The Impact of Reflective Videos for Learning About Research Methods: A pilot study of a reflective video activity during Covid-19
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
บทคัดย่อ
This article aimed to study (1) the use of reflective videos for teaching complex subjects such as research methods, and (2) the perceptions of the students regarding how the reflective videos helped them learn about this complex subject. The sample was university students at a Thai university studying research methods. The instrument for collecting data was from videos and comments posted on an online video platform called Soqqle, as well as a survey done by 22 of the participating students. The analysis was done with both descriptive statistics and analysis of the student comments about the reflective video activities. The research results were found as follows:
- While reflective videos enabled the students to share ideas with and learn from each other, there were some issues with students posting repetitive comments or not engaging with the reflective video activity in a way that led to mutual learning for all.
- The time watching the reflective videos did not correlate with student perceived learning
- Reflective video activities did not lead to a significantly better understanding of perceived knowledge gain of research methods among the students studying research methods. participants, but did lead to more critical reflection of their mindsets and attitudes towards research methods.
- A large majority of the students reported that the reflective videos were a good way to review and recall what was learned, as well as discover new ways of looking at issues discussed in class.
This study proposes that reflective video learning can work well with students who are highly motivated and engaged, but not so well with students who are less engaged with learning about research methods. The study provides insight on when reflective videos can be most effective and offers suggestions for other learning activities that could assist with the learning of research methods.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Adams, D. M., Mayer, R. E., MacNamara, A., Koenig, A., & Wainess, R. (2012). Narrative games for learning: Testing the discovery and narrative hypotheses. Journal of educational psychology, 104(1), 235.https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025595
Arango-López, J., Valdivieso, C. C. C., Collazos, C. A., Vela, F. L. G., & Moreira, F. (2019). CREANDO: Tool for creating pervasive games to increase the learning motivation in higher education students. Telematics and Informatics, 38, 62-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.08.005
Bandura, A. (1963). Social reinforcement and behavior change—Symposium, 1962: 1. Behavior theory and identificatory learning. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 33(4), 591–601. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1963.tb01007.x
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
Barab, S. A., Gresalfi, M., & Ingram-Goble, A. (2010). Transformational play: Using games to position person, content, and context. Educational researcher, 39(7), 525-536.https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X10386593
Boyle, E. A., MacArthur, E. W., Connolly, T. M., Hainey, T., Manea, M., Kärki, A., & Van Rosmalen, P. (2014). A narrative literature review of games, animations and simulations to teach research methods and statistics. Computers & Education, 74, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.004
Chen, M. R. A., Hwang, G. J., & Chang, Y. Y. (2019). A reflective thinking‐promoting approach to enhancing graduate students' flipped learning engagement, participation behaviors, reflective thinking and project learning outcomes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2288-2307. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12823
Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process. Boston, MA: D.C. Heath & Co Publishers.
