Search

Background: Hyper‐video technology allows reflection on learning materials by writing personal notes and by interactions with lecturers and peers through shared posts and replies. While research shows that integrating hyper‐videos in educational systems can promote the learning processes and outcomes, an open question remains regarding its actual utilization patterns by students and teachers. Objectives: The study aimed to reveal the extent to which students utilize different functions of hyper‐videos in real‐life learning contexts, and to examine the role of instructional design on hyper‐video utilization. Method: In a mixed‐method design, the study characterized active and passive interactions in hyper‐videos in higher education courses, and amongst active interactions, compared shared versus private annotations. Additionally, the study compared voluntary and mandatory instructional design for promoting hyper‐video interactions. In particular, we used learning analytics to explore hyper‐video patterns in 25 undergraduate and graduate courses. Results and Discussion: A log analysis revealed that students wrote most of the posts, while lecturers mainly provided replies to students' posts. Private annotations were more prevalent than shared writing, pointing to the unfulfilled potential of hyper‐video annotations to benefit from collaborative learning. A qualitative analysis on instructional design was consistent with quantitative findings, revealing important differences between the courses with mandatory versus voluntary hyper‐video integration in pedagogical design, and in cognitive presence and teaching presence, based on the community of inquiry framework. Major takeaways: Findings point to an unfulfilled potential of hyper‐video technology to promote active and collaborative learning. This highlights the role of design and instructive guidance when integrating technology into educational systems. Lay Description: What is already known about this topic: Hyper‐video functions increase motivation and promote self‐regulation of learningIntegrating hyper‐videos in education can benefit leaning outcomesHowever, there is an imbalance between the availability ICT and its actual useThere is a gap in the literature regarding actual utilisation patterns of hyper‐video What this paper adds: A mixed method design exposes hyper‐video utilisation patterns in higher educationFindings show underutilisation of active and collaborative hyper‐video functionsMixed analysis reveals advantage for mandatory (graded) compared to voluntary designGender and degree do not moderate utilisation patterns of hyper‐videos Implications for practise and/or policy: Instructional design is required to guide students of effective use of hyper‐videosInstructors should use hyper‐videos to promote collaboration and peer dialogueDirect instruction does not engage students in active learning via hyper‐videosMandatory design can increase hyper‐videos' potential to contribute to learning [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic dishonesty has been growing in both digital and analog settings. The present study aimed to generalize the ethical dissonance index (EDI), which was established in a sample of Israeli school students as the gap between the pervasiveness of academic dishonesty and its perceived legitimacy. Furthermore, the study examined how technology, dishonesty type and individual differences affