Potent Pedagogic Roles for Video: Serving Learning Objectives Jack Koumi, University of the Philippines Open University This file is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International Abstract. Summarising a key segment of a course run at the Philippines Open University, the paper proposes 34 pedagogically effective Roles for video – techniques and teaching functions for which the video medium is distinctively capable – in four domains: Cognition, Experiences, Affect, Skills. The Cognitive, Affective and Skills Learning Objectives are served by the Roles in the corresponding three domains, and these Roles are enabled by the video-distinctive techniques in the Cognition and Experiences domains. The latter provides virtual experiences that are nevertheless realistic. The learning that is anticipated from each Role derives largely through expert teachers’ opinions rather than from empirical research. However, many studies have established that video can achieve such anticipated learning to a large extent. Some flaws in these studies are discussed. Finally, the anticipated learning objectives are characterised in terms of the Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Keywords: Pedagogic Roles, Cognition, Experiences, Affect, Skills, Objectives, Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy 1. Introduction Figure 1 lists 34 pedagogic roles for video. It will be argued that, through these roles, video can achieve most learning objectives more effectively than other media. The pedagogic roles comprise video techniques and teaching functions that exploit video’s distinctive presentational attributes, in four domains, Cognition, Experiences, Affect, Skills. 1. Facilitating COGNITION 2. Providing realistic/amplified EXPERIENCES, otherwise inaccessible 1 composite images, e.g. split screen, highlighting, superimposed text or images, green screen 2 animated diagrams with narration 3 visual representation/analogy/metaphor 4 illustrating concepts with real examples 5 modelling a situation by judicious simplification 6 juxtaposition of situations, one after another 7 condensing time by editing real life 8 audio-track reinforcement 9 narrative (storytelling) power – with pedagogic blending of visuals, audio, commentary, text 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 activation resolve motivation attitudes emotions feelings movement with location sounds1 viewpoints e.g. aerial, extreme CU, POV places e.g. dangerous/overseas locations 3D by crisp lighting & moving object or camera slow motion / fast (time-lapse) motion people/animals in action and interaction chronological sequence & pacing of behaviour resource material for extended scrutiny one-off/rare events/resources plus archive film staged events e.g. enactments, experiments 3. Nurturing AFFECTIVE characteristics 4. Teaching (by demonstrating) SKILLS 1 galvanize / spur into action, provoke viewers to get up and do things 2 motivate a strategy e.g. by showing its success 3 stimulate appetite to learn more e.g. reveal the fascination of the subject 4 change attitudes/appreciations e.g. engender empathy, moral reflection 5 alleviate learner’s isolation by showing/hearing the teacher or peers 6 reassure, encourage self-efficacy 7 authenticate academic abstractions by providing empirical confirmation 8 create sense of importance, e.g. acclaimed presenter/interviewee makes a strong case 1 manual/craft: making learning aids, cookery, joinery, painting, designing 2 agility: dance, gymnastics, athletics 3 reasoning: problem solving, planning, brainstorming 4 interpersonal: counselling, teamwork, interviewing, classroom teaching 5 linguistic/expressive: language, singing, oration, authoring, non-verbal 6 studying: researching, collaborative learning, exam strategy, metacognition 7 technical: laboratory, mechanics, nursing, IT/technical Figure 1. Potent Pedagogic Roles: Techniques and Teaching Functions that Facilitate Learning 1 The realism of the events is severely reduced if no sound is recorded. (Although, sometimes, this omission is by design, when the location is too noisy – and realistic sound effects are added post-recoding.) 1.1 In most cases, for each of the 34 Roles in Figure 1, there are several distinct versions Most items in Figure 1 have several versions. This is explicitly noted for many items, since they include subdivisions. For example item 2.2 (viewpoints) lists three different viewpoints. Then again, in Domain 4 (Demonstrating Skills), each of the seven items lists three or more different skills. There are also several items for which the many subdivisions are not listed explicitly. For example, the following variety of video clips all involve a composite image (item 1.1) • fleshing out skeletons in biology or archaeology with slowly superimposed graphics • graphically superimposing geological strata lines on a freeze of a cliff face – the lines would be absent to start with, then superimposed on then off, then again on and off • highlighting parts of a picture while dimming other parts – to help discrimination Figure 2 illustrates this effect. A video clip highlights/dims the different members of a human family that would suffer from exposure to radiation Figure 2a. Somatic radiation effect - affecting the grandmother Figure 2b. Hereditary radiation effect - damage to the ovum of the grandmother affects her son and grandchildren Figure 2. Somatic and Hereditary Effects of exposure to radiation • split-screen or picture-in-picture – in Figure 3, a child tells the story shown in the picture-book Figure 3. Picture-in-picture. A speech scientist has just used a picture-book to help tell the story, The Runaway Bus. The child now has to re-tell the story, while the scientist points to the pictures. 