Di Loreto, I., Mora, S., & Divitini, M. (2012, June). Collaborative serious games for crisis management: an overview. In 2012 IEEE 21st International Workshop on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (pp. 352-357). IEEE. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/6269757
Flores, O., Del-Arco, I., & Silva, P. (2016). The flipped classroom model at the university: analysis based on professors’ and students’ assessment in the educational field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13(1), 1-12. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41239-016-0022-1
Foster, L., & Gunn, A. (2017). Special issue on social science research methods education. Teaching Public Administration, 35(3), 237-240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0144739417708839
Gielen, M., & De Wever, B. (2015). Structuring the peer assessment process: A multilevel approach for the impact on product improvement and peer feedback quality. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(5), 435-449. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12096
Greenhow, C. (2011). Online social networks and learning. On the horizon. 19(1), 4-12. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748121111107663
Gunn, A. (2017). Critical debates in teaching research methods in the social sciences. Teaching Public Administration, 35(3), 241-259. https://doi.org/10.1177/0144739417708837
Halpern, D. F., Millis, K., Graesser, A. C., Butler, H., Forsyth, C., & Cai, Z. (2012). Operation ARA: A computerized learning game that teaches critical thinking and scientific reasoning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 7(2), 93-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.03.006
Hwang, G. J., & Chien, S. Y. (2022). Definition, roles, and potential research issues of the metaverse in education: An artificial intelligence perspective. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 100082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100082
Lewthwaite, S., & Nind, M. (2016). Teaching research methods in the social sciences: Expert perspectives on pedagogy and practice. British Journal of Educational Studies, 64(4), 413-430. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2016.1197882
Lee, H., & Lee, J. H. (2022). The effects of robot-assisted language learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 35, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100425
Liao, Y.-W., Huang, Y.-M., Chen, H.-C., & Huang, S.-H. (2015). Exploring the antecedents of collaborative learning performance over social networking sites in a ubiquitous learning context. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 313–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.028
Maddox, & Fitzpatrick, T. (2019). The promise of virtual reality in health-care education and training: It’s all in the neuroscience. Digital Medicine, 5(4), 133–137. https://doi.org/10.4103/digm.digm_26_19
Mawasi, A., Nagy, P., Finn, E., & Wylie, R. (2022). Narrative-based learning activities for science ethics education: an affordance perspective. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31(1), 16-26. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10956-021-09928-x
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass, 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104-1310.
Nah, F.FH., Telaprolu, V.R., Rallapalli, S., Venkata, P.R. (2013). Gamification of Education Using Computer Games. In: Yamamoto, S. (eds) Human Interface and the Management of Information. Information and Interaction for Learning, Culture, Collaboration and Business,. HIMI 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8018. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39226-9_12
Nind, M. (2020). A new application for the concept of pedagogical content knowledge: teaching advanced social science research methods. Oxford Review of Education, 46(2), 185-201. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2019.1644996
Nind, M., Kilburn, D., & Wiles, R. (2015). Using video and dialogue to generate pedagogic knowledge: teachers, learners and researchers reflecting together on the pedagogy of social research methods. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(5), 561-576. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2015.1062628
Nind, M., & Lewthwaite, S. (2020). A conceptual-empirical typology of social science research methods pedagogy. Research Papers in Education, 35(4), 467-487. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2019.1601756
Nind, M., Kilburn, D., & Wiles, R. (2015). Using video and dialogue to generate pedagogic knowledge: teachers, learners and researchers reflecting together on the pedagogy of social research methods. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(5), 561-576. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2015.1062628
Pannese, L., & Morosini, D. (2011). Serious Games For Reflective Learning. In International Conference The Future of Education. https://conference.pixel-online.net/conferences/edu_future/common/download/Paper_pdf/LGA04-Pannese,Morosini.pdf
Ramsey, R., Kaplan, D. M., & Cross, E. S. (2021). Watch and learn: The cognitive neuroscience of learning from others’ actions. Trends in Neurosciences, 44(6), 478–491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2021.01.007
Ross, K., & Call-Cummings, M. (2020). Reflections on failure: teaching research methodology. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 43(5), 498-511. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2020.1719060
Scharp, K. M., & Sanders, M. L. (2019). What is a theme? Teaching thematic analysis in qualitative communication research methods. Communication Teacher, 33(2), 117-121. https://doi.org/10.1080/17404622.2018.1536794
Scheff, S. W. (2016). Fundamental statistical principles for the neurobiologist: A survival guide. Academic Press.
Teo, P. (2019). Teaching for the 21st century: A case for dialogic pedagogy. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 21, 170–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.03.009
Turner, W. D., Solis, O. J., & Kincade, D. H. (2017). Differentiating instruction for large classes in higher education. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 29(3), 490-500. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1151047
Wong, G. W. C., Wong, P. P. Y., & Chong, J. C. M. (2022). Low-fidelity buyer seller simulations can encourage authentic learning experiences. International Review of Economics Education, 40, 100241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iree.2022.100241