IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

Learner-Generated Digital Media (LGDM) as an Assessment Tool in Tertiary Science
Education: A Review of Literature
Jorge Reyna
University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
Peter Meier
University of Technology, Sydney, Australia

93

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

Abstract
Learner-Generated Digital Media (LGDM) in tertiary science education focuses on researchskills, inquiry, active learning, teamwork, and collaboration. LGDM across disciplines isunder-theorised, under-researched, and only in its early development. This paper evaluates theresearch in the field of LGDM in tertiary science education. The literature review had fourstages – identification, screening, filtering, and selection of relevant scholarly research. Results
showed that research in the field of LGDM assignments had been done without a systematic
approach to designing, implementing, and evaluating the assessment task. Most studies
neglected student digital media training and are characterised by a lack of compelling marking
rubrics or strategies to ensure efficient groupwork. Studies also lack rigorous methodologies
for data capture to evaluate the intervention and they use small sample size cohorts anddifferent digital media types that require different sets of production skills. With the empirical
data available, validation of the benefits of LGDM assignments in science education is notpossible, and studies have limited scalability. These gaps in the literature create a need todevelop theoretical models for the design, implementation, and evaluation of LGDM in theclassroom. This paper discusses future research needs in this field and the implications forassessment design.
Keywords: learner-generated digital media, digital media literacies, science education,
student-created content, authentic assessments

94

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

Learner-Generated Digital Media (LGDM) can be defined as digital artefacts developed by
students to showcase their learning (Reyna, Hanham, & Meier, 2018). To date, there is noconsensus in regards to naming and LGDM can be called, for example, student-generated
digital media, student-created content, user-generated content, multimedia projects, andstudents as co-creators of content. LGDM include different media types such as podcast, digitalstory, screencast, animation and video, which adds an extra layer of complexity to a highly
atomised field of research. For instance, to conduct a literature review in the field, it wasnecessary to use a multi-search strategy. The rationale is to use digital media as a vehicle forlearning the subject content and developing graduate attributes such as technological skills(Buckingham, 2007), time management (Frawley, Dyson, Tyler, & Wakefield, 2015; Pearce& Vanderlelie, 2016), teamwork and collaboration (Coulson & Frawley, 2017), conflict
resolution (Reyna, Horgan, Ramp, & Meier, 2017), and for fostering student engagement andcreativity (Coulson & Frawley, 2017; Hoban, Nielsen, & Shepherd, 2015; Pearce, 2014).
Research conducted in the last decade in the field of education has described the use of digital
media assignments with the main focus on reflective practices for pre-service teachers(Kearney, 2013; Rich & Hannafin, 2009). In contrast, in science disciplines, it can beconsidered a novel approach focused on the development of research skills, inquiry, and active
learning (Hoban et al., 2015). Documented examples include use in biology (Pirhonen & Rasi,2016), health sciences (Pearce & Vanderlelie, 2016), and pharmacology (Henriksen,
Henriksen, & Thurston, 2016; Nielsen, Hoban, & Hyland, 2017; Reyna, Meier, Geronimo, &Rodgers, 2016). Other disciplines where it has been used include computer programming(Powell & Robson, 2014; Vasilchenko et al., 2017), geology (Reyna et al., 2017), mathematics(Calder, 2012; McLoughlin & Loch, 2012), and engineering (Anuradha & Rengaraj, 2017).
LGDM across disciplines in higher education is considered under-researched (Hakkarainen,2009), under-theorised (Potter & McDougall, 2017), and lacking in practical frameworks to
implement it outside the Education discipline (Reyna et al., 2018). There is a lack of rigorousstudies evaluating its effectiveness in different disciplines (Duffy & Jonassen, 2013; Hoban etal., 2015; Kearney & Schuck, 2005). This literature review will cover the different approaches
trialled to embed LGDM into tertiary science education, and it will critically evaluate theassumptions, theoretical models (if any), and the methodology for evaluating the intervention
and its outcomes. Media range from audio podcast (Bartle, 2015), which is considered anelementary form of digital media, to digital story (Rieger et al., 2018), screencast (Yang & Lau,
2018), animation (Wishart, 2017), and video (Hoban et al., 2015; Wishart, 2017). This
literature review will also identify research gaps that have an impact on the implementation ofdigital media assignments in science curricula.
Literature review
Methodology
Research in the field of LGDM is segmented, due to the different names used to describe theintervention such as: (1) digital media for learning (DML); (2) learner-generated content(LGC); (3) student-generated content (SGC); (4) student-generated multimedia (SGM); and(5) learner-generated digital media (LGDM). An additional layer of complexity is the different
digital media types, for example, podcast, digital story, screencast, animations, digital video,
and so on. This literature research excluded blogs and wikis because, although they are formsof digital media, they do not promote multimodal representation of content like the other digital
media types. These types of digital media do not need a storyboard for their production. New
forms of digital media such as 360-degree video, Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Reality(AR), and games also fell outside the scope of the review. A multi-research strategy captured

95

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018available research in the field of LGDM. The literature review followed a protocol ofidentification, screening, filtering, and selection, the crucial steps for information-gathering(Figure 1).

