Online tutoring is made possible by using videos to replace or supplement face to face services. The purpose of this research was to examine student reactions to the use of lecture capture technology in a university tutoring setting and to assess student knowledge of some features of Tegrity lecture capture software. A survey was administered to traditional age undergraduates (N = 272; mostly white females) and the results indicate viewing of videos was primarily off campus. Applying a technology acceptance model, the respondents reported the software was generally easy to use though they expressed a lack of familiarity of some features. Human resource development and adult educators, who provide or use tutoring services may incorporate the findings in development of videos. Recommendations for video users and developers and software vendors are included as well as suggestions for future research.
Aalto–KorteK., KurimoR., LaitinenJ., PesonenM., TakalaE., & PoutanenM. (2016). Continuing vocational training for teachers in beauty and hair care: Teachers act as active developers of their work and engage in transferring good practices to their students. International Academy of Technology, Education and Development 2016 Proceedings, pp. 2386–2394, International Academy of Technology, Education and Development. doi:10.21125/iceri.2016.0152
2.
AnzaiY., & SimonH. A. (1979). The theory of learning by doing. Psychological Review, 86(2), 124.
3.
BaerW. O., ChengQ., McGlownC., GongY., CaiZ., & GraesserA. C. (2016). Using virtual agents to deliver lessons in reading comprehension to struggling adult learners. In TraumD., SwartoutW., KhooshabehP., KoppS., SchererS., & LeuskiA. (Eds.), 16th International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science Los Angeles, CA (pp. 516–518). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978–3–319–47665–0
BelzerA. (Ed.). (2007). Toward defining and improving quality in adult basic education. NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
6.
BlewittJ. (2005). Problem–based learning. In WilsonJ. (Ed.), Human Resource Development (2nd ed., pp. 365–379). Sterling, VA: Kogan Page.
7.
BrechtH. (2012). Learning from online video lectures. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 11(1), 227–250.
8.
BrechtH., & OgilbyS. (2008). Enabling a comprehensive teaching strategy: Video lectures. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 7(1), 71–86.
9.
BrusilovskyP. (2000). Adaptive hypermedia: From intelligent tutoring systems to web–based education. Paper presented at the Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Retrieved from http://www.pitt.edu/∼peterb/papers/ITS00inv.html
10.
BurnsH., LuckhardtC. A., ParlettJ. W., & RedfieldC. L. (2014). Intelligent tutoring systems: Evolutions in design. New York: Psychology Press.
CatlingC., WhiteH., CumminsA., & HoganR. (2014, May). The virtual tutor project: A student–friendly guide to clinical skills. Clinical simulation in nursing, 10(5), e277–e280. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2014.01.005
14.
CheungB., HuiL., ZhangJ., & YiuS. M. (2003). SmartTutor: An intelligent tutoring system in web–based adult education. The Journal of Systems and Software, 68, 11–25. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0164–1212(02)00133–4
15.
ChiM. T. (2009). Active–constructive–interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 73–105.
16.
ChiM. T. (2013). Learning from observing an expert's demonstration, explanations, and dialogues. In StaszewskiJ.J. (Ed.). Expertise and Skill Acquisition: The Impact of William G. Chase. New York: Psychology Press.
CohenP. A., KulikJ. A., & KulikC.C. (1982). Educational outcomes of tutoring: A meta–analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19(2), 237–248. doi: https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312019002237
19.
ColvinJ. W. (2015). Peer mentoring and tutoring in higher education. In LiM. & ZhaoY. (Eds.), Exploring Learning & Teaching in High Education (pp. 207–229). NY: Springer. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978–3–642–55352–3
20.
CulpK. M., HoneyM., & MandinachE. (2005). A retrospective on twenty years of education technology policy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(3), 279–307.
21.
D'AbateC., EddyE. R., & TannenbaunS. I. (2003, December). What's in a name? A literature–based approach to understanding mentoring, coaching, and other constructs that describe developmental interactions. Human Resource Development Review, 2(4), 360–384. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484303255033
22.
DavisF. D. (1989, September). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
23.
DeyE. L., BurnH. E., & GerdesD. (2009, June). Bringing the classroom to the web: Effects of using new technologies to capture and deliver lectures. Research in Higher Education, 50(4), 377–393.
24.
EntwistleN. (Ed.). (1990). Handbook of educational ideas and practices. NY: Routledge.
25.
EvansM. J., & MooreJ. S. (2013). Peer tutoring with the aid of the internet. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(1), 144–155.
26.
GardnerR., NobelM. M., HesslerT., YawnC. D., & HeronT. E. (2007). Tutoring system innovations past practice to future prototypes. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43(2), 71–81.
27.
GrasserA.C., RusV., & HuX. (2017). Instruction based on tutoring. In MayerR. E. & AlexanderP. A. (Eds.), Handbook of research and learning and instruction (pp. 460–483). New York: Routledge.
28.
GuoP. J., KimJ., & RubinR. (2014). How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC videos. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the First ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale Conference, 41–50.
