It would be easy to assume that high quality and high budget studio-produced video is more effective for learning than lower budget at-home filmed video. But the research on the impact of video quality is mixed, suggesting that other factors like content and delivery are more important than quality alone. And that audio quality is more important than video quality. That’s good news for home-bound educators, who can rest assured that engaging videos are possible without needing to break the bank.
One study by Guo, Kim, and Rubin (2014) compared student engagement with videos from two different MOOCs—one course was filmed in the instructor’s office on home equipment while the other was filmed in a professional television production studio. The results showed that students engaged for longer periods of time with the videos filmed in the instructor’s home office than with those produced in the studio. In the former, the instructor was filmed relatively close up and made regular eye contact, which would have felt more personal to learners than the latter, in which the instructor spoke from behind a podium and scanned a crowd.
The theme of personalization is repeated throughout the research on video in online learning. Video created by the instructor can be viewed as more “authentic and human” (Grant, 2016; Stoerger, 2013), which can be more engaging to learners in an online environment. While some students may expect high production values based on how much tuition they are paying, others find complex production elements distracting (Hibbert, 2014). Many would agree that the most important thing is that ideas are relevant to the course and communicated clearly and effectively (Hansch et al., 2015; Hibbert, 2014).
However, a minimum level of quality is important and helpful for effective learning, as poor quality can be distracting (Grant, 2016). And it is most critical to consider audio quality. Experts and students often rate audio quality as more important than video (Hansch et al., 2015; Reeves & Nass, 1996). So, if you invest in only one thing for your at-home studio, consider a decent microphone.
Grant, K. (2016) The transformational use of video in online learning. Humanizing online teaching and learning. Whitney Kilgore. Retrieved from https://humanmooc.pressbooks.com/chapter/the-transformational-use-of-video-in-online-learning/
Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014). How video production affects student engagement: an empirical study of MOOC videos. Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference (L@S ’14). https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566239
Hansch, A., Hillers, L., McConachie, K., Newman, C., Schiledhauer, T. & Schmidt, J. P. (2015) Video in online learning: Critical reflections and findings from the field. HIIG Discussion Paper Series No. 2015-02. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2577882
Hibbert, M. (2014, April 7). What makes an online instructional video compelling? EDUCAUSE Review. Retrieved April 18, 2020, from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/what-makes-online-instructional-video-compelling
Reeves, B., & Nass, C. I. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Stoerger, S. G. (2013). Using video to foster presence in an online course. In E. G. Smyth & J. X. Volker (Eds.), Enhancing instruction with visual media: Utilizing video and lecture capture (pp. 166-176). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-3962-1.ch012