1Using Educational Video in the Classroom: [613490]

1Using Educational Video in the Classroom:
Theory, Research and Practice

By Emily Cruse
M.Ed., Curriculum Director, Library Video Company

Without question, this generation truly is the media generation, devoting more
than a quarter of each day to media. As media devices become increasingly
portable, and as they spread even fu rther through young people’s environments—
from their schools to their cars—media messages will become an even more
ubiquitous presence in an already medi a-saturated world. Anything that takes up
this much space in young people’s liv es deserves our full attention.
—Kaiser Family Foundation

For 8- to 18-year-olds—dubbed Generation M fo r their media use by the Kaiser Family
Foundation—television and video remain the dominant medium of choice. Turning our
full attention as educators to this fact requ ires harnessing the power of educational video
for teaching and learning.

Overview of Educational Video

Using audio-visual materi als in the classroom is nothing new. Since filmstrips
were first studied during World War II as a training tool fo r soldiers (Hovland,
Lumsdaine & Sheffield, 1949), educators have recognized the power of audio-visual
materials to capture the attention of learners , increase their motiva tion and enhance their
learning experience. Both the content and the technology have developed considerably
since that time, increasing the availability and the value of A/V materials in classrooms.
Content has developed from instructional te levision (ITV) of the 1950s and 1960s, which
allowed replay of taped l ectures, through educational te levision (ETV), intended to
complement classroom instruction rather than compete with it (Corporation for Public

2Broadcasting, 2004) to educational standard s-based videos designed specifically as
supplemental classroom tools. Delivery technolo gies have also advanced, from filmstrips
to cable television, to the ve rsatility of VCRs, DVDs and laserdiscs. Finally, with the
advent of digital technology, the field is evolving to newer a nd ever-greater potentials of
adaptability in delivery. The use of educational video and televi sion in classrooms has risen steadily over
the past 20 to 30 years, according to a series of studies conducted by the Corporation for
Public Broadcasting. These surveys measured both patterns of use and teacher attitudes
and expectations for outcomes. Not only is th is technology widely used, according to the
most recent study, but it is also highly valued as a means of teaching more effectively and
creatively (CPB, 1997). Perhaps the most significant survey fi nding that supports the value of these
multimedia tools is the direct relationshi p between frequency of use and perceived
student: [anonimizat], two-thirds find that students learn more
when TV or video is used, and close to 70% find that student: [anonimizat], educational
television and video:
• Reinforces reading and lecture material
• Aids in the development of a co mmon base of knowledge among students
• Enhances student: [anonimizat]
• Provides greater accommodation of diverse learning styles
• Increases student motivation and enthusiasm
• Promotes teacher effectiveness (CPB, 2004)

3 This paper will be exploring the theory and research supporting the educational
use of video and its implications for classr oom practice. Unless otherwise noted, “video”
is used as a unifying term to refer to this range of multimedia, A/V content used in schools, whether delivered by VCR, DVD or digitally.

How does video promote learning?

There is a pervasive belief, increasin gly being challenged by research, that
television and video viewing is a passive activity in which viewers are only superficially
reactive to what they are watching, and one that will, over time, hamper or displace
academic achievement. However, recent studies support the theory that viewing is instead
an active process, one which can be “an ongoing and highly interconnected process of
monitoring and comprehending” and “a comple x, cognitive activity that develops and
matures with the child’s development to promote learning” (Marshall, 2002, p. 7).
Mayer (2001) explains that viewing, while it may appear to be passive, can
involve the high cognitive activity necessa ry for active learning: “well-designed
multimedia instructional messages can promot e active cognitive processing in students,
even when learners seem to be behaviorally inactive” (p. 19). The content and context of
the viewing are both crucial elements for e ngaging students as active learners. Content
should be age- and skill-appropriate, as “the content one watches may be a truer
determinant of future academic success than the amount of time one spends watching
television” (Stanovitch & Cunningham, as cite d in CPB, 2004, p. 8). Other aspects of
video that have been demonstrated to engage students in active learning are its address to