Figure 1. Literature review workflow on LGDM in science education
The keywords presented were used in the process of data gathering across reputableeducational databases such as A+ (Informit), ERIC (EBSCO), Education Database (ProQuest),
Education Research Complete (EBSCO), and LearnTechLib (AACE). The screening provided
all papers that came up with the search. The filtering of papers left only peer-reviewed journals,
conference papers, books, and student-created content. Suitable papers were downloaded andimported on EndNote X8, and duplicate papers were removed. Generic keywords such as
DML, LGC, SGC, and LGDM in conjunction with ‘science education’ generated the highest
number of results (n=412 papers). In most of the cases, the keywords found papers on using
digital media to deliver subject content, for example, DML (n=322 papers), LGC (n=52papers), SGC (n=36 papers), and LGDM (n=2 papers). In the case of podcast (n=87 papers),
only four were on science students creating podcasts. Digital story (n=12 papers) was reduced
to six papers, while screencast (n=5) was reduced to four papers. Digital video (n=43 papers)
was reduced to eleven papers, and blended media (n=2) to one paper. Blended media papers
were added to digital video as in essence; this is a video in the digital media industry.
Animation (n=106 papers) was reduced to nine papers (Figure 1). The following sections
present research on learner-generated podcast, digital story, screencast, animation, and video.
Learner-generated podcasts
A podcast is an audio file, usually recorded and compressed for online delivery (MP3 format),which can be delivered via web platform and downloaded directly to mobile devices for users
to listen to (Geoghegan & Klass, 2008; Reyna et al., 2018). Educators have previously
identified the benefits for students of the learner-generated podcast. Students can learn subject

96

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

content by researching topics and preparing storyboards before recording audio podcasts(Hobbs, 2017). This task helps them to gain a deep understanding of the topic by narrating thecontent of the podcast (Digiovanni, Schwartz, & Greer, 2009). In the process of designing a
podcast, students also develop new skills such as critical thinking (Frydenberg, 2006),
teamwork, and collaboration (Lazzari, 2009; McGarr, 2009). It also improves technical skills,
gets students motivated (Cane & Cashmore, 2008), encourages the development of reflective
learning skills (Forbes, 2015; Lazzari, 2009), transforms the learner from a passive consumerof information into a producer, and enhances student creativity (Struck et al., 2011).
In science education, the available research on podcasting is limited and difficult to compare
because of inconsistent approaches to evaluation. Furthermore, it has methodologicalproblems, for example, some studies collected data equal to or less than a semester, usedcomparatively small undergraduate cohorts of less than 400 (first-year students), or used aqualitative approach via surveys and individual interviews (Fernandez et al., 2015). A
qualitative study implemented learner-generated podcasts for a first-year chemistry class(n=350-400), with students allocated to groups of three. The study evaluated students’
perceptions, task completion, motivation, and engagement and concluded that the learnergenerated podcast led to deep learning of the subject content (Bartle, Longnecker, & Pegrum,2011). The study used two Likert scale questions: (1) The podcast activity helped me to get abetter understanding of chemistry; and (2) The podcast activity was an enjoyable activity. Two
open-ended questions related to the advantages and disadvantages of podcasts for learning werealso asked, and analysed using thematic analysis. The survey response rate was 35%.
Limitations of the study included insufficient survey items to measure what was claimed(student perceptions, task completion, motivation, and engagement). A continuation of thestudy with a first-year chemistry class (n=352) (Pegrum et al., 2015) used a quantitative
approach and supported the previous study. This study found a significant improvement inmarks attained by students who engaged in podcast creation for learning when compared to aprevious year cohort. The main limitation of this study was that comparison data was from theprevious year when podcasting was not used. Neither study used a theoretical model to design
the podcast assessment task, nor was media training offered to students.
In one case, a geography subject used a three-step model that included pre-production,
production, and post-production (Kemp, Kotter, Mellor, & Oosthoek, 2009). Pre-production
included brainstorming, logical structuring of the topic, and storyboarding. The production
stage covered special effects like music and sound, designing the introduction, and recording,
editing, and mixing the podcast. The post-production stage required producing a writtensummary or outline of the podcast and submitting the audio file to iTunes. This model isvaluable but did not incorporate relevant aspects of podcast content discussed previously, suchas the type of content, length, style, purpose, or the pace and intonation. The model is probably
the most complete so far, but it does not have the educator and student role embedded in it. For
example, how will this model inform the educator about designing a learner-generated podcast
task? How will it inform the student about the assessment task? A continuation of the study a
few years later concluded that the task enhanced student learning, competence with technology,
creativity, and science communication skills (Kemp, Mellor, Kotter, & Oosthoek, 2012). The
evaluation had a qualitative approach using informal discussion with students and the teaching
team, and a questionnaire comprising closed and open-ended items. The study used data from2008 (n=40) and 2010 (n=61) and noted low response rates to the questionnaire. This study
used a theoretical model (Kemp et al., 2009) that informed the design of the task and also thecreation of a marking rubric. Limitations included the methodology for gathering the data andthe small size of the cohorts. Another qualitative study in postgraduate engineering students