1.2 The provenance of the techniques and teaching functions in Figure 1 The claim that the 34 Roles in Figure 1 add distinctive value to learning derives largely from expert teachers’ opinions rather than from empirical research. Their provenance is as follows. Half the functions correspond to the list of appropriate teaching functions drawn up in the 80’s by the UK OU’s Audio-Visual Allocations Subcommittee, with the purpose of ensuring cost-effective use of video. This list comprised pedagogic roles that video could deliver outstandingly well compared to other (cheaper) media. Course Teams had to make a compelling case that their intended learning outcomes really did need video’s distinctive presentational attributes. This procedure led to the compilation of 18 roles that were adjudged by consensus and research to exploit the distinctive strengths of video (Bates, 1984 – Appendix). These 18 have been expanded into the above 34 Roles, initially through further deliberation during ten three-month courses on TV for Development, run at the BBC OU Production Centre (Koumi, 2006/2009, pp. 3, 99). Subsequently, workshops by this author in 40 countries, the MOOC, What and How to Teach with Video (Koumi, 2017), plus six, successively revamped presentations of an 11-week course to BA students of the Philippines OU, have led to further refinements and to the four-domain categorisation2. 1.3 Video’s presentational attributes The basis of the learning-facilitation claim for the techniques and teaching functions in Figure 1 is the rich symbol system of video – its presentational attributes, listed in Figure 4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 moving images with synchronous location sounds real-time or slow motion real-life or diagrammatic (including animated diagrams) real or dramatised behaviour processes and situations (actual or representational) extreme close-ups / microscopy chronological sequence (timeline) and pacing of behaviour visual metaphor specially constructed physical models to represent objects or concepts camera moves, zooms and framing customised lighting to ‘sculpture’ objects, hence bring out their three-dimensionality shot transitions (including editing to condense time) composite images, e.g. split-screen, superimposed text, highlighting, green screen audio-track enhancement/reinforcement, e.g. sound effects, tone of voice, music; note this excludes narration, which comes under item 16 non-verbal communication, e.g. facial expression, gestures, body language, tone of voice personalisation and activities of the teacher and other people video pause and replay – enabling extended scrutiny varying format, e.g. a segment in studio, then on location, interspersed with animation (see Appendix 1 for an extensive list of Video Formats derived from Figure 1) Figure 4. Video’s presentational attributes In most circumstances, video’s presentational attributes make it more effective than other media. One exception occurs in the Affective domain. A well-scripted dramatized enactment on audio can sometimes evoke more realism and emotion than video, by stimulating listeners’ visual imagination. For instance, under Role 3.4, engender empathy, audio can powerfully portray a case of child abuse to trainee social workers. (An adult assumes the role of the child’s voice in an audio drama). This example has illustrated that for some functions in Figure 1, in certain circumstances, there is a better choice of medium than video. At the other extreme, there are some categories for which there is no alternative to video, because video can provide amplified realism – e.g. 2.5 fast motion via timelapse recording, whereby real life can be speeded up thousands of times. More examples later. 2 In Koumi 2006/9, it was recognised that any Skill has a Cognitive component. Hence Skills Roles were encompassed within the Cognition domain. However, the separate domain here, Demonstrating Skills, concedes that the depth of cognition involved in a skill can vary from minimal to extensive. For example, if the demonstrators talk through the thinking behind their skill, the viewer learns the reasons behind the elements of the skill, as well as how to perform the skill. 1.4 The nature of the four Domains: Techniques and Teaching Functions Video’s presentational attributes (Figure 4), underlie the techniques in the Cognition and Experiences domains. Domains 3 and 4 both comprise teaching functions that are served by the above techniques, as will be explained in Section 2. CAVEAT. Pedagogic Roles need empowerment through Pedagogic Design To achieve the learning potential of the 34 pedagogic roles, the video needs painstaking learning design. Koumi (2023) proposes a framework of 32 such pedagogic design principles, distributed in eight categories: Hook, Signpost, Cognitive Engagement, Constructive Learning, Sensitise, Elucidate, Reinforce, Consolidate. PS. This framework is what’s meant by item 1.9 of Figure 1. 2. Learning Anticipated through the techniques and teaching functions in Figure 1 This section deals with learning that is anticipated through the techniques and teaching functions of Figure 1. The extent to which video can indeed achieve such learning – empirical evidence – will be discussed in section 3. Learning anticipated through Domain 2, provision of Realistic/Amplified Experiences, will be addressed last, because its functions diverge from those of the other three Domains. 2.1 Learning anticipated through the video techniques of the Cognition Domain Provided a video has been well designed pedagogically (as noted in the above Caveat), the learning outcomes of the techniques in the Cognition domain of Figure 1 are posited in Figure 5. 1.1 composite-image techniques can aid synthetic, analytic and discrimination skills; for substantiation of this claim see the four composite-image examples listed above Figure 3. 1.2 animated diagrams (narrated) – sharing the teacher’s imgery and explaining dynamic processes: particularly powerful is interspersing real life with animation of obscured motion, e.g. of the diaphragm of a person with breathing difficulties. 1.3 visual metaphor/analogy/representation – to render complex/abstract processes more concrete, i.e. relate them to the learner’s existing knowledge 1.4 illustrating abstract concepts with evocative real examples, hence making the concepts more concrete 1.5 modelling a process or situation with a tailored, simplified version – which scaffolds learning by showing only the pertinent features. 1.6 juxtaposition in quick succession, of contrasting situations/processes – to aid discrimination 1.7 condensing time by pruning real-world processes (e.g. editing out non-salient events) thus bringing the duration within the viewer's concentration span. 1.8 audio-track reinforcement and signalling – sound effects, music, tone of voice 1.9 narrative (story-telling) power – creates coherence and aids recall through causal links and signposting (Laurillard et al, 2000). Essential for this power is pedagogic blending of visuals, audio, commentary, text Figure 5. Learning anticipated through the techniques in Domain 1, Cognition 2.2 The Intended Learning Objectives of Roles in Domains 3 and 4, Affective and Skills Each Affective or Skills Role is a Teaching Function with an intended learning objective. For example, 3.2 motivate a strategy by showing its success, serves the Affective Learning Objective, the viewer is motivated to follow that strategy. In the Skills domain: 4.2 demonstrating a dance technique, serves the Skills Learning Objective, the viewer learns that technique. 2.3 Affective and Skills Roles. and hence their Learning Objectives, are enabled by techniques in the Cognition and Experiences domains Whereas the main function of Figure 5 is to show how Cognition techniques enable Cognitive Learning Outcomes, these techniques can also enable Affective and Skills Objectives. For example, the Affective objective, 3.2, motivate a strategy, can be enabled by technique 1.6, juxtaposing a successful and unsuccessful strategy, one after the other. Similarly, an example of a Skills objective is Classroom Teaching, which can be facilitated by Role 1.7, condensing time (in a video of an expert classroom teacher) by editing non-salient events. The enabling power of Experiences techniques is even more obvious. All the Skills roles depict real life experiences, and are therefore enabled by techniques of the Experiences domain. The same is true for all the Affective roles – they all depict real life experiences and behaviour. For example, changing attitudes towards people might involve seeing various contrasts in situ, like peoples’ socialising behaviour (Bates, 1984, p. 246), through technique 2.6 people interacting. 2.4 Cognitive Learning via Domain 2’s provision of Realistic Experiences Apart from some abstract subjects like Logic and Pure Mathematics, Cognitive learning (Figure 5) is largely concerned with knowledge about the real world. Therefore when learners experience the real world (vicariously but realistically) their study is grounded in context. Jonassen (1991) argues that context provides, episodic memory cues that make the acquired knowledge more memorable (p. 37). McLellan (1994) points out that context can be anchored through video. Consequently, instructional video is often used to transport learners into the real world, through the techniques in the Experiences domain. For example, how lab techniques are scaled up in industry (Koumi, 2006/9, pp 90-91). 