29.
HeY., SwensonS., & LentsN. (2012). Online video tutorials increase learning of difficult concepts in an undergraduate analytical chemistry course. Journal of Chemical Education, 89(9), 1128–1132.
30.
HenleyI. M. A. (2016). Aviation education and training: Adult learning principles and teaching strategies. NY: Routledge.
31.
IbarzT. (2005). Multilingual and multicultural HRD. In WilsonJ. (Ed.), Human Resource Development (2nd ed., pp. 276–298). Sterling, VA: Kogan Page.
32.
JacobsG. E., CastekJ., PizzolatoA., RederS., & PendellK. (2014). Multiliteracies: Production and consumption a closer look at adult digital literacy acquisition. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57(8), 624–627. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.293
33.
KetamoH. (2014, June). Learning fingerprint: Adaptive tutoring for MOOCs. In ViteliJ. & LeikomaaM. (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2014. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/147812
34.
KulikC. C., & KulikJ. A. (1991). Effectiveness of computer–based instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 7(1), 75–94.
35.
KulikC. C., KulikJ. A., & ShwalbB. J. (1986). The effectiveness of computer–based adult education: A meta–analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2(2), 235–252.
36.
LageM. J. & PlattG. (2000, Winter). The internet and the inverted classroom, The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1183335
37.
LageM. J. & PlattG. & TregliaM. (2000, Winter) Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment, The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30–43.
38.
LinL. C. (2016). Student's involvement and community support for service engagement in online tutoring. Journal of Educational Media & Media Services, 53(2), 245–268. doi: https://doi.org/10.6120/JoEMLS
39.
MarchandJ., PearsonM. L., & AlbonS. P. (2014). Student and faculty member perspectives on lecture capture in pharmacy education. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 78(4).
MayerR. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
42.
MerrillD. C., ReiserB. J., RanneyM., & TraftonJ. G. (1992). Effective tutoring techniques: A comparison of human tutors and intelligent tutoring systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(3), 277–305.
MuldnerK., LamR., & ChiM. T. (2014). Comparing learning from observing and from human tutoring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 69.
45.
MullerD. A., SharmaM. D., EklundJ., & ReimannP. (2007). Conceptual change through vicarious learning in an authentic physics setting. Instructional Science, 35(6), 519–533.
46.
MuukkonenH., LakkalaM., & HakkarainenK. (2005). Technology–mediation and tutoring: How do they shape progressive inquiry discourse?The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(4), 527–565.
47.
NultyD. D. (2008). The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: What can be done?Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(3), 301–314.
48.
PiccoliG., AhmadR., & IvesB. (2001). Web–based virtual learning environments: A research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training. MIS Quarterly, 25(4), 401–426.
49.
RabournK. E., ShoupR., & BrckaLorenzA. (2015, May). Barriers in returning to learning: Engagement and support of adult learners. Paper presented at the Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research, Denver, CO.
50.
SchmalzN. A., EscovedoC., HarrisonD.LentzJ., StahlL., ThakurS., ParkerN., & StarkE. (2016, April). A longitudinal study of the utility and efficacy of a peer–based anatomy tutoring program for first year medical students: 22011–2015. Journal of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, 30(1), 565.3.
51.
SeattlerP. (1990). The evolution of American educational technology. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
52.
SchillingK. (2009). The impact of multimedia course enhancements on student learning outcomes. Journal of Education for Library & Information Science, 50(4), 214–225.
SpenceD. (2007, February). Traditional and online student reactions to the video tutor component of MyMathLab. In Proceedings of the international conference on technology in collegiate mathematics, 19, 192–196.
55.
StephensM. D. & RockerickG. W. (1972). The training of adult education tutors. Irish Journal of Education, vi (1), 31–44.
56.
SugarW., BrownA. & LuterbachK.Examining the anatomy of a screencast: Uncovering common elements and instructional strategies. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Education, 11(3), 1–19. October 2010
57.
SwartJ., MannC., BrownS., & PriceA. (2005). Human resource development strategy and tactics. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth–Heinemann.
58.
ToppingK. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276.
59.
TuckerB. (2012, Winter). The flipped classroom, Education Next, 12(1), 2.
VenkateshV., & DavisF. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.
62.
VenkateshV., ThongJ. Y., & XuX. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178.
63.
WongK., NegreirosJ., & NevesA. (2016, December). Computer literacy teaching using peer–tutoring: The Macao, China, experience. In VopavaJ., DoudaV., KratochvilR., & KoneckiM. (Eds.) Proceedings of MAC–ETL 2016 (pp. 10–17). Prague, Czechia: Czech Technical University.
64.
WoodD., & WoodH. (1996). Vygotsky, tutoring and learning. Oxford Review of Education, 22(1), 5–16.
65.
Zawacki–RichterO., RobkenH., Ehrenspeck–KolasaY., & von OssietzkyC. (2014). Research areas in adult and continuing education. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 20(1), 68–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7227/JACE.20.1.5