97

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

(in a mathematics subject) adopted an ‘action research’ approach (planning, action,observation, and reflection) to gauge students’ views on learner-generated podcasting. Students
appreciated the intervention but found podcast creation to be time-consuming and difficult(Adams & Blair, 2014).
In learner-generated podcast in science education, there is no comprehensive model for its
implementation in the classroom which considers content and technical aspects and highlights
educator and student roles. Studies are limited because it is a new approach. Most of theexisting studies used a qualitative approach to data-gathering and analysis and did not use aframework to design the task. Studies are difficult to compare as they were undertaken indifferent disciplines and different settings. Most studies did not provide student training for thetask. The research on podcasting and student learning in tertiary science education is thusinconclusive.
Learner-generated digital stories
Digital storytelling involves making a 3-5 minute video composed of images and voice-over(Martinelli & Zinicola, 2009). It is an arts-based research method that has the potential toexplain complex narratives (Rieger et al., 2018) and to engage the audience and trigger theiremotions by creating an unforgettable experience (Reyna et al., 2017). This digital media typecan be created using PowerPoint, Movie Maker, iMovie, or similar software (Frazel, 2010;
Hussain & Shiratuddin, 2016). Outside science disciplines, digital storytelling has been used
to close the gap between facts and understanding, prompt reflection on experiences, embody
agency, and assist meaning construction and formation of identity (Chan, Churchill, & Chiu,
2017; Martinelli & Zinicola, 2009; Niemi & Multisilta, 2016; Özüdoğru & Cakir, 2017;
Shelton, Warren, & Archambault, 2016). In public health campaigns, digital stories are used toeffectively convey complex messages to the general public (Rieger et al., 2018), but digitalstorytelling in higher education is still under-studied and under-used (Dewi, Savitri, Taufiq, &Khusniati, 2018).
In science disciplines, digital stories have been used to deploy content in blended learning(Molnar, 2018), but rarely used for students to engage in the creation of content. Learnergenerated digital stories have the potential to help students in the classroom to learn bytranslating complex scientific concepts into personal narration. For example, in the process ofdrafting a storyboard, students have the opportunity to transform information into a simple
visual representation (Martinelli & Zinicola, 2009). Regrettably, use of digital stories in scienceeducation as an assessment task is infrequent. The reason behind this is that the scientificcommunity does not see digital stories as a rigorous methodology for presenting information(Martinelli & Zinicola, 2009; Schrum, Dalbec, Boyce, & Collini, 2017).
In undergraduate biology (Year 1) and environmental science (Year 2), the digital story has
been used in assessment tasks (Ross, 2015). However, the methodology for this research was
not straightforward and did not include the analysis of data. Students reported the task of
producing the assignment to be time-consuming (+30 hrs). The study used a marking rubric
that assessed content, creativity, and language. ‘Creativity’ seems mismatched with this rubric,
which was more concerned with the technical aspects of the task. Outside creative disciplines,
how can creativity be measured objectively? The research did not include qualitative or
quantitative data. As a result, the study is inconclusive.
A study has reported on the use of digital story in postgraduate science education to improvestudent communication skills. The framework used was based on the process developed by the98

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

Story Center in 2014 and included seven steps: (1) students see examples; (2) concept check;(3) brainstorming; (4) script and critique; (5) storyboard; (6) production; and (7) exhibition andevaluation. The methodology for the study was unclear, and it used three examples of digitalstories developed by students, surveys, and interviews, but the data was not included in thepaper. The study concluded that digital stories provided an opportunity for ESL science
students to explore digital media and multimodal communication, learn about the subject topic,
and improve communication skills (Purser, 2015). Another study with undergraduate (n=8)
and postgraduate students (n=4) used the framework described and asked six open-ended
questions to evaluate the intervention. Students said that they enjoyed the freedom to creatematerial using their ideas and skills and reported minor technical issues (Martinelli & Zinicola,2009).
The uses of learner-generated digital stories in science education are in its early stages.
Although theoretical frameworks for storytelling have been applied, a methodology for
gauging student learning or perception is not comprehensively explained in the literature. The
research in this field seems to be more anecdotal than rigorous.
Learner-generated screencasts
Screencasts are recordings of the computer screen, with or without narration, using software
such as Camtasia Studio, CamStudio, Macintosh QuickTime, or online applications like
Screencast-o-Matic. They have become popular in higher education to develop training
materials for students in flipped classroom interventions (Carney, Ormes, & Swanson, 2015;
Talbert, 2014). Student-generated screencasts are only a recently emerging trend in higher
education, and the literature is scarce. A literature search on student-generated screencasts
identified only four papers in science education, exclusively in computer programming
subjects. In one study, students were asked to create screencasts as a form of note-taking intutorials. The trial included two groups, the group of students creating screencasts and theothers who did not. The research presented data from four semesters (n=225) and reported only
on test scores. Findings suggested that students who created screencasts as note-taking during
tutorials achieved better scores than students who used traditional note-taking (Powell, 2015).
The limitations of this study included the lack of survey data and interviews and the possibility
that students shared their screencasts with their peers.
A second study reported the use of learner-generated screencasts as tests of complement code
writing. Previously, students had been asked to provide screenshots for the task (Woods, 2015).
This paper’s research methodology is unclear, and it is not known how many students
participated in the trial. The author concluded that the screencasts generated by the students
helped the instructor to evaluate the assessment task. The intervention was teacher-centred
rather than student-centred. The author also mentioned that the screencasts helped students toreflect on code writing. A similar approach was reported as a useful teaching approach ingeometry, where students used screencasts for self- and peer-review (Shafer, 2010).
It is questionable whether creating a screencast that may, for example, not require a script canbe considered learner-generated content. In contrast, if the task is to create a training video on
how to use software or an application, students will need to be familiarised with the tool andlearn a storyboard approach. They will also need working knowledge about editing thescreencast and about digital media principles like colour schemes and typography, as they arelikely to use on-screen text and prompts.