2.5 Interpreting Figure 1 in terms of Learning Objectives The above elaborations of Figure 1 can be summarised as follows. Cognitive, Affective and Skills Learning Objectives are served by the Roles in the corresponding three Domains of Figure 1 – and these Roles are enabled as follows. The Affective and Skills Roles are enabled by the video-distinctive techniques in the Cognition and Experiences domains. The Cognitive Roles, except when they involve abstract subjects like Logic and Pure Mathematics, are enabled by the techniques of the Experiences domain. Finally, as in Figure 4, the enabling techniques of the Cognition and Experiences domains derive from video’s rich symbol system – its distinctive presentation attributes. A diagrammatic summary of this interpretation is given in Figure 6. Figure 6. Interpreting Figure 1, Potent Pedagogic Roles, in terms of Learning Objectives An implication of Figure 6 might seem surprising – a learning objective can be Cognitive, Affective or Skills, but NOT Experiential. This is because the experiences provided by Domain 2 do not themselves constitute learning objectives. Rather, they function as enablers – they enable Roles in the other three domains to serve learning objectives – as noted in sections 2.3 and 2.4. 2.6 Prioritising Learning Objectives Figure 6 prioritises Learning Objectives (depicted first) to emphasise that: when designing a video, first itemise the intended Learning Objectives and only then identify which Pedagogic Roles need to be employed to serve each objective. An example of such prioritising, for a video demonstrating a particular skill, is given in Figure 7. A video demonstrating a bereavement counselling session (condensed to 20 minutes by editing) intends the broad (Skills) learning objective, become skilled in bereavement counselling. The broad objective would entail more detailed recognition objectives (as below). Intended Learning Objectives Broad Learning Objective Trainees become skilled in bereavement counselling Pedagogic Roles serving each Objective 4.4 Interpersonal (counselling) 2.8 resource material for extended scrutiny 1.7 condensing time; the interview is edited to bring it within the viewer’s concentration span, and to show only its salient features (with minimal repetition): 1.5 modelling a situation by judicious simplification (1.7 shortens duration). Specific, detailed cognitive objectives Trainees will recognise the following behaviour of the bereaved in reaction to the counsellor: bereaved’s facial reactions to counsellor’s questions bereaved’s distinctive body postures when discussing the deceased relative 2.6 counsellor & bereaved interactions 2.2 viewpoints of facial expression 2.2 viewpoints of posture 2.6 bereaved’s actions bereaved’s tone of voice in reaction to counsellor’s prompts 2.6 counsellor & bereaved interactions 1.8 audio-track reinforcement bereaved’s pauses and pace of speech in reaction to counsellor’s prompts. 2.6 counsellor & bereaved interactions 2.7 chronology & pacing of the bereaved person’s speech Specific, detailed cognitive/skills objectives Trainees will identify (cognitive) and be able to perform (skills) the cathartic eliciting prompts employed by the counsellor. (Note, a counsellor’s input is needed here regarding the precise nature of the counsellor’s prompts and consolation techniques) 4.5 counsellor’s linguistic/expressive actions 1.8 audio-track reinforcement (tone of voice) 2.6 counsellor managing eliciting-activity 1.4 using real examples to illustrate the concept, cathartic eliciting prompting 2.6 counsellor & bereaved interactions Figure 7. Broad objectives served by detailed objectives, enabled by Pedagogic Roles 2.7 An added bonus of the Experiences domain – Amplified Realism Having digressed to discuss learning objectives, here’s a final feature of the Experiences domain. Beyond mere realism, items 2, 5 and 9 of the Experiences Domain of Figure 1, extreme close-ups, slow/fast motion, and staged events, supply amplified realism that cannot be experienced in real life. For example, Figure 8 shows an extreme close-up in a clip of a carpenter’s chisel preparing a depression for a mortice lock; this shot is so tight that trainee carpenters could not experience the view in real life because they would need to stand dangerously close – and too close for their eyes to focus. Figure 8. The fitting of a mortice lock – illustrating role 2.2 of Figure 1, extreme close-up Regarding slow-fast motion (item 5 of the Experiences domain), this could display slow motion of • a bird in flight; or predators hunting • airbags expanding in a car crash • a vibrating string, showing a clear image of the shape of the string fast motion of • cloud movement; flowers growing; bacteria dividing • a bird, nest-building; a spider, weaving its web • the 12-hour tidal cycle speeded up 1500 times Regarding staged events (item 10 of the Experiences domain) • in a safety training video, staged accidents, contrived to look real through editing techniques. • a specially positioned water-spray to demonstrate a rainbow as a complete circle (Figure 9). Figure 9. The sun behind the camera, which was on the edge of a building so that we could see the water droplets BELOW the