Video replacing static media (e.g., text) benefits learning more than video replacing a teacher¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 When video replaced static media the pooled effect was g = 0.51, significantly larger than when video replaced a teacher (g = 0.18). → Noetel 2021

Evidence¶

Noetel 2021¶

Noetel, M., Griffith, S., Delaney, O., Sanders, T., Parker, P., del Pozo Cruz, B., & Lonsdale, C. (2021). Video Improves Learning in Higher Education: A Systematic Review. Review of Educational Research, 91(2), 204–236. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654321990713

q3 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r3

Moderation analysis within the replacement meta-analysis comparing video against static media versus against a teacher. The review reports video "was significantly more effective (g = 0.51, 95% CI [0.27, 0.75])" against static media than against a teacher (g = 0.18).

"the comparison condition was a significant moderator (R22 = 0.00, R32 = 0.17, p = 0.03): when video replaced static media (e.g., text) it was significantly more effective (g = 0.51, 95% CI [0.27, 0.75], n = 45, k = 27) than when video replaced a teacher (g = 0.18, 95% CI [0.02, 0.34], n = 121, k = 58)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Video is more effective for teaching skills than for transmitting knowledge — related
• Replacing existing teaching with video produces small improvements in student learning in higher education (g = 0.28) — a broader claim this one bears on
• Video benefits learning only when its interactivity matches or exceeds the comparison condition — related
• Adding supplementary video to existing teaching produces strong learning benefits (g = 0.88) — related
• Evidence of publication bias exists, but the pooled video effects are robust to it — related