99

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

Studies of learner-generated screencasts in tertiary science education are currently rare in theliterature, and future studies should consider the pedagogy behind the task. For instance,
students learning about an application or software by preparing screencast training material
would be an ideal use of screencast. That task would require a storyboard to help students tolearn the software. There is a need to undertake studies on learner-generated screencasts thatuse defined methodologies and large samples to test their effectiveness for student learning.
Learner-generated animations
Animation is a sequence of frames put together to create a sense of motion. Producing
animations was a time-consuming task until a decade ago. Designers could spend weeks
creating an animated story. The affordability of technology helped to overcome this problem.
For example, services such as Pow-toon (Graham, 2015) and GoAnimate (Stratton, Julien, &Schaffer, 2014) allow students to create animations in a short timeframe. This type of animation
is called whiteboard animation, and it has been highlighted to communicate concepts online(Türkay, 2016). Online companies are using this approach to showcase their products on social
media. In the past, animations were created using Flash Professional and required knowledgeof ActionScript coding (Moock & Epstein, 2001). Educators of pre-service teachers coined theterm ‘slowmation’ (slow animation) to refer to a type of student-created animation (Hoban,
2007; Hoban et al., 2015; Jablonski, Hoban, Ransom, & Ward, 2015). New names for existing
categories of digital media will only create more atomisation of the LGDM literature andshould preferably be avoided.
Constructionist theory, instructional design frameworks, and semiotic theory have all beenused to explain learning with animations. For instance, when students prepare an animation to
explain a science concept, they clarify, check, and refine their understanding (Hoban, Nielsen,& Carceller, 2010). Although there is no existing framework for implementing learnergenerated animations in the classroom, the literature does discuss possible features of such amodel, like purpose, timing, orientation, materials, and technology (Hoban & Nielsen, 2013).
With pre-service science teachers, case study design and discourse analysis (n=3) have beenused to understand learning through creating a science animation. Research with pre-service
teachers found that the process of meaning-making involved in such exercises fostered learningand reinforced the scientific concepts being conveyed. Multimodal representation of content,such as writing, still images, and voice-over, helped them to learn (Hoban & Nielsen, 2013).
This research is comprehensive but cannot be generalised to a large cohort of students outside
the discipline of education due to its qualitative nature. A study where undergraduate
pharmacology students created animations during a two-hour tutorial found that students were
anxious (39%), apprehensive (27%), intimidated (26%), lacking time to complete the project(67%), and lacking technical skills (54%) (Pearce, 2014). However, the study reported thatstudents agreed that they had developed problem-solving, critical thinking, oral
communication, teamwork, and management skills from the exercise. This research did not use
a theoretical model for assignment design, and students did not receive media training. The
data presented was gathered from a qualitative survey alone.
There is a lack of extensive studies to reinforce previous findings on the impact of animationin science education. The current affordability and ease of production of whiteboard animations
created entirely online opens the possibility of a large-scale study to gauge their effect onlearning further.

100

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

Learner-generated video
Learner-generated digital video for tertiary science education is the most common form of
LGDM represented in the literature. Advantages of student-created digital video in education
include the affordability of experiential learning (Coulson & Frawley, 2017), development ofgraduate attributes (Frawley et al., 2015; Pearce & Vanderlelie, 2016), new ways to represent
knowledge (Hobbs, 2017), student engagement (Graybill, 2016), group collaboration (Coulson& Frawley, 2017; Pearce, 2014), project management (Cox, Vasconcelos, & Holdridge, 2010),
and the development of technical skills (Morel & Keahey, 2016). Empirical data to validate
these advantages are not available in existing research. Studies in the field have a flavour ofguesswork, small samples, a qualitative nature, and lack of theoretical models to guide
implementation of the assessment task. Moreover, most studies did not provide student training
in video production. These drawbacks make it challenging to compare studies.
In a third-year undergraduate course in physiotherapy (n=75), no framework was used to
implement the LGDM assessment task, and no training in video production was delivered to
students. The results reported were mixed (Coulson & Frawley, 2017). Students reported stressand anxiety from problems related to the time given to complete the assignment, the group
work involved, and assignment design issues. The study used a qualitative survey alone togauge student perceptions and evaluate the intervention. A study in a geography subject
followed the same pattern and lacked a framework to implement the assignment. However, it
used a six-phase approach for the assessment task: (1) topic selection; (2) thesis statement andinformation/image gathering; (3) first narrative draft; (4) storyboarding; (5) videography
workshop; and (6) viewing of videos on YouTube. Evaluative data was collected from routine
institutional student surveys at the end of the semester (Graybill, 2016). The study reported
student satisfaction with the assessment task, but issues with groupwork contributions and alack of technical skills for creating a video.
Another study conducted with postgraduate students in health information management (n=8),
using a qualitative survey, claimed that the assessment task developed critical thinking by
creating a video that reinforced learning (Morel & Keahey, 2016). The study also suggested
the development of project planning, management, and collaboration skills. It highlighted theneed for clear assignment instructions and expectations, student training support, and strategies
to improve groupwork such as assigning roles and responsibilities. The limitations of the study
were its small sample size and the qualitative nature of the data.
Research with fourth-year pharmacy students (n=92) and second-year health sciences students(n=83) across two different institutions, using a qualitative survey, reported that students
enjoyed working in teams and the creative nature of the task. They also felt that they developed
graduate attributes such as problem-solving, critical thinking, communication skills, and time
management (Pearce & Vanderlelie, 2016). However, the study reported that students were
anxious (59%) and apprehensive (87%) about the task. Students did not receive video training
or any technical assistance, and the assessment task did not use a theoretical framework.
Limitations of the study included students undertaking different assessment tasks and being
evaluated at different times.
Other studies on learner-generated digital video in science education (biology and geography)
have the same limitations described above. These studies have in common small sample sizes,
qualitative surveys, and lack of student training in digital media production (Anderson, 2013;
Fuller & France, 2016; Pirhonen & Rasi, 2016). They concluded that both students andeducators required coaching in video production (Fuller & France, 2016) and that storyboards