observer’s feet. (Courtesy of Peet Media Associates) 3 Evidence of learning through the Cognition, Affective and Skills Domains 3.1 Evidence of learning through the techniques of the Cognition domain Figure 5 (anticipated learning), as well as Figure 1 (pedagogic roles for video), derives as much from experts’ opinions as from empirical research. As for the latter, many studies have shown that video helps learning, summarised in Wisher and Curnow (2003), Saltrick, Honey and Pasnick (2004 – for specific topics, such as Science, History, Mathematics, Social Studies) and Paulsen and Bransfield (2010). This is despite the fact that the videos investigated were produced without extensive consideration of Pedagogic Roles (initially drafted in Koumi 2006/9 and now updated in Figure 1) and without the benefit of comprehensive Design Principles such as those in Koumi (2023). 3.2 The extent to which video engenders Affective changes in students (Domain 3) The title of Domain 3, Nurturing Affective Characteristics, implies that its Roles result in enduring changes to a viewer’s character. But how realistic is this claim – to what extent can video affect motivations and emotions, and over what time frame? Miller (2005) notes that social learning theorists suggest that observing a model via video is a viable method of learning a new attitude while affective-cognitive consistency theorists suggest that the affective component of the attitude system may be changed by first changing the cognitive component through providing new information, e.g. as in anti-smoking or literacy campaigns on TV. Altinay, Brown and Piccoli (2012) report a more nuanced result in which the cognitive component did not correlate with attitude change. They found a significant change in attitude and intentions to act following the viewing of a video on Climate Change which was personally framed (framed in terms of the effect on the individual). In contrast, a video framed globally, and one depicting facts only did not reach significance on attitude change. Zimbardo & Leippe (1991, p.154-58) report research findings on attitude change that a complex message is more persuasive when presented in writing “presumably because, it could be better comprehended if it was read”, while an easy-to-understand message was most persuasive when presented on video. Other findings were that experts and likeable presenters on video were much more persuasive than unlikeable non-experts and the effect was stronger for video than for print. Other researchers (Azevedo, 2006; Renninger, Bachrach & Posey, 2008) note that sustained changes in students’ interest require multiple triggers rather than through video alone. 3.3 Evidence of learning Skills through video demonstration (Domain 4) Typing video demonstration of skills into Google results in a billion entries, including many videos demonstrating skills, in every category of the Skills domain. But how effective are such videos? There is a large body of research regarding the efficacy of Cognitive Apprenticeship (Collins, Brown and Holum 1991, Cash, Behrmann, Stadt and Daniels 1997). Collins, Brown and Holum (ibid) characterise Cognitive Apprenticeship in terms of four main phases: modelling, coaching, scaffolding and fading. In modelling, the Master demonstrates the target task and exposes the thinking behind it. The master then coaches the apprentice who undertakes activities towards becoming an expert. These activities are designed to support or scaffold the learning. For example, the activities could be sub-tasks or simplified versions of the task. Fading refers to progressive withdrawal of the scaffolding as the learner becomes more proficient. Video demonstration of skills accompanied by voiced-over reasoning covers the first phase, modelling. The other three phases are usually necessary to become an expert; however the efficacy of modelling alone, using video, has been supported in several studies, while being challenged in others. Nova Scotia Online Learning have produced creditable videos in their Virtual Campus Apprenticeship programme, which produced an average of 800 graduates per year between 2005 and 2011. Some of the videos, for coaches, encompass both manual skills and teaching skills. Kemper, Foy, Wissow and Shore (2008) found that 59 of the 61 clinicians who viewed demonstration videos on communication skills judged that their skills had improved significantly. Donkor (2000) showed, as expected, that Video was superior to Print materials in practical skills and craftsmanship of block-laying and concreting. In contrast, a study carried out on 40 students of Nursing and Obstetrics by Mouneghi, Derakhshan, Valai and Mortazavi (2003), showed that live demonstration was superior to a video demonstration for the skills of, changing a wound dressing and washing the hands. However, students’ grades were still high after video demonstration, so the authors concluded that video can be a suitable substitute whenever live demonstration was difficult to manage. All four studies above show that video can be effective in the learning of skills, although the fourth showed that