Can students evaluate scientific YouTube videos? Examining students' strategies and criteria for evaluating videos versus webpages on climate change.
Background: YouTube is widely used for learning about scientific issues in and out of school. However, much of the scientific information on YouTube is inaccurate. Prior studies have mostly focused on how students evaluate textual online information sources and have not yet systematically examined h...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol. 39; no. 2; pp. 558 - 578 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Apr2023
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=162203184&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 162203184 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 02664909 6M1 jtl: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning issn: 02664909 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Apr2023 vid: 39 iid: 2 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell place: Malden, Massachusetts artinfo: ui: 162203184 160663604 162203184 162203184 10.1111/jcal.12762 162203184 ppf: 558 ppct: 20 formats: tig: atl: Can students evaluate scientific YouTube videos? Examining students' strategies and criteria for evaluating videos versus webpages on climate change. aug: au: Abed, Fayez Barzilai, Sarit affil: Faculty of Education, Department of Learning and Instructional Sciences, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel sug: subj: Social Media Videorecording Evaluation World Wide Web Science Students, Middle School Climate Change Human Comparative Studies Judgment Misinformation Experimental Studies Israel Adolescence Male Female Descriptive Statistics Interrater Reliability Quantitative Studies Epistemology Adolescent: 13-18 years Male Female ab: Background: YouTube is widely used for learning about scientific issues in and out of school. However, much of the scientific information on YouTube is inaccurate. Prior studies have mostly focused on how students evaluate textual online information sources and have not yet systematically examined how they evaluate authentic scientific YouTube videos. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to examine how students evaluate authentic scientific YouTube videos in comparison to scientific webpages. Methods: Eighth grade students ranked six YouTube videos on the topic of climate change, justified their rankings, and responded to metacognitive prompts designed to elicit their evaluation criteria and strategies. Students also responded to a parallel webpage evaluation measure. We analysed and compared students' evaluation strategies and criteria. We also examined which evaluation criteria predict students' judgments of YouTube video quality. Results and Conclusions: Students predominantly relied on evaluation of video content, focusing mainly on criteria of communicative quality and explanation quality. Students tended to neglect source expertise and information validity criteria. Students evaluated videos mostly similarly to how they evaluated webpages. However, affective experiences played a greater role in video evaluation; whereas task relevance and verbal quality played a smaller role. Students' evaluation criteria predicted their judgments of video quality. Implications: The findings suggest that students are unprepared for critically evaluating scientific YouTube videos and that digital information literacy instruction should address this gap. The study also identifies some unique challenges of video evaluation that educators should attend to. Lay Description: What is already known about this topic: Students often use YouTube for learning about scientific issues.However, much of the scientific information on YouTube is inaccurate.Prior studies have found that students can find it difficult to evaluate scientific websites.Little is known about how students evaluate scientific YouTube videos. What this paper adds: Students mostly focused whether the videos include good explanations and if they are well‐designed.Students tended to ignore the sources of the videos and the accuracy of the information.Students evaluated videos mostly similarly to how they evaluated webpages.However, emotional experiences played a greater role in video evaluation compared to webpage evaluation; whereas the content played a smaller role. Implications for practice and/or policy: The findings suggest that students are unprepared for critically evaluating scientific YouTube videos.Digital information literacy instruction should also focus on teaching video evaluation. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|