4multiple forms of intelligence, its use of multiple modes for content delivery and its
emotional appeal to viewers.
Multiple Intelligences
According to Gardner’s multiple intelligences theory, an individual possesses, in
varying strengths and preferences, at least eigh t discrete intelligences: linguistic, logical-
mathematical, spatial, musical, bodily-kines thetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal and
naturalistic (Gardner, 2006). “The relative strengths and weaknesses among and between
these intelligences dictate the ways in which individuals take in information, perceive the
world, and learn” (Marshall, 2002, p. 8). This represents a great departure from the
traditional view of intelligence, which rec ognizes only verbal and computational ability
(Brualdi, 1996). Gardner’s theory suggests that the manne r in which subject matter is conveyed
will influence that individual’s ability to learn, and that teachers need to take all of these
intelligences into account when planning in struction (Brualdi, 1996). While traditional
textbooks often take a primarily linguistic approach to learning, video’s multiple modes can take a variety of approaches, such as aes thetic, logical or narra tional, in addition to
linguistic, thus addressing the needs of a br oader range of learners: “These ‘multiple
entry points’ into the content are especially valuable in a formal educational setting, as
they offer greater accommodation to the mu ltiple intelligences of a diverse group of
students” (CPB, 2004, p. 7).
Multimodal Learning Styles
There are three widely a ccepted types of learning styles: aptitude-based, which
draws on Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences; personality-based, measured by using the Meyers-Briggs test; and sensory-ba sed, which looks to the modalities through

5which students take in information (Pruitt, 2005; Miller, 2001). What all of these
conceptions of learning styles express is the need to expand instruction beyond single
modes of instruction. There are three primary modalities thr ough which people take in information:
visual, auditory and tactile. Silverman ( 2006) relates these three modalities to how
students process information, deriving three ba sic learning styles: visu al-spatial, auditory-
sequential and tactile-kin esthetic. Visual-spatial learners take in new information through
visualization of the whole con cept and think in holistic, ofte n three-dimensional, images.
Auditory-sequential learners, by contrast, think in words, processed auditorally, and
generally learn in a sequential, step-by-step process. Finall y, tactile-kinesthetic learners
take in information through physical touc h and sensation, and they benefit from
demonstration or application more than from verbal explanations. The benefits of video—where much of the content is conv eyed visually—for
visually-oriented learners is immediat ely apparent (CPB, 1997; Denning, no date).
However, video also benefits auditory lear ners, with its inclusion of sound and speech,
and can provide demonstrations not otherwise possible in classrooms fo r tactile learners.
Dual-Channel Learning
In fact, all students, both with a nd without a strongly dominant modality
preference, benefit from in struction that includes vide o. Marshall (2002) cites the
conclusions of Wiman and Mierhenry (1969), extending Dale’s “Cone of Experience,”
that: “people will generally remember:
10% of what they read
20% of what they hear
30% of what they see
50% of what they hear and see” (pp. 7-8).

6 Video is a form of multimedia that conveys information through two
simultaneous sensory channels: aural and visual. It often uses multiple presentation modes, such as verbal and pictorial repres entations in the case of on-screen print and
closed-captioning (Mayer, 2001). This multiplic ity means that video communicates the
same information to students through simu ltaneous learning modalities and can provide
students with “multiple entry points ” (Gardner, 2006) into the content:
The richness of these forms of information [images, motion, sound, and, at times,
text] benefits learners, by enabling them “…to lear n through both verbal and
visual means, to view actual objects a nd realistic scenes, to see sequences in
motion, and to view perspectives that are difficult or impossible to observe in real
life” (Wetzel, 1994). …[M]ost researchers agree that “…when viewed together,
each source provides additional complementary information,” thus increasing the
chances that comprehension will take place (Kozma, 1991).” (CPB, 2004, p.5)

Citing Wood (1995), Aiex (1999) notes that video can be used “to promote
awareness of the interrelationship between modes (picture, movement, sound, captions)”
(p. 2). Kozma (1991) found that the mix of spoken language, text, still images and
moving images in television and video result s in higher learning ga ins than media that
rely primarily on only one of these symbol systems. Wetzel et al.’s 1994 review of
research concluded that combining sound with either still or movi ng images resulted in
more learning than simply adding motion to still images (cited in CPB, 2004).
Motivation and Affective Learning
One of the greatest strengths of televisi on and video is the ability to communicate
with viewers on an emotional, as well as a c ognitive, level. Because of this ability to
reach viewers’ emotions, video can have a strong positive effect on both motivation and
affective learning. Not only are these impor tant learning components on their own, but
they can also play an important role in creating the conditions through which greater
cognitive learning can take place.

7 Marshall (2002) details three theories that explain how learning may occur via
well-selected video “based on th e ability of the entertaining me dia to engage the learner,
activate emotional states, initiate interest in a topic, and allow for absorption and processing of information” (p. 7). Arousal Theory deals with how communication
messages evoke varying degrees of generali zed emotional arousal and how concomitant
behavior can be affected while a person is in this state. S hort-Term Gratification Theory
deals with affective and motivational compone nts such as enthusiasm, perseverance and
concentration. Finally, Interest Stimulation Theory posits th at entertainment promotes
learning and creativity by sparking a student's in terest in and imagination about a topic.
The visual messages of multimedia are processed in a different part of the brain than that which processes textual and lingui stic learning, and the limbic system responds
to these pictures by triggering instinct, emo tion and impulse (Bergsma, 2002, as cited in
CPB, 2004). Memory is, in turn, strongly infl uenced by emotion, with the result that
educational video has a power ful ability to relay experi ence and influence cognitive
learning (Noble, 1983, as cited in CPB, 2004).