live demonstration was superior to video. Caveat: a fundamental problem with media comparison studies Care should be exercised in interpreting the final two studies above. There are many media comparison studies such as these, but they all suffer from a fundamental problem: how well were the different media designed? Neither of the above studies gave a description of the video design. Donkor’s video was based on existing print materials, but the designers would have attempted to design as good a video as possible, so possibly some pedagogical enhancements were incorporated into the video, making the design of the video pedagogically superior to that of the print materials. Conversely, the pedagogic potential of video may have been under-achieved (which would strengthen Donkor’s results). For example, if the video treatment was based strictly on the print treatment (in the attempt to compare like with like), the full potential of video would have been underachieved. This is because each medium has its own distinctive presentational attributes that need to be fully exploited by choosing distinctive treatments of the topic. For example, for mixing cement, the print material would start with the beginning of the procedure, whereas the video had better start at the end, showing the desired consistency of the mix before jumping back to the start of the mixing. So rather than comparing like with like, Donkor’s study may have been comparing apples with oranges. Similar issues concern the study by Mouneghi et al (2003). In a video recording of a manual skill, special lighting is needed to bring out the three-dimensionality. Other techniques, like cutting to an extreme close-up at critical points, could serve to make the video experience more informative than the live demonstration. Also more informative would be to position the camera close to the eye-line of the demonstrator so that viewers get a virtual experience of personally performing the skill. In a live demonstration this viewpoint would need all trainees to stand just behind the demonstrator’s ear – not possible. Moreover, to achieve optimum video treatment, the demonstrator’s narration needs to accommodate the special shooting techniques. It is unlikely that such skills were used by the researchers, since they did not mention video design issues. Such considerations point to critical flaws in media comparison studies. In order to be fair to each medium, we would need creative practitioners be allowed adequate resources and thinking-time to exploit the full potential of each medium's presentational capabilities. This means not only good design3 but the concept of comparing like with like has to be abandoned in favour of judging which different treatments of the topic and which desired learning objectives best exploit the affordances of the different media. Appendix 2 proposes 15 learning affordances of educational media. 4 Taxonomy of Learning Outcomes achievable through video The presentational attributes of video enable the array of techniques in the Cognition domain of Figure 1. These suggest a wide range of cognitive learning outcomes that can be afforded by video, as expounded in Figure 5 and supported in general terms by the research literature. More crucially, all the presentational attributes need to be potentiated by effective pedagogic design, as in Koumi (2023). These outcomes will now be scrutinised in terms of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy, the twodimensional matrix of cognitive learning goals in Figure 10. The shaded cell exemplifies how to interpret the matrix – it involves a learning outcome of type 4/C, Analyse some Procedural knowledge. A specific example of this, in metalwork, could be, differentiate between welding and soldering. Hence the taxonomy has a total of 4 x 6 = 24 types of learning outcome. The Taxonomy deals largely with the Cognitive domain, but not exclusively. Firstly, the cell Create/Procedures in Figure 10 includes production of skills in the expanded version of the taxonomy (Krathwohl, 2002). Secondly, that expanded version of Metacognitions includes self-knowledge, and this encompasses most of the affective teaching functions in Figure 1. 3 See Koumi (2013) for a project in which video demonstrated language skills (function 4.5 of Fig 1), and in which the 56 videos closely adhered to the design principles in Koumi (2006/9 and 2023). Knowledge dimension A. Facts B. Concepts Cognitive Processes C. Procedures D. Metacognitions 1. Remember 2. Understand 3. Apply 4. Analyse 5. Evaluate 6. Create Figure 10. A typical cell, 4/C, in Revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of Learning Objectives (Krathwohl, 2002) In Figure 11, a bold font has been used for those learning outcomes that can be achieved with nonstop viewing of self-standing video (no supplementary print), it being understood that the video has been diligently designed for effective learning (Koumi, 2006/9 and 2023). In which case, viewers can be enabled to remember and understand all four knowledge categories: facts, concepts, procedures and metacognitions, for the following