’ open-ended responses about how the project helped their learning, and to describe the variety of video design choices made by students. Three members of our research team collaborated to create three set of codes based on the qualitative data: (1) positivity in responses to an open-ended question about whether the video assignments helped students learn; (2) themes among student comments about how the project helped them learn; and (3) a typology of design choices as observed in students’ videos. We followed guidance from Qualitative Analysis (Ezzy, 2013) for both deductive and inductive analyses. We deductively generated the codes for students’ expressed positivity about the assignment helping them learn by producing a dichotomous variable (positive/not positive) based on their response to the related question. Nearly all cases were explicit with students using a clear positive word such as “yes,” “definitely,” “helpful,” “helped me.” We coded any clearly negative or unclear responses as not showing positivity about the assignment’s helpfulness. In any borderline cases, such as “Sort of? It was good to go over the cycle again a few more times but that's it really,” we assigned “not positive” codes to avoid overestimating students’ positivity. For the responses that showed clear positivity about the assignments, we engaged in an iterative process to develop a set of themes about how it was helpful. In this case, two researchers read through students’ responses and noted themes that emerged. Then, we generated codes based on these themes and organized those codes into categories, inductively generating a thematic structure based on the raw data for the purpose of describing various student perspectives. We identified nine distinct types of help as noted in the students’ comments. These nine themes are described below and documented with examples and frequencies in Supplemental Table S5.
To analyze video types, two researchers reviewed student videos and noted the common types that students created. Our analysis was rooted in the conjecture that opportunities for free student expression would allow students to share their individuality, based on which we coded the ways in which videos varied. Based on our initial viewing, we created codes categorizing whether videos included a speaker view, a visual representation that they created, and any props or demonstrations.
Results
Video assignment influence on content knowledge
Because each knowledge assessment had a small number of items that were scored in different ways, we scaled their raw points as percentages of the maximum possible points to visualize pre-post change across courses. In Figure 2, the scatterplot shows that a clear majority of students showed improvement on the classroom assessments. Of 124 students across courses, 86 students (69%) improved, 24 (19%) remained stable, and 14 (11%) decreased. A cluster of scores at the high end of the post-test suggests a ceiling effect in that students achieved the maximum score and the assessment did not capture the full range of student knowledge. This limitation could reduce our power to measure pre-post change at the upper end of the scale.
Scatterplot of each student’s pre and post knowledge scores.
Analyzing the changes between the pre and post scores on the general topic assessments, we found statistically significant pre-post increases using non-parametric sign tests on the raw ordinal data for all three courses (p < .001 in each course; Table 1).
Overall confidence scores at pretest and posttest.
Note. Non-parametric sign test p-values are indicated with *** to represent values <.001.
The medians show consistent gains ranging from 2 to 4.25 points. In terms of practical significance, each question was worth approximately 2.5 points on average which means the typical pre-post gain was approximately equivalent to mastering one additional item. Because these gains could be due to learning experiences other than the video assignment, such as ongoing course discussions or even the experience of taking the pretest assessment, we compared how much students learned on their video topic compared to the alternative topic. The general trend shows a greater rate of increase for students who submitted a video on the topic of their assessment, as opposed to the alternative topic.
The pre-post changes were statistically significant for each case where students were assessed on the topic of the video they submitted (non-parametric sign tests where the assessment matched the assignment topic: light photosynthesis, p = .020; dark photosynthesis, p = .006; gravitropism, p < .001; phototropism, p = .003; nitrogen cycle, p < .001). The pre-post change for students when assessed on the complementary topic they did not study was only statistically significant in two cases, for phototropism students on the gravitropism assessment (p = .018), and for carbon cycle students on the nitrogen cycle assessment (p < .001). See Supplemental Material for detailed statistics (Supplemental Table S3) and boxplots (Supplemental Figure S1).
While these findings do not perfectly support our hypothesis, we did generally find greater knowledge gains on assessments for topics students studied in their video project, compared to assessments on the complementary but unstudied topic. The pre-post gains were greater in magnitude or stronger in statistical significance for students who submitted a video on the topic of the assessment compared to their peers who did not. There are multiple possible explanations for those instances where students gained knowledge on the topic they did not cover in their video: learning about their video topic may have deepened their general knowledge about the alternative topic as well; they may have learned from their peers who were submitting videos on the alternative topic; or the assessment items might not have adequately differentiated between the two topics.
Video assignment influence on confidence
Beyond impacts on learning, we examined whether the video assignment had a positive influence on student confidence. The confidence items asked students to “please rate how confident you feel about the following aspects of this assignment, from 1 (not at all confident) to 5 (extremely confident).” In each course, there were two confidence items about course content, one related to each assignment topic. We analyzed these scores independently to compare student confidence about knowing the topic they studied to their confidence about knowing the complementary topic they did not study. We also created a sum score that added the ratings for these two items to create a combined confidence score about the course topic in general.
Examining the sum confidence score about knowledge about both course topics for 124 students in this sample, 93 students’ scores improved (75%), 25 remained stable (20%), and 6 declined (5%). Figure 3 shows individual pre-post changes in student confidence about understanding course content.
Scatterplot of each student’s pre and post confidence scores.
We used non-parametric sign tests to examine pre-post changes on students’ overall confidence about the general topic of both assignments in their courses. For example, confidence about their phototropism knowledge was self-rated in one time, and their confidence about gravitropism was self-rated in a second item. We summed two items to examine overall changes in confidence about tropism knowledge for all participants. There were statistically significant pre-post increases where p < .001 in each course (Table 2).
Overall confidence scores at pretest and posttest.
Note. Non-parametric sign test p-values are indicated with *** to represent values <.001.
The magnitude of this positive pre-post change was nearly two points on average which equates to an increase of two levels on the summed score that ranged from 2 to 10. For the three courses, the pre-test medians were 6 which is just above the score’s midpoint and suggests moderate confidence, and the post-test medians were 7.5 or 8, increasing midway toward the maximum score of 10.
We also hypothesized that confidence levels would increase more for the topic students studied during the video assignment compared to the complementary topic they did not study. In four of the six subgroup comparisons, we found that student confidence gains were statistically significant only for the topic that students covered in their videos (non-parametric sign tests where the confidence topic matched the assignment topic: dark photosynthesis, p < .001; gravitropism, p = .008; phototropism, p < .001; nitrogen cycle, p < .001). The two other comparisons showed confidence gains related to both the topic students studied as well as the complementary topic they did not study: (1) confidence about light photosynthesis showed statistically significant pre-post gains for both students who explained it (p < .001) and those who explained dark photosynthesis (p = .019), although the shift was greater for those who studied light photosynthesis in their videos; (2) confidence about understanding the carbon cycle showed statistically significant pre-post gains for both students who explained it (p < .001) and those who explained the nitrogen cycle (p < .001). See Supplemental Material for detailed statistics (Supplemental Table S4) and box plots illustrating (Supplemental Figure S2). These findings generally support our hypothesis that the video project would inspire greater gains in student confidence about their related knowledge.
Student perspectives
Supporting the above findings about students’ learning and confidence, survey, and participation data suggested that the assignment was engaging for students and gave them a chance to express themselves in unique ways. In the large course, where participation in the video project was optional, 83 students (43%) chose to submit projects and all of them responded to a survey about their experience. Because this cohort was much larger than the others and had such a high response rate, we conducted qualitative analyses on these students’ survey responses to better understand their perspective about how the assignment helped them learn.
Of the 78 students from the large course who submitted videos and responded to the question “Did the video assignment help you learn the concepts? Please explain,” only two students were uncertain, noting that it did force them to review the information, and two students were negative, noting that it did not teach them anything new. The rest (95%) responded positively, and we coded their written explanations about how the assignment supported their learning. The inductive thematic analysis strategy (Ezzy, 2013) identified four major themes: the development of a more sophisticated understanding (56%); the usefulness of needing to explain or teach (41%); the utilization of extra studying or practice (41%); and a better understanding of specific concepts (23%). See Supplemental Table S5 for more detail and coding examples.