101

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

were essential to master subject content before moving to video production (Pirhonen & Rasi,2016). As previously suggested in the field of educational technology, it is likely that there are
more cases of LGDM implementation in science education that have not been formallyevaluated and published (Liu, 2016).
Conclusion
Learner-Generated Digital Media in tertiary science education is currently in its embryonicstages. There is no practical model for implementing LGDM assignments in the classroom
which can be applied regardless of the digital media type. The lack of a model means that
LGDM as an assessment tool is under-theorised and the lack of coherent methodologies toevaluate the student learning experience means the field is under-researched. However, a
deficit in educator knowledge of digital media production workflow and digital media
principles adds an extra layer of complexity to using LGDM assignments. The lack ofcompelling marking rubrics and neglect of student training provides evidence for this claim.
These gaps in knowledge could explain the current status of research in the field. Learnergenerated digital content, regardless of the type, has been acknowledged to have various
advantages for science learning.
There is a great need to develop a practical framework for the design, implementation, andevaluation of LGDM assignments in tertiary science education. Ideally, the framework would
be applicable across disciplines and different digital media types such as podcast, animation,
digital story, or video. Its purpose would be to guide educators in designing, implementing,and evaluating digital media assignments and to get students to understand the rationale of theassessment task. The framework should be student-centred and should consider digital media
training, groupwork contributions, student feedback, reflection, and so on.
Looking at the gaps in the literature, it will be necessary to develop a second model to informstudent digital media training which considers conceptual, functional, and audiovisual skills.
Conceptual skills developed here are searching for information and producing a storyboard,essential steps for students to understand the content before moving to the digital media
production stage. Learning functional skills will ensure that students are capable of using
digital media applications and will reduce the anxiety and apprehension reported with LGDM
assignments. The digital media principles that apply to the creation of compelling digital media
will develop audiovisual skills. Currently, most research on LGDM assignments perpetuatesthe ‘digital natives’ myth which leads to neglect of student training in digital media. Lack ofstudent training could be due to the limited working knowledge of educators outside thedisciplines of visual design, multimedia, film, or digital media about digital media production
workflow.
A third model could use a taxonomy of digital media types, based on the skills required todevelop the different types of digital media. This framework would inform educators indesigning the LGDM task, mark weighting, group size, and comprehensive marking rubrics.
From the student perspective, this taxonomy would inform them about the skills and training
they need to produce LGDM assignments and to succeed in the assessment task.
Finally, a model is needed to define the minimum audiovisual skills required to produce digital
media, for example, the digital media principles for production of compelling digital media
artefacts, such as layout design, colour theory, typography, use of images, and basic video
techniques. The US literature has highlighted that problems are not related to technology

102

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018ownership, but fluency in its use (Alexander, Adams Becker, & Cummins, 2016). On the other
hand, research papers on LGDM there have reported that students successfully produced
quality digital media presentations (Coulson & Frawley, 2017; Pearce & Vanderlelie, 2016).
Without an understanding of digital media principles and a good marking rubric, how can weevaluate the quality of LGDM content objectively? Moreover, how can educators fairly mark
LGDM assignments if students do not receive formal training in digital media principles? It istherefore essential for educators implementing LGDM assignments to have a soundunderstanding of digital media production and its principles. LGDM should not be used
exclusively as a vehicle for learning content, but also for learning to communicate effectively
using digital media. Effective communication in the digital space is a required attribute for21st-century graduates.
With the creation of the models discussed, it will be possible to apply a systematic approach todesigning LGDM assignments for science education. Finally, a methodology for evaluating
learning with digital media creation will be required to fill the gap in the literature and validate
current assumptions about the benefits of LGDM. This approach should include a validated
survey to gauge student attitudes to technology for learning and career development, theirunderstanding of the assignment, their knowledge construction, and open-ended questions.
Methodological triangulation of surveys against group dynamics and student marks should
provide a sharper picture of the effectiveness of LGDM assignments.
This paper has highlighted the potential of LGDM assignments for science education, but
rigorous studies taking systematic approaches to assignment design, implementation, andevaluation are required to validate assumptions.