How does research support the use of video in the classroom?

In the era of No Child Left Behind, a ny educational initiativ e must result in
increased student achievement as measured by systematic, empirical research. Television
has been evaluated for over 50 years for its educational value, and an ever-increasing
body of research indicates that television a nd video are effective teaching tools, with
positive outcomes in both academic and affective learning. A survey of this research conducted in 2004 by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting concluded that “children’s

8viewing of educational television has been shown to support significant and lasting
learning gains” and that “a positive re lationship has been found between childhood
viewing of educational television and cogni tive performance at both preschooler and
college levels” (p. 2).
Early Literacy Development
The largest body of research has been conducted on the impact of educational
television and video on y oung children and their ea rly literacy skills.
Causal relationship between children’s viewing of Sesame Street (the most
extensively researched educational televisi on program) and their a cademic and cognitive
development has been documented for a period of over 35 years. Fisch (2005)
summarizes studies conducted since the early 1970s, which “provide powerful evidence
for the educational effectiveness of Sesame Street ” (p. 11). Among preschoolers, heavy
viewers of Sesame Street showed significantly greater gr owth in a variety of academic
skills and in school readiness. These effects ha ve long-term positive benefits for students,
as shown by a “recontact” study that found middle and high school students who had
watched Sesame Street and other educational TV as pres choolers had higher grades and
showed higher academic self-esteem that peers who had not watched educational
television (Anderson et al , 2001; Huston et al.; ci ted in Fisch, 2005).
A study on the impact of the early literacy program Between the Lions found that
kindergarteners who watched this program out performed their peers by nearly 4 to 1 on
specific program content, and that they were al so able to transfer this content to show
significantly improved growth in key early li teracy skills and overall reading ability
(Linebarger, 2000). A later study concluded th at watching the program, combined with
supporting classroom and at-home activities, helped low-income children, children in

9rural areas and children who sp eak English as a second langu age significantly outperform
control groups on several key reading skills (Prince, Grace, Linebarger, Atkinson & Huffman, 2002). In a study recently reported in the U.S. Department of Education’s What Works
Clearinghouse, the television program Arthur was shown to have a positive effect on the
language development of English language learners.
Other Studies
A variety of other studies have supported the use of vi deo with older students and
in a variety of content areas and so cial skills. Some of these include:
• A study by Rockman et al. (1996) of the academic impact of home and school
viewing of Bill Nye the Science Guy showed that students who watched the
program were able to provide more co mplete and complex explanations of
scientific concepts after viewing the s how. Additionally, the gaps in knowledge
base between boys and girls and between minority and majority students were
smaller and closer to parity after viewing the program.
• A study of the impact of Cyberchase on children’s problem-solving skills found
that viewers outperformed nonveiwers in solving problems and produced more
sophisticated solutions (Fisch, 2003).
• In two unrelated studies, the use of vide o to “anchor” instruction to a shared
classroom experience resulted in improve d vocabulary use, greater understanding
of plot and characterization and increase d ability to draw inferences based on
historical information (Barron, 1989).
• A six-week study on the use of instructi onal television with eighth grade students
found that students in the classes whic h included the television programming

10outperformed the control groups in test sc ores, writing assignments, in variety and
creativity of problem-solving skills, and in their engagement in class discussion
(Barnes, 1997).

How can video address the needs of special populations?

Video use is an effective educational tool for all students, but its positive effect on
special populations of students is gaining grea ter attention all the time. According to a
survey by the Corporation for Public Broad casting, these media are “highly valued as
teaching tools” and “seen as especially effec tive for reaching visual learners and special
populations” (CBP, 1997, p. 12). More than ha lf of teachers survey ed describe TV and
video as “very effective” for teaching stude nts with learning disabilities or economic
disadvantages. Denning summarizes the benefits of vi deo to a range of special student
populations:
Videos may help to promote learning in students with high visual orientation in
their learning styles. Video can also provide visually-c ompelling access to
information for many learners with lear ning difficulties who might miss learning
opportunities provided solely by print-based materials. In this respect, videos
provide important learni ng opportunities to students working in a second
language. (p.2)

As Barron (1989) argues, not only can vide o create learning c ontexts that would
not otherwise be accessible, “in some situations video is even superior to a field trip …
because the video can be replayed and reviewed as often as necessary” to ensure learning
by students with learning disa bilities or who are otherwise at-risk for poor school success
(p. 3).