reason. The types learning in Figure 5 clearly cover 1 Remember and 2 Understand for knowledge categories A Facts, B Concept, C procedures. The arguments above regarding skills also indicate that 3 Apply can also be achieved (to an extent, hence only pale shading). As for D Metacognitions, in the expanded taxonomy, this has subcategories, learning strategies (both general and task-specific) and self-knowledge. The first subcategory, learning strategies, can be targeted by 1.5 of Figure 1, modelling a process. The second, self-knowledge, can be touched on by 1.3 metaphor (e.g. metaphor for fear of change). And as noted earlier, most of the Affective teaching functions in domain 3 of Figure 1 directly facilitate self-knowledge. Knowledge dimension A. Facts B. Concepts Cognitive processes C. Procedures D. Metacognitions 1. Remember 2. Understand 3. Apply 4. Analyse 5. Evaluate 6. Create Figure 11. Learning outcomes achievable with non-stop video viewing The categories in Figure 11 that are not highlighted indicate the kind of learning that cannot easily be achieved through non-stop viewing of video (as contrasted with viewing short segments, interspersed with formative quizzes). That is, non-stop video is not an appropriate means of achieving the three highest level cognitive processes, analyse, evaluate, create. Note however that remembering and understanding an overview of a knowledge topic is a useful (and often an essential) precursor of higher-level processing of details. The reverse can also be true – an overview can provide a useful consolidation after a learner has undertaken concentrated study of detailed material but has been left with a fragile grasp of the big picture. Whether or not an overview is better studied before or after studying details depends on the learning task and the individual learner. Koumi (2015) describes how learning can be considerably augmented when videos are segmented, complemented with printed materials and self-assessed. References Altinay, Z., Brown P. & Piccoli, F. (2012). Responses to Environmental Issues: The Effects of Framing on Public Attitudes about Climate. Louisiana State University Media Effects Lab. http://melresearch.wordpress.com/2012/04/14/health-com-2/ Azevedo, F. (2006). Personal excursions: Investigating the dynamics of student engagement. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning 11(1), 57-98 Bates, A. W. (1984). Broadcasting in Education, Constable, London. Cash, J.R., Behrmann, M.B., Stadt, R.W. and Daniels, H.M. (1997). Effectiveness of Cognitive Apprenticeship Instructional Methods in College Automotive Technology Classrooms. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 34(2). http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JITE/v34n2/Cash.html Collins, A., Brown, J. S. & Holum, A. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. http://www.21learn.org/archive/cognitive-apprenticeship-making-thinking-visible/ Donkor, F. (2000). The Comparative Instructional Effectiveness of Print-Based and Video-Based Instructional Materials for Teaching Practical Skills at a Distance. IRRODL 11(1). Hoyman, A., Wulf, G. & Lewthwaite, R. (2014). Impacts of autonomy-supportive versus controlling instructional language on motor learning. Human Movement Science 36, 190–198 Jonassen, D. (1991). Context is everything. Educational Technology 31(5), 35-37. Kemper, K. J., Foy, J. M., Wissow, L. & Shore, S. (2008). Enhancing communication skills for paediatric visits through on-line training using video demonstrations. BMC Medical Education 8(8). http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/8/8 Koumi, J (2006, reprinted 2009). Designing video and multimedia for open and flexible learning , RoutledgeFalmer, London and New York. Koumi, J. (2013). Construction of 56 instructional TV programmes for English Language learners in Turkey. Educational Media International 50(4), 341-354. Koumi, J. (2015). Learning Outcomes afforded by self-assessed segmented Video-Print combinations. Cogent Education 2(1). http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2331186X.2015.1045218#.VZPD1fm6dNA Koumi, J. (2017). 4-week MOOC (EMMA platform), What and How to Teach with Video https://platform.europeanmoocs.eu/course_what_and_how_to_teach_with_vid Koumi, J. (2023). Pedagogic Video Design Principles. Self-published in, (91) Pedagogic Video Design Principles | Jack Koumi - Academia.edu Krathwohl, D.R. (2002). A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview, in Theory into Practice 41 4, College of Education, The Ohio State University. KrathwohlPM (depauw.edu) Laurillard D (1993). Rethinking University Teaching: a Framework for the Effective use of Educational Technology, Routledge, London. Laurillard, D.M., Stratford, M., Luckin, R., Plowman, L. and Taylor, J. (2000). ‘Affordances for learning in a non-linear narrative medium’, Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2000(2). http://wwwjime.open.ac.uk/article/2000-2/50.html McLellan, H. (1994). Situated learning: Continuing the conversation. Educational Technology, 34(10), 7-8 Miller, M. (2005). Teaching and Learning in Affective Domain. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. AECT publication. http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Teaching_and_Learning_in_Affective_Domain Mouneghi, H., Derakhshan, A., Valai, N. & Mortazavi, F. (2003). The effectiveness of video-based education on gaining practical learning skills in comparison with demonstrating method’s effectiveness among university students. Journal of Medical Education, 4(1), 27-30. http://journals.sbmu.ac.ir/jme/article/viewFile/855/749 Nova Scotia Online Learning. (2005- 2011). Virtual Campus Apprenticeship programme. Videos for coaches on how to demonstrate a skill. http://apprenticeship.nscc.ca/mentoring/Mentoring.Course.Step3.pdf Paulsen, C.A. & Bransfield, C.P. (2010). Evaluation of Design Squad, Season 3: Final Report. In support of NSF Grant No: 0810996. Concord, MA: Concord Evaluation Group, LLC. http://concordevaluation.com/papers/paulsen_DS3_evaluationreport_072310.pdf Renninger, K. A., Bachrach, J. W., & Posey, S. K. E. (2008). Learner interest and achievement motivation. In M. L. Maehr, S. Karabenick, & T. Urdan (Eds.), Social psychological perspectives (15), (pp. 461491). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. Saltrick, S., Honey, M. & Pasnik, S. (2004). Television Goes to School: The Impact of Video on Student Learning in Formal Education. http://cct.edc.org/sites/cct.edc.org/files/publications/PBS_tv-school.pdf Wisher, R. A., & Curnow, C. K. (2003). Video-based instruction in distance learning: From motion pictures to the internet. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 315–330). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Zimbardo, P.G. & Leippe, M.R. (1991). The psychology of attitude change and social influence. McGraw-Hill APPENDIX 1. Video Formats (not just Talking Head) that exploit the power of video 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. physical models, constructed to represent objects or concepts animation/diagrammatic build-up/composite images presenter full screen or picture-in-picture or voice-over (narrating) presenter plus green screen two presenters, interleaved in studio, e.g. presenter plus objects / on location, to provide otherwise inaccessible experiences discussion/interview (tempting because it is an easy time-filler, so avoid unless exceptional) demonstration/dramatic enactment screencast, e.g. the teacher shows how to navigate on a website, or how to input into Excel tablet capture, preferably writing onto a prepared slide (not onto a blank slide like Kahn). NOTE. If a video switches between several of these formats, then at each switch the viewer gets reengaged. Hence, multi-format videos can sustain viewers’ engagement over longer durations. APPENDIX 2. Fifteen learning affordances of educational media and technologies Presentational Attributes and Realism 1. Symbol system – the types of symbols the medium uses to communicate, e.g. text, graphics, moving images, chronological sequencing, sound. 2. Motivational Influences – engagement and motivation are crucial to learning. 3. Personalisation of the teacher, alleviating isolation – an advantage of video over print. 4. Provision of realistic experiences Learner-Technology Interactions 5. Networking – enabling interaction between learners and teachers, online or face-to-face 6. Adaptivity – the medium is able to adapt its provision to suit an individual's needs (emulating the ability of an expert human teacher who addresses the needs of individual students) 7. Interactivity – an action by a student receives feedback from the medium, e.g. different levels of help are provided depending on students’ inputs into a dialogue box 8. Student Reactivity – prompts for student activity, including mental activity (for which answers can be suggested, as in the self-assessed video-print combinations in this paper) Ease of use (NB. 9, 10 and 11 identify learning activities for which print is better suited than video) 9. Navigability – ease with which users can move through the material to find particular items 10. Surveyability/Browsing – an advantage of static print over time-based audiovisual materials 11. Legibility – the amount of data that can be viewed comfortably (e.g. printed multi-page data) 12. Controllability – how much influence students can exert over how they use the medium Choice of Time, Place and Duration 13. Choice of When (and Where) to study – afforded by self-paced study in contrast to a fixed course schedule (e.g. in face-to-face classes). 14. Pedagogically determined Size/Duration of the learning package – afforded by segmented media materials compared to non-segmented. Media-specific Pedagogic Designs 15. Optimal pedagogic design for each technology/medium Each educational technology/medium can be well or badly designed for cognitive engagement, constructive reflection, and hence learning. Optimal pedagogic design is characterised here as an affordance, although strictly speaking it is a boundary condition that restricts the pertinence of the other 14: if a technology or medium is badly designed, the potential of affordances 1 to 14 is compromised.