Interactive Video Use in Nursing Education

Afza.Malik GDA

Nursing Education and Effectiveness of Interactive Video

Interactive Video Use in Nursing Education

Research on Interactive Video,Interactive Video Use in Nursing Education,Interactive Videos for Continue Nursing Education,Outcomes of Using  Interactive Videos,Conflicting Results,Recommendations for Nursing Researchers,Deficiencies Needs to Improve.

Research on Interactive Video

    Interactive video (IAV) is defined as a technology in which a video program is under the control of a computer, with user choices affecting program branching. The video source for IAV was videotape in early days of development, but current applications use the videodisk.

Interactive Video Use in Nursing Education

    Development of IAV programs for nursing education began in the early 1980s, and commercially produced programs appeared in 1989. However, the body of research in this area is relatively small, and many studies were dissertations. 

    Studies generally fall into six categories: cost-effectiveness, expert and us age surveys, effectiveness, learning in groups, learner attributes, and strategies to facilitate learning.

Interactive Videos for Continue Nursing Education

    Parker examined a large-scale IAV project initiated in 1981 to provide continuing education for nurses scattered across 30 different locations in Florida. She reported significant savings in time and money when IAV was compared with traditional workshops.

    In 1987, Rizzolo solicited experts to participate in a three round Delphi study. Twelve significant factors that were impeding the development of new programs in nursing were identified. Participants were able to clearly identify the content they wanted in IAV programs, especially applications for simulations. 

    They agreed on the benefits of IAV for students but were less certain about how it might affect faculty roles. Conservative predictions were made about how technology might change nursing education in the future.

Outcomes of Using Interactive Videos

    Two surveys examined the status of interactive video in nursing education. In 1989, Clark surveyed 504 BSN programs. Of the 369 respondents, 66 reported that they were using IAV. 

    One year later Cambre and Castner conducted a study funded by FITNE, Inc. Of the 1,120 schools that responded, 207 were using IAV. Visits and phone interviews revealed positive attitudes about IAV but limited integration into the curriculum.

Several early studies compared IAV to another form of instruction, usually a linear videotape or lecture. Most found no significant differences in achievement. 

    A few reported other positive findings attributable to IAV programs such as higher scores on retention, more positive attitudes toward content, or savings in time required to accomplish objectives. 

    Weiner et al. found that students who completed an IAV on labor and delivery, along with clinical experience, had significantly greater clinical confidence and learning than those who had only clinical experience. 

    Witt Stadt found no difference in confidence levels of nurses who used an interactive video program on infusion pumps as compared to those who learned the material in lecture. Froman et al. found that the sequence of lecture followed by IAV produced the largest gains in self-efficiency by students learning IV procedures.

    Middlemiss evaluated IAV as a teaching strategy to help students develop ethical decision-making skills. Students wrote about and analyzed an ethical dilemma, then completed an IAV program and analyzed the event again. She found that students focused more on emotions in their first analysis and used a rational approach after completing the JAV program.

Conflicting Results

    Conflicting results were reported in studies of students using IAV in groups. Rizzolo (1994) compared the pre- and post-test scores of students who worked though case study simulations in a large classroom situation to those who worked independently. 

    Although both achieved significant increases in scores, the classroom group scored significantly higher on the posttest. Garcia's study used one case from the same IAV program and found no significant differences among students working individually, in groups of 2 or 3, and in groups of 10 to 12.

    Battista Calderone studied three groups who worked through an IAV tutorial. Some worked individually, some in groups of 2 or 3, the rest in groups of 7 to 10

    Results revealed no significant differences in learning. and attitude. Moyer (1996) audiotaped students in groups of two and four as they worked through six IAV programs and also had every student write journal entries. Content analysis revealed more problem solving behaviors in the tetrad groups. 

    Most felt the group experience was not as beneficial for those who learned more slowly nor for content like ethical decision making, particularly when a group member was very opinionated. 

    Several studies examined the interaction between learner attributes and achievement or attitudes. Glavin-Spichs examined field dependence, and Hasset studied psychological type. Neither found significant differences.

    Billings and Cobb evaluated the effects of learning style preferences, attitude, and GPA on learner achievement. The strongest predictor was attitude toward computer based instruction. 

    In a later study, Billings assessed student learning style and attitude toward IAV instruction, then students worked through an IAV program either in a group or alone, as they wished. Students who studied in a group reported greater comfort, but there was no significant difference in learning outcomes.

    Yoder's (1994) study measured preferred learning style, then randomly assigned students to IAV or linear videotape instruction. Students who preferred to learn through active experimenting learned better with IAV; those who preferred to learn by reflective observing scored higher after learning with linear videotape.

    Most of the research on interactive video has implications for newer multimedia formats such as CD-ROM and interactive offerings on the World Wide Web. It seems clear that well-designed programs can teach content just as well if not better than traditional strategies. 

    Some researchers are even using IAV programs as a tool for research. Predko tracked decisions made by cardiac care nurses as they worked through case study simulations to examine the effect of clinical experience and education on clinical decision-making skills.

Recommendations for Nursing Researchers

    Nurse researchers can look to instructional design and educational technology researchers for models and suggestions for future investigation. Their studies include approaches based on cognitive psychology, systems modeling, and instructional events and have suggested researchable propositions to test the validity of underlying assumptions about the technology to discover the conditions of effective use.

Deficiencies Needs to Improve

    Although much additional research is needed on how people learn, nursing students are a diverse group, and qualitative studies might produce more useful data. Studies that identify ways to help students effectively choose and use technology-based applications to learn offer an important area of exploration.

    Because studies found little integration of IAV into the curriculum and revealed that most faculty use IAV only for supplementary assignments, research on faculty use of technology is an important area of inquiry. 

    Faculty can easily evaluate program content, but can they evaluate program design to determine if appropriate strategies and media are employed to match content and objectives? 

    Can they decide if the degree of fidelity is appropriate for intended learners? These important questions must be answered so that faculty can select and use technology appropriately and design curricula that free the teacher to provide those experiences than only human interaction can accomplish.


Post a Comment


Give your opinion if have any.

Post a Comment (0)

#buttons=(Ok, Go it!) #days=(20)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. Check Now
Ok, Go it!