11 There are numerous advantages for such “at-risk” students wh en instruction is
supplemented by the use of video:
First, [video-based contexts] provide rich sources of information with
opportunities to notice sensory images, dyna mic features, relevant issues, and
inherent problems. Second, they give st udents the ability to perceive dynamic
moving events and to more easily form ri ch mental models. This advantage is
particularly important for lower achiev ing students and for students with low
knowledge in the domain of interest. Thir d, video allows students to develop
skills of pattern recognition which are relate d to visual and auditory cues rather
than to events labeled by the teacher. In sum, video images are ideal for creating a
common experience for the teach er and learner that can be used for ‘anchoring’
new knowledge. (Bransford et al. cited in Barron, 1989, p. 3)

For students learning English as a sec ond language, video and film demonstrate
communicative language within a language environment and cultural context (Wood,
cited in Aiex, 1999). Video, especially film , provides a social context for English
language learners; it can be played either with the sound on, so that students hear the
language being spoken, or alternatively, with th e sound off, so that l earners can use their
own language skills to provide the dialog or narrative.

How can video support the development of 21st-century literacies?

Over the past decade, researchers have increasingly turned th eir attention to the
question of what “literacy” means in this era of rapidly expanding information and
communication technologies, particularly the Internet. What skills do students need to
navigate, interpret and assess information in a world no longer primarily dependent on
print as a means of communicating? These “new literacies” are an ev olving target, as new
technologies are appearing at a rapid pace, and identifying what literacy skills students
need to successfully “read” and use such tools as multimedia web pages, video editors,

12virtual worlds, etc., has pr ovoked a great deal of theori zing (see Semali, 2001; Coiro,
2003; Leu, Kinzer, Coiro & Cammack, 2004). An interesting pattern to emerge is re newed attention to literacies that were
identified long before the current explosion of digital media, but that are now being
reprioritized as critical 21
st-century skills. While the definitions—and the exact
boundaries drawn between literaci es—vary slightly, organizations such as the The Pacific
Bell/UCLA Initiative for 21st Century Literacies, The Ne w Media Consortium (NMC),
and NCREL (North Central Regional Educationa l Laboratory) all agree that the ability to
learn from and through multimedia like video remains central to functioning as a fully-
literate individual, and all prioritize visual and media literacies as crucial skills. The
PB/UCLA Initiative includes visual literacy a nd media literacy as two of its four central
skills, while the NMC’s New Media Liter acy & Learning Initia tive “centers on the
abilities and skills where aura l, visual and digital liter acy overlap” (NMC Projects).
NCREL’s enGauge framework for understanding 21st-century skills includes visual
literacy as a central component. Although students spend more than a quart er of each day engaged with various
forms of media, and television in particular (Rideout, Roberts & Fo ehr, 2005), research
indicates that mere exposure is not sufficient for students to acquire significant visual or
media literacy (Messaris, 2001). Rather, explic it instruction is required to equip young
people with the critical disc rimination skills they need.
Visual Literacy
When he coined the term “visual liter acy” in 1969, John Debes explained that it
“refers to a group of vision-competencies a human being can develop by seeing and at the
same time having and integrating other sens ory experience. The development of these

13competencies is fundamental to normal human learning” (cited in International Visual
Literacy Association, no date). In the concis e definition of the Visual Literacy Program
of Pomona College, visual literacy “means th e skills and learning needed to view visual
and audio-visual materials skeptically, critic ally and knowledgably” (Stonehill, no date).
Teaching students to become visually literat e implies perceiving video in the classroom
not merely as a conveyor of content knowle dge, but also as a l earning object productive
of its own visual meanings. In a study of elementary students in Australia, Callow (2006) concluded that
students’ intuitive understanding of such visual elements as color, salience and layout
needed to be scaffolded through explicit in struction: while “many students have some
understanding of visual featur es, …this is not developed into a richer systematic
understanding, where similar concepts might be transferred to other lit eracy tasks.” In his
review of the relevant lite rature, Callow found a lack of substantial research and
documentation of “both the metalanguage of vi sual texts and the pedagogy for teaching
about them,” indicating that this is an area where fu rther work is required.
Teaching students to become visually-lit erate consumers of media also develops
their abilities to produce thei r own multimedia objects, lite rate as both “readers” and
“writers” in a visual language . While historically, research and resources have been more
focused on the development of print literacy, the development of visual literacy is in fact
a means of supporting more traditionally de fined literacy: the app lication of visual
literacy skills will assist students not only “[to] critique their own visual products, but
also … to interrogate other texts to explore intended audience, purpose, emotional effect
and ideological positions” (New London Group, cited in Callow, 2006). “Although visual