When students commented on the development of a more sophisticated understanding, they noted that the video project helped them to “solidify,” “synthesize,” “consolidate,” and “uncomplicate.” One student mentioned that "creating the video allowed me to think about the concepts and synthesize them in a different way than I usually do when studying.” In multiple instances, students explicitly connected this deeper learning to the requirement that they explain the concept as if to a peer. For example, one student noted that “I think the fact that I was teaching the concept made me actually think about it in simple terms and try to conceptualize it instead of simply reviewing it at a surface level.” Students also attributed their learning to the additional study or practice that they undertook as part of the assignment. In one example, a student stated explicitly that they “had to review the material a little more to make sure I knew what I was going to say.” Similarly, 18 students (23%) mentioned that the project helped them better understand specific concepts or details, such as “identifying the steps of the nitrogen cycle and the conditions.”
Students also identified other valuable aspects of the assignment that relate to the intent of this study. They mentioned the unique aspects of the video format (9%), the value of creating or using related visuals (5%), the effectiveness of the video project for aiding memory (5%) and exposing gaps in understanding (5%). In two cases, students explicitly mentioned using the video they created as a learning tool. These qualitative findings show that the students who chose to participate in the video assignment were almost unanimously positive about how it supported their learning. Their comments also support the theoretical basis for using assignments like this one; the metacognitive and creative dynamics of the video assignment enhance student learning.
Video analysis
We also theorized that the video design project would create an opportunity for self-expression. Students were free to customize their presentation to suit their preferences, personality, culture, humor, and lifestyle. In one of the smaller courses where the required video assignment yielded a high submission rate, we analyzed the design choices students made to create their videos. We studied 56 videos that were submitted by students who agreed to share their coursework for research, representing 90% of the enrolled students. Submissions included traditional lectures, image and video compilations, graphic design, and original illustrations. There were also a few students who used less common media to share their thoughts on photosynthesis, including an original song, a painting, and a demonstration using ping-pong equipment. The majority (71%) used some type of visual during their video explanation, and many students generated original graphics to aid explanation, suggesting that they were working with the course content in unique ways that would not have occurred in the absence of this assignment.
Specifically, there were multiple types of design choices students made to best suit their preferences. Some students videotaped their explanation using original artwork on paper to guide and support their explanation (see Figure 4). Multiple students recorded videos showing graphics they had created on white boards to support their explanation (see Figure 5). There were also a few cases where students created interactive multi-media displays, including a chalkboard image that was captured on a device where the student could highlight the image for emphasis while speaking and paper manipulatives that a student moved over a graphic shown on a device to complement the explanation (see Figure 6).
Examples of student work using paper artwork.
Examples of student work using whiteboards.
Examples of student work using interactive multi-media.
Across these examples, we see evidence of students planning, visualizing, creating, practicing, and explaining course concepts, all activities that are noted in the literature about how metacognitive activities can influence learning. While the projects qualitatively analyzed here were topically focused on photosynthesis, students expressed their individuality while generating novel learning artifacts using the media that best suited their preferences.
Discussion
This study provided an opportunity to isolate the effects of a versatile video assignment on student learning and confidence while describing students’ perspectives and the videos they created. This active learning assignment required students to structure their thinking, to practice explaining a concept, to create something novel, and to evaluate their own thinking. Student engagement and displays of individuality suggest that the video project also provided a forum for self-expression that students found beneficial. When students designed their own video to explain a difficult scientific concept to a peer, they showed an increase in learning gains. While the experimental design and quantitative findings present evidence that the video assignment improved student learning, the qualitative analyses of students’ videos and open-ended feedback revealed four aspects of the assignment that help us consider the assignment’s effectiveness:
(1) it provided autonomy for students regarding how to design their projects;
(2) it required each student to create original content;
(3) it required students to practice playing the role of teacher; and
(4) it encouraged students to self-assess and revisit content in more detail.
Beyond memorization or rereading notes, the assignment required them to explain, plan, and create a related artifact. For context, these learning activities correspond with the Bloom’s taxonomy categories that deepen and extend learning; the levels from “Understand through Create are usually considered the most important outcomes of education” (Krathwohl, 2002, p. 216).
Beyond learning gains, we also showed that students’ self-perceived confidence improved, which is similar to prior findings about peer discussions boosting confidence (Tullis & Goldstone, 2020). Considering the mechanism for this shift, we noted prior researchers’ assertion that metacognitive awareness “promotes positive self-perceptions, affect, and motivation” (Paris & Winograd, 1990, p. 7) and psychometric research showing a positive relationship between metacognitive awareness and confidence (Kleitman & Stankov, 2007). Accordingly, we propose that the increased confidence revealed in this study may be due in part to the self-monitoring and reflection that students reported engaging in while completing the video assignment, especially while composing explanatory scripts and designing visuals about the topic.
The student videos also showed a range of design choices, illustrating the autonomy students exercised when choosing the video structure, materials, and tone. This autonomy was intentionally prioritized in the assignment design to encourage students to share their authentic voices in the classroom, an inherently inclusive teaching practice aimed at improving learning for all students regardless of the course topic. Students’ use of music, art, and sports shows that the assignment was able to “utilize students’ culture as a vehicle for learning” (Ladson-Billings, 1995, p. 161).
In practice
Active learning experiences like the video assignment described here can enhance learning and boost confidence as an inclusive teaching strategy that invites students to share their unique perspectives through a medium that suits them. The versatile assignment structure can easily be applied across disciplines, and it was effective across varied instructional conditions. Whether the video assignment was required or optional, whether it was graded for completion or on a rubric, whether it was used during in-person or remote courses, students gained knowledge and confidence about course content.
Considering whether these findings will hold in other contexts, the self-selection of students to submit either the video assignment or the pre and post assessments presents a challenge. Given that our findings were consistent for the plant science courses in which they were required suggests a pattern that may persist in other undergraduate courses. The qualitative analyses of open-ended survey data and the videos themselves also lacked generalizability because the samples were not all-inclusive nor randomly selected. Yet, they provide a valuable proof of concept and novel information about the potential for video assignments like this one to support students’ learning and confidence and welcome their perspectives into any classroom.
Future directions
In addition to the positive outcomes for students who created videos, students may also benefit from sharing their videos with others, learning from other students’ videos, and potentially co-creating video projects in group settings. Recent research has begun studying co-creation experiences (Arruabarrena et al., 2019) and the interactive learning involved with video-blogging as a course activity (Campbell, 2019). Along a similar vein, we conjecture that integrating the videos into classroom activities in a more social way might improve classroom climate. We also have a great deal to learn about how different students may experience assignments like these in different ways. For example, are certain subgroups of students more or less likely to participate, or feel the assignment is effective? Are there differential impacts across different gender, ethnicity, or racial groups? Do the impacts of inclusive, metacognitive assignments extend beyond a particular course? Does sharing student-created videos contribute to a sense of community by making students more familiar with one another? These questions can guide future investigations.
Supplemental Material
sj-docx-1-alh-10.1177_14697874241287208 – Supplemental material for Versatile video assignment improves undergraduates’ learning and confidence
Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-alh-10.1177_14697874241287208 for Versatile video assignment improves undergraduates’ learning and confidence by Amy Cardace, Kathleen Hefferon, Anna Levina, Esther R Angert, Daniel H Buckley, William Miller, Lisa Sanfilippo, Tom Silva and Carolyn Aslan in Active Learning in Higher Education
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
This study would not have been possible without the support of the Active Learning Initiative at Cornell University.
Correction (November 2024):
Legends of figures 2-3 have been updated.
Author contributions
Esther Angert: Investigation; Resources; Review & Editing; Funding. Carolyn Aslan: Conceptualization; Review & Editing; Supervision; Funding. Dan Buckley: Investigation; Resources; Review & Editing; Funding. Amy Cardace: Conceptualization; Methodology; Software; Validation; Analysis; Investigation; Resources; Data Curation; Writing; Review & Editing; Visualization; Project Administration. Kathleen Hefferon: Conceptualization; Validation; Investigation; Resources; Writing; Review & Editing. Anna Levina: Conceptualization; Validation; Investigation; Resources; Writing; Review & Editing. Bill Miller: Investigation; Resources; Review & Editing; Funding. Lisa Sanfilippo: Conceptualization; Review & Editing; Supervision. Tom Silva: Investigation; Resources; Review & Editing; Funding.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Human subjects research oversight
This research followed IRB protocols approved and managed by Cornell University (#1708007347; #2009009851).
Supplemental material
Supplemental material for this article is available online.
Author biographies
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