103

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

References
Adams, R. V., & Blair, E. (2014). The learner-generated podcast: engaging postgraduate
engineering students in a mathematics-intensive course. Research in Post-Compulsory
Education, 19(2), 132–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2014.897502
Aguiar, C., Carvalho, A. A. A., & Maciel, R. (2009). Podcasts na licenciatura em biologia
aplicada: diversidade na tipologia e duração. In A.A.A. Carvalho (Org.), Actas do
Encontro sobre Podcasts, (pp. 140–154). Braga: CIEd, 2009. ISBN 978-972-8746-698.
Alexander, B., Adams Becker, S., & Cummins, M. (2016). Digital literacy: An NMC Horizon
Project strategic brief. Volume 3.3, October 2016. Austin, Texas: The New Media
Consortium.
Anderson, J. (2013). Active learning through student film: a case study of cultural geography.
Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 37(3), 385–398.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2013.792041
Anuradha, V., & Rengaraj, M. (2017). Storytelling: Creating a positive attitude towardnarration among engineering graduates. IUP Journal of English Studies, 12(1), 32–38.
Bartle, E. (2015). Creative podcasting in Chemistry: A case study. In G. Hoban, W. Nielsen,& A. Shepherd (Eds.), Student-generated digital media in Science Education:
Learning, explaining and communicating content, (pp. 41–54). Abingdon, Oxon, UK:
Routledge.
Bartle, E. K., Longnecker, N., & Pegrum, M. (2011). Collaboration, contextualisation andcommunication using new media: Introducing podcasting into an undergraduate
chemistry class. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics
Education (formerly CAL-laborate International), 19(1), 16–28.
Bower, M., Hedberg, J. G., & Kuswara, A. (2010). A framework for Web 2.0 learning
design. Educational Media International, 47(3), 177–198.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2010.518811
Buckingham, D. (2007). Digital media literacies: Rethinking media education in the age of
the Internet. Research in Comparative and International Education, 2(1), 43–55.
https://doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2007.2.1.43
Calder, N. (2012). The layering of mathematical interpretations through digital media.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80(1-2), 269–285.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-011-9365-7
Cane, C., & Cashmore, A. (2008). Student-produced podcasts as learning tools. Paper
presented at the Higher Education Academy’s fourth Annual Conference, July 1–3, atthe Harrogate International Centre, Harrogate, UK.
Carney, D., Ormes, N., & Swanson, R. (2015). Partially flipped linear algebra: A team–based
approach. Primus: Problems, Resources & Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate
Studies, 25(8), 641–654. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2015.1047545
Carvalho, A. A. A., Aguiar, C., & Maciel, R. (2011). Taxonomia de Podcasts: da criação à
utilização em contexto educativo. TICAI 2009-TIC's para a Aprendizagem da
Engenharia, 171–177.
Chan, B. S. K., Churchill, D., & Chiu, T. K. F. (2017). Digital Literacy Learning In Higher
Education Through Digital Storytelling Approach. Journal of International Education
Research (JIER), 13(1), 1–16.

104

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

Coulson, S., & Frawley, J. K. (2017). Student-generated multimedia for supporting learningin an undergraduate physiotherapy course. in H. Partridge, K. Davis, & J. Thomas(Eds.), Me! Us! IT! Proceedings ASCILITE2017: 34th International Conference on
Innovation, Practice and Research in the Use of Educational Technologies in Tertiary
Education, (pp. 235–244). Toowoomba, QLD: ASCILITE.
Cox, A. M., Vasconcelos, A. C., & Holdridge, P. (2010). Diversifying assessment throughmultimedia creation in a non-technical module: reflections on the MAIK project.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(7), 831–846.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903125249
Dale, C., & Povey, G. (2009). An evaluation of learner-generated content and podcasting.
Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education (Oxford Brookes
University), 8(1), 117–123. https://doi.org/10.3794/johlste.81.214
Dewi, N. R., Savitri, E. N., Taufiq, M., & Khusniati, M. (2018, April). Using science digitalstorytelling to increase students’ cognitive ability. Journal of Physics: Conference
Series, 1006, 012020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1006/1/012020
Digiovanni, L., Schwartz, S., & Greer, C. (2009, March). I think, iPod (cast), I learn: Using
digital media and podcasting in teacher education. In I. Gibson, R. Weber, K.
McFerrin, R. Carlsen & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2009--Society for
Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1812–
1819). Charleston, SC, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in
Education (AACE).
Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (2013). Constructivism and the technology of instruction: Aconversation. New York: Routledge.
Fernandez, V., Sallan, J. M., & Simo, P. (2015). Past, present, and future of podcasting inhigher education. In M. Li, & Y. Zhao (Eds.) Exploring Learning & Teaching in
Higher Education. New Frontiers of Educational Research, (pp. 305–330). Springer:
Berlin, Heidelberg.
Forbes, D. (2015). Beyond lecture capture: Student-generated podcasts in teacher education.
Waikato Journal of Education, 20(3), 195–205.
Frawley, J. K., Dyson, L. E., Tyler, J., & Wakefield, J. (2015). Building graduate attributes
using student generated screencasts. In T. Reiners, B.R. von Konsky, D. Gibson, V. Chang, L.
Irving, & K. Clarke (Eds.), Globally connected, digitally enabled. Proceedings ascilite
2015 (88–99). Perth: ascilite.
Frazel, M. (2010). Digital storytelling guide for educators: International Society forTechnology in Education Washington, DC.
Frydenberg, M. (2006). Principles and pedagogy: The two P’s of podcasting in theinformation technology classroom. In The Proceedings of ISECON 2006 (Vol. 23).
Fuller, I. C., & France, D. (2016). Does digital video enhance student learning in field-based
experiments and develop graduate attributes beyond the classroom? Journal of
Geography in Higher Education, 40(2), 193–206.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2016.1141186
Geoghegan, M. W., & Klass, D. (2008). Podcast solutions: The complete guide to audio andvideo podcasting. New York, NY: Apress.
Graham, B. (2015). Power up your PowToon studio project. Birmingham, UK: Packt
Publishing Ltd.
Graybill, J. K. (2016). Teaching energy geographies via videography. Journal of Geography
in Higher Education, 40(1), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2015.1089474

105

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

Hakkarainen, K. (2009). A knowledge-practice perspective on technology-mediated learning.
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(2), 213–231.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9064-x
Hoban, G. (2007). Using Slowmation to Engage Preservice Elementary Teachers inUnderstanding Science Content Knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology &Teacher Education, 7(2), 75–91.
Hoban, G. F., Nielsen, W. S. & Carceller, C. (2010). Articulating constructionism: Learningscience through designing and making "Slowmations" (student-generated
animations). In C. Steel, M. Keppell, P. Gerbic & S. Housego (Eds.), Conference of
the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (pp. 433–
443). Queensland: University of Queensland.
Hoban, G., & Nielsen, W. (2013). Learning science through creating a ‘slowmation’: A casestudy of preservice primary teachers. International Journal of Science Education,35(1), 119–146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.670286
Hoban, G., Nielsen, W., & Shepherd, A. (2015). Student-generated digital media in scienceeducation: Learning, explaining and communicating content. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Hobbs, R. (2017). Create to learn: Introduction to digital literacy. Malden, MA: John Wiley& Sons.
Huann, T. Y., & Thong, M. K. (2006). Audioblogging and podcasting in education.
Education Ministry, Government of Singapore. Retrieved 4 May 2018 fromhttps://www.moe.gov.sg/edumall/rd/litreview/audioblogg_podcast.pdf.
Hussain, H., & Shiratuddin, N. (2016). A digital storytelling process guide for designers.
Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering (JTEC), 8(8),
13–17.
Jablonski, D., Hoban, G., Ransom, H., & Ward, K. (2015). Exploring the use of ‘slowmation’as a pedagogical alternative in science teaching and learning. Pacific-Asian Education
Journal, 27(1), 5–20.
Kearney, M., & Schuck, S. (2005, June). Students in the director's seat: Teaching andlearning with student-generated video. In P. Kommers & G. Richards (Eds.),
Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2005--World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 2864-2871). Montreal, Canada: Association
for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)..
Kemp, J., Kotter, R., Mellor, A. & Oosthoek, J. (2009) Podcasting in geography and thesocial sciences: a guide to podcasting with Audacity. Documentation. The Higher
Education Academy: Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences (GEES).
Kemp, J., Mellor, A., Kotter, R., & Oosthoek, J. W. (2012). Student-produced podcasts as an
assessment tool: An example from geomorphology. Journal of Geography in Higher
Education, 36(1), 117–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2011.576754
Lazzari, M. (2009). Creative use of podcasting in higher education and its effect oncompetitive agency. Computers & Education, 52(1), 27–34.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.002
Martinelli, J., & Zinicola, D. (2009). Teaching science through digital storytelling. In I.
Gibson, R. Weber, K. McFerrin, R. Carlsen & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE
2009--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International
Conference (pp. 3802–3808). Charleston, SC, USA: Association for the Advancementof Computing in Education (AACE).

106

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

McGarr, O. (2009). A review of podcasting in higher education: Its influence on the
traditional lecture. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(3).
https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1136
McLoughlin, C., & Loch, B. (2012, June). Engaging students in cognitive and metacognitive
processes using screencasts. In T. Amiel & B. Wilson (Eds.), Proceedings of
EdMedia 2012--World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 1107–1110). Denver, Colorado, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in
Education (AACE).
Molnar, A. (2018, March). The effect of interactive digital storytelling gamification on
microbiology classroom interactions. In Integrated STEM Education Conference(ISEC), 2018 IEEE (pp. 243–246). Princeton, US: IEEE.
Moock, C. (2001). ActionScript: The definitive guide: Mastering flash programming. Boston,
MA: O'Reilly Media.
Morel, G., & Keahey, H. (2016, March). Student-generated multimedia projects as amultidimensional assessment method in a health information management graduate
program. In G. Chamblee & L. Langub (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information
Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1120–1125).
Savannah, GA, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in
Education (AACE).
Niemi, H., & Multisilta, J. (2016). Digital storytelling promoting twenty-first century skills
and student engagement. Technology, Pedagogy & Education, 25(4), 451–468.
https://doi.0rg/10.1080/1475939X.2015.1074610
Özüdoğru, G., & Cakir, H. (2017, June). A review of the studies using digital storytelling in
in-service and pre-service teacher training. In J. Johnston (Ed.), Proceedings of
EdMedia 2017 (pp. 886–891). Washington, DC: Association for the Advancement ofComputing in Education (AACE).
Pearce, K. L. (2014, September). Undergraduate creators of video, animations and blended
media: The students' perspective. In Proceedings of The Australian Conference on
Science and Mathematics Education (formerly UniServe Science Conference)(pp.
156–162).
Pearce, K. L., & Vanderlelie, J. J. (2017, August). Teaching and evaluating graduate
attributes in multimedia science-based assessment tasks. In Proceedings of The
Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education (formerly UniServe
Science Conference) (pp. 215–225).
Pegrum, M., Bartle, E., & Longnecker, N. (2015). Can creative podcasting promote deeplearning? The use of podcasting for learning content in an undergraduate science unit.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 142–152.
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12133
Pirhonen, J., & Rasi, P. (2016). Student-generated instructional videos facilitate learning
through positive emotions. Journal of Biological Education, 51(3), 215–237.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2016.1200647
Potter, J., & McDougall, J. (2017). Digital media, culture and education: Theorising third
space literacies. London, UK: Springer Nature.
Powell, L. M. (2015). Evaluating the effectiveness of self-created student screencasts as atool to increase student learning outcomes in a hands-on computer programmingcourse. Information Systems Education Journal, 13(5), 106–111.

107

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

Purser, E. (2015). Using digital stories to teach communication in the science curriculum. In
G. Hoban, W. Nielsen, & A. Shepherd (Eds.), Student-generated digital media in
Science Education: Learning, explaining and communicating content, (pp. 57–67).
Abingdon, Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Reyna, J., Hanham, J., & Meier, P. (2017). A taxonomy of digital media types for learnergenerated digital media assignments. E-learning and Digital Media, 14(6), 309–322.
https://doi.org?10.1177/2042753017752973
Reyna, J., Hanham, J., & Meier, P. (2018a). The Internet explosion, digital media principles
and implications to communicate effectively in the digital space. E-learning andDigital Media, 15(1), 36–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753018754361
Reyna, J., Hanham, J., & Meier, P. (2018b). Theoretical considerations to design learnergenerated digital media (LGDM) assignments in higher education. Paper presented at
the Rethinking Learning in a Connected Age, 12th annual International Technology,
Education and Development Conference, INTED, Valencia, Spain, March 11-13.
Reyna, J., Horgan, F., Ramp, D., & Meier, P. (2017). Using learner-generated digital media(LGDM) as an assessment tool in geological sciences. Paper presented at the 11th
annual International Technology, Education and Development Conference, INTED,
Valencia, Spain, 6 - 8 March 2017.
Rieger, K. L., West, C. H., Kenny, A., Chooniedass, R., Demczuk, L., Mitchell, K. M., Scott,S. D. (2018). Digital storytelling as a method in health research: a systematic review
protocol. Systematic reviews, 7(41). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0704-y
Rosell-Aguilar, F. (2007). Top of the pods—In search of a podcasting “podagogy” forlanguage learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(5), 471–492.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220701746047
Ross, P. (2015). Stories and narratives: using digital stories to learn science. In G. Hoban, W.
Nielsen, & A. Shepherd (Eds.), Student-generated digital media in Science Education:
Learning, explaining and communicating content, (pp. 68–80). Abingdon, Oxon, UK:
Routledge.Schrum, K., Dalbec, B., Boyce, M., & Collini, S. (2017, June). Digitalstorytelling: Communicating academic research beyond the academy. In Innovationsin Teaching & Learning Conference Proceedings (Vol. 9, No. 1, p. 1).
https:// doi.org/10.13021/G8itlcp.9.2017.1807
Shelton, C., Warren, A., & Archambault, L. (2016). Exploring the use of interactive digitalstorytelling video: promoting student engagement and learning in a university hybrid
course. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 60(5), 465–
474. https://doi.0rg/:10.1007/s11528-016-0082-z
Story Center (2018). Listen deeply... Tell stories. Retrieved 12 May 2018 fromhttps://www.storycenter.org/
Stratton, M. T., Julien, M., & Schaffer, B. (2014). GoAnimate. Journal of Management
Education, 38(2), 282–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562914524693
Struck, R., Kynäslahti, H., Lipponen, L., Vesterinen, O., Vahtivuori-Hänninen, S., Mylläri, J.,& Tella, S. (2011). Podcasts as learner-created content in higher education.
International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 1(2), 20–30.
https://doi.org/10.4018/ijopcd.2011040102
Talbert, R. (2014). Inverting the linear algebra classroom. Primus, 24(5), 361–374.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2014.883457

108

IAFOR Journal of Education

Volume 6 – Issue 3 – Winter 2018

Türkay, S. (2016). The effects of whiteboard animations on retention and subjective
experiences when learning advanced physics topics. Computers & Education, 98,
102–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.004
Wishart, J. (2017). Exploring how creating stop-motion animations supports student teachersin learning to teach science. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,49(1/2), 88–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2017.1291316
Woods, D. (2015). Student created screencasts as an aid to grading and tool for student
reflection. Paper presented at the EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Mediaand Technology 2015, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. June 22-25.
http://www.editlib.org/p/151358
Yang, I., & Lau, B. T. (2018). Undergraduate students’ perceptions as producer of screencast
videos in learning mathematics. In S. Tang, & S. Cheah (Eds.), Redesigning learning
for greater social impact, (pp. 277–286). Singapore: Springer.
Corresponding author: Jorge Reyna
Contact email: jorge.reyna@uts.edu.au109