14literacy is surely valuable for its own sa ke, its potential broader ramifications lend
additional urgency to the argument for vi sual education” (M essaris, 2001).
Media Literacy
As with visual literacy, media literacy expands the concept of what constitutes a
“text” to include aural and visual messages. As defined by the Center for Media Literacy,
media literacy is a 21st century approach to educati on [that] provides a framework
to access, analyze, evaluate and create me ssages in a variety of forms. [It] builds
an understanding of the role of media in society, as well as essential skills of
inquiry and self-expression necessary fo r citizens of a democracy. (Thoman &
Jolls, 2005)

Television literacy, though sometimes broken out as a separate literacy (Semali, 2001), is
more commonly recognized as a critical component of the broader media literacy
(PB/UCLA, no date). Video tec hnology is an essential tool for bringing a wide range of
multimedia messages into the classroom where they can be analyzed and evaluated in a shared learning experience. Media literacy instruction has been s hown to have a posi tive correlation with
demonstrable academic improvement in co re subject areas. In a comparison study
between two 11
th-grade English classes, one of whic h incorporated extensive critical
analysis of print, audio and visual medi a, researchers found th at the media literacy
instruction resulted in improved reading and wr iting skills across all forms of text (Hobbs
& Frost, 2003). Additionally, preliminary resu lts from a three-year study of a new media-
literacy program funded by the U.S. Department of Education indicate that media literacy
can play an important role in improving stude nt performance in core-curriculum subjects
(Gregorian, 2006).

15 Although media literacy is not yet a widely-implemented component of standard
school curriculum, it is, in the words of Da vid Martison (2004), “ no longer a curriculum
option”:
If schools are to meet the challenges presented during this revolutionary
postmodern age of communication, the entire educational establishment…must be
committed to responding in an anticipatory and creative manner. A commitment
to aiding the development of a media-lite rate population must become a central
priority. (p. 158)

How is video best used in the classroom?
Successful and productive school use of television and video has increased
dramatically over the last decades. As th e technology continues to grow both more
sophisticated and more user-friendly, teach ers continue to become more adept at
integrating these media into their instructi on. Over a period of 20 years, the Corporation
for Public Broadcasting conducted surveys of cl assroom uses of television and video that
reveal increased use of and satisfaction with video in the classroom. In the most recent
survey, 92% of teachers said that using TV a nd video helped them teach more effectively,
and 88% said that “it enable[d] them to be more creative” in the cl assroom (CPB, 1997).
As with all educational technologies, the value of video relies on how it is
implemented in the classroom. Reviews and meta -analysis of the research indicates that
positive learning and affective outcomes are greatly enhanced and extended when the video is integrated into the rest of th e lesson (CPB, 2004; Mares, 1996). Effectively
integrating video into classroom instruction involves preparation and activities before,
during and after viewing (Reeves, 2001; Rogow, 1997; National Teacher Training
Institute, undated).
Purpose and Expectations for Viewing

16 Teachers can prepare for using video by pr eviewing the content, establishing clear
purposes for viewing and deciding what sele ctions will best support that purpose. The
value of video “is highly correlated to its integration within th e curriculum—in other
words, how closely the content fits into th e overall instructiona l sequence” (CPB, 2004,
p. 11). For instance, video may be used at th e beginning of a unit to pique interest, during
a unit or lesson to bring demonstrations into the classroom that might not otherwise be
possible, or as a means of revi ewing or reinforcing content.
Supporting students to engage with video as active learners requires creating the
right setting for such learning to occur. Wh ile this may seem an obvious truism, a six-
year study of mass media usage in two Massach usetts school district s reveals that film
and video are still often used for non-optimal purposes, including filling time, keeping
students quiet, as a break from learning or as a reward for good behavior (Hobbs, 2006).
Using video as “edutainment” in this wa y reinforces “the passive viewing and
unquestioning acceptance of received material that accompanies growing up in a video environment” (Paris, 1997, p. 2). Setting expectations for students an d providing a context for the activity,
beneficial with any learning tasks, may be es pecially crucial for viewing of video with
content that is highly emotionally-charged. Denning (no date) fears that without proper
instructional context and guidance, “video, li ke television, may condi tion viewers to be
insensitive or to feel helpless in the c ontext” of events being watched (p. 1).
Selecting Video Content
Selecting effective video is an essentia l component of integrating this medium
into practice and realizing the promise of mu ltimedia in the classroom. In reviewing the
historical, political and economic contexts of each major classroom technology over the

17past century, Fabos (2001) concludes that one of the most significant factors in the
success or failure of an educational technology is the quality of the content, rather than
the technology itself. Selecting video that ha s strong, visually-rich ed ucational content is
a critical element for maximizing the effectiveness of video. Video is a visual medium, and optimal use capitalizes on the strengths of its
visual material. This includes providing visual demonstrations or evidence, dramatizing
events and concepts, and appealing to the em otions. Educational vide o with instructional
strategies and cognitive mode ling traits embedded in the video itself can aid in student
comprehension. Examples range from zooming in on details, to providing titles and other
attention-drawing graphics, to animations. Videos with closed captioning can further
promote learners’ reading fluency an d motivation to read (Lin, 2003).
Denning (no date) offers the following suggestions of positives to look for when evaluating videos:
• Variation in the presentation
• Humor
• Age-appropriate narration and develo pmentally-appropriate thinking skills
• Chunking, or organizat ion in sections
• Provision of meaningful examples
• Posing of open-ended questions
• Opportunities for students to carry out individual thinking
• Opportunities for extension
• Teacher guides outlining possibilities for previewing or extension activities.

Video becomes less effective if the selections shown depe nd too closely on non-visual
elements of video and thus exploit the wea knesses of the medium by presenting abstract
and non-visual information, relying too much on a “talking heads” style of conveying
information or presenting inte llectual arguments not backed up with physical evidence
(Hampe, 2006). Since video conveys informati on that is both audito ry and visual, these
two modes must work in concert for video to be most effective. Overly-dramatic sound

18tracks, visuals and narration th at are not supportive of one a nother, and excessive use of
still frames or slides can all detract from the educational message.
New Technologies: The Age of Video-on-Demand

In 1997, a survey by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting indicated that a
growing number of teachers (93 %) used TV programming on tape all or most of the time,
rather than relying on live television, for th e ease and benefits of videotape medium,
including convenience, the ability to show the same tape to multiple sections of a class
and greater control over how th e material is presented. Today, video continues to have
“significant staying power” in classrooms, although with new technology, “video is
finding its way into schools through different paths,” according to market research by
Grunwald Associates (Branigan, 2005). One of the most exciting of thos e new paths is Video-on-Demand (VOD)
systems, tools that make unprecedented numbe rs of videos available to classroom
teachers exactly when and as they want them . The videos are digitized, then stored on a
computer server, where they can be accesse d at any time by teachers or students. This
may be a local server, housed at either an individual school or district, and accessed
through the school network. Altern atively, the content may be stored at a non-local site
and streamed over the Intern et, though this may sometimes overload the available
bandwidth, causing the video to be jerky. Video-on-Demand does away with many of the inconveniences of playing video
in either cassette or DVD form: locating the de sired content in hard copy in a library or
for purchase, reserving that title and the equi pment needed to play it on, cuing it up prior

19to class or between classes, switching hard copies to change to a new program, etc.
Instead, teachers can search for the content they need on any netw orked computer, find
exactly the content they need from a variety of sources and play it at their convenience,
either as part of a planned multimedia lesson or by seizing the “teachable moment.” Digital delivery of video allows for far greater flexibility of searching than is possible with hard copy. Because the content is stored digitally, it can be indexed and
metatagged by educators to provide searchab le indexes of every program by not only
showing summaries, but also key curricular concepts, making it possible to search by
keyword for the exact content contained with in a video or video segment. Using a VOD
system, teachers can easily locate targeted content, searching by keyword, subject area or
even state educational standards. As Denning (no date) points out, one of th e best ways of avoiding what he terms
“television response,” or passive consumption of media, is to exploit the ability of video
to be shown in short, relevant segments and to use segments from multiple programs.
However, editing together a precise sequence of video clips onto one vi deo cassette, as he
suggests, can be a cumbersome and time-c onsuming process when using only a video
recorder. Digital video is desi gned to facilitate this proce ss, making it an easy and quick
process to locate, segment and arrange clips to suit the exact needs of a particular lesson.
In fact, the ability of VOD systems to assist teachers in locating and presenting
short, targeted clips of no more than two to five minutes in lengt h dovetails exactly with
expert recommendations for vide o usage: “Most educational e xperts agree that video is
best shown in short segments so as to maximize learners’ concentration” (Shephard,
2003, p. 296). Video-on-Demand facilitates the pr ocess of embedding video, or threading
brief segments throughout a lesson, a strategy beginning to be supporte d by research (for

20example, see Chambers, Cheung, Madden, Slavin & Gifford, 2006). Digital delivery
frees classroom practice so that students can control their own watching of clips
supporting a lesson, repeating a nd reviewing as needed for comprehension. In one study
of two science classrooms, re searchers found that the use of digital clips significantly
promoted learning in three critical ways:
Firstly, the computer environment afforded student control of the pacing of the
POE [predict-observe-explain ] tasks…[and] also contri buted to a high level of
ownership of responses….Secondly, the co mputer-based digital clips afforded
new opportunities for students in the cruc ial observation phase of the POE process
by providing a refined tool for students to make detailed observations of events,
enhancing the quality of observations on their predictions….Th irdly, the real-life
physical settings depicted in the video clip s were interesting and relevant for the
students and helped them to feel comf ortable and confident in voicing their
opinions…(Kearney, 2002)

Collecting clips into playlists or integrating them into a multimedia lesson plan makes the
creation of such learning experiences eas ier than it has ever been before.
It is clear that this new technology op ens many new opportunities for learning that
are just beginning to be explored. As the documented strengths of film, television and
video are made more and more availabl e and accessible through Video-on-Demand
systems, the potential for learning an d exploration opens up before us.

21WORKS CITED

Aiex, N.K. (1988). Using film, video, and TV in the classroom. ERIC Digest, No 11.
Bloomington, IN: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills.
Aiex, N.K. (1999). Mass media use in the classroom. ERIC Di gest D147. Bloomington,
IN: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills.
Barnes, B., ed. (1997). The power of classroom TV: A marketing and advocacy document
for the use of classroom television professionals. NETA Center fo r Instructional
Communications. October 1997. Available:
http://www.scetv.org/k12/classroom%20tv.htm
Barron, L. (1989). Enhancing learning in at -risk students: Applications of video
technology. ERIC Digest. Bloomington, IN : ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and
Communication Skills.
Branigan, C. (2005). Technological, societ al factors are driving the video trend. e-School
News. Available:
http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/PFshowstory.cfm?ArticleID=5598
Brualdi, A.C. (1996). Multiple intellig ences: Gardner’s theory. ERIC Digest.
Bloomington, IN: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills.
Callow, J. (2003). Talking about visual texts with students. Reading Online, 6(8). April
2003. Available:
http://www.readingonline.org/articles/a rt_index.asp?HREF=callow/index.html
Chambers, B., Cheung, A., Madden, N.A., Slavin, R.E. & Gifford, G. (2006).
Achievement effects of embedded multim edia in a Success for All reading
program. Journal of Educational Psychology 98(1) , pp. 232-237.
Coiro, J.L. (2003). Reading comprehension on the Internet: Expa nding our understanding
of reading comprehension to encompass new literacies. The Reading Teacher.
February 2003. Available: http:// www.readingonline.org/electronic/RT/2-
03_column/index.html
Corporation for Public Broadcasting. (1997). Study of school uses of television and video.
1996-1997 School year summary report. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 413 879)
Corporation for Public Broadcasting. (2004). Television goes to school: The impact of
video on student learning in formal education. Available:
http://www.cpb.org/stations/reports/tvgoestoschool/
Denning, David. (no date). Video in theory and practice: Issues for classroom use and
teacher video evaluation. Available:
http://www.ebiomedia.com/downloads/VidPM.pdf
Fabos, B. (2001). Media in the classroom: An alternative history. Paper presented at the
annual conference of the American Educa tion Research Association, Seattle, WA.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 454 850)

22Fisch, S.M. (2003). The impact of Cyberchase on children’s mathematical problem
solving: Cyberchase Season 2 executive summary. Teaneck, NJ: MediaKidz
Research & Consulting.
Fisch, S.M. (2005). Children’s learning from television. TelevIZIon, 18, pp. 10-14.
Gardner, H. (2006). Multiple Intelligences, New Horizons. New York: Basic Books.
Gregorian, N. (2006). Eye on Research: Media literacy & core curriculum. Threshold.
Winter 2006. pp. 5-7.
Hampe, B. (2006). Four ways video can help—and three ways it can’t. e-School news.
Available: http://www.eschoolnews.com /news/PFshowstory.cfm?ArticleID=1354
Hobbs, R. & Frost, R. (2003). Measuring th e acquisition of medi a-literacy skills. Reading
Research Quarterly, 38(3). pp. 330-355.
Hobbs, R. (2006). Non-optimal uses of video in the classroom. Learning, Media &
Technology, 31(1). March 2006. pp. 35-50.
Hovland, C.I., Lumsdaine, A.A. & Sheffield, F.D. (1949). Experiments on mass
communication. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
International Visual Liter acy Association. (no date). What is “visual literacy”?
Available: http://www.ivla.org/ org_what_vis_lit.htm#definition
Kearney, M. (2002). Using digital video to enhance authentic technology-mediated
learning in science classrooms. Paper presented at the Australian Computers in
Education Conference, Hobart. Availabl e: http://www.tasite.tas.edu.au/acec2002
Kozma, R.B. (1991) Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), pp.
179-212.
Leu, D. J., Jr. Kinzer, C.K., Coiro, J.L. & Cammack, D.W. (2004). Toward a theory of
new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and
communication technologies. In R. B. Ruddell & N. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical
models and processes of reading, 5th edition. Available:
http://www.readingonline.or g/newliteracies/leu/
Lin, C.-H. (2003). Literacy instruction th rough communicative and visual arts. ERIC
Digest, No 186. Bloomington, IN: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and
Communication Skills.
Linebarger, D.L. (2002). Summative evaluation of Between the Lions : A final report to
WGBH Educational Foundation. Available:
http://pbskids.org/lions/parentste achers/program/research/pdf/BTL-
Summative.pdf
Mares, M.-L. (1996). Positive effects of television on social behavior: A meta-analysis.
Annenburg Public Policy Center Repor t Series, No. 3. Philadelphia, PA:
University of Pennsylvania.
Marshall, J.M. (2002). Learning with tec hnology: Evidence that technology can, and
does, support learning. White paper prep ared for Cable in the Classroom.
Martinson, D.L. (2004). Media literacy edu cation: No longer a curriculum option. The
Educational Forum, 68, pp. 154-160.

23Mayer, R.E. (2001). Multimedia learning . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Messaris, P. (2001). New literacies in action: Visual education. Reading Online, 4(7) .
February 2001. Available:
http://www.readingonline.org/ newliteracies/lit_index.a sp?HREF=/newliteracies/a
ction/messaris/index.html
Miller, P. (2001). Learning styles: Multimedia of the mind. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 451 140)
National Teacher Training Institute. (no date). NTTI video utilization strategies.
Available: http://www.thirteen.org/ edonline/ntti/resources/video2.html
NCREL. (2002). enGauge : 21st century skills: Digital literacies for a digital age. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Se rvice No. ED 463 753)
New Media Consortium. (2005). A global imperative: The report of the 21st century
literacy summit. Available: http://nmc.org/pr ojects/literacy/index.shtml
Pacific Bell/UCLA Initiative for the 21st Century. (no date). Literacies at the end of the
20th century. Available: http://www/ne wliteracies.gseis.ucla.edu
Prince, D.L., Grace, C., Linebarger, D. L., Atkinson, R., Huffman, J.D. (2002). Between
the Lions : Mississippi Literacy In itiative final report. Available:
http://pbskids.org/lions/parentste achers/program/research/pdf/BTL-
Mississippi.pdf
Pruitt, C. (2005). The next d ecade of educational media. Digital Divide Network. May 5,
2005. Available: http://www.digitaldivid e.net/articles/view .php?ArticleID=372
Rideout, V., Roberts, D.F. & Foehr, U.G. (2005). Generation M: Media in the lives of 18-
18 year-olds. Executive Summary. Kaiser Family Foundation Study. Available:
http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/ Executive-Summary-Generation-M-Media-
in-the-Lives-of-8-18-Year-olds.pdf
Rockman et al. (1996). Evaluation of Bill Nye the Science Guy television series and
outreach: Executive summary. San Francisco, CA: Author.
Semali, L.M. (2001). Defining new li teracies in curri cular practice. Reading Online .
November 2001. Available: http://www.readingonline.org/new
literacies/semali1/index.html
Shephard, K. (2003). Questioning, promoting an d evaluating the use of streaming video
to support student learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3), pp.
295-308.
Silverman, F. (2006). Learning styles. District Administration. September 2006, pp. 70-
71.
Stonehill, B. (no date). What is visual literacy?. Claremont, CA: The On-Line Visual
Literacy Project. Available:
http://www.pomona.edu/Academics/cour serelated/classprojects/Visual-
lit/intro/intro.html

24Thoman, E. & Jolls, T. (2005). Literacy for the 21st century: An overview & orientation
guide to media literacy education. Center for Media Literacy. Available:
http://www.medialit.org/r eading_room/article540.html
WWC Intervention Report. (2006). English language learners: Arthur . What Works
Clearinghouse. September 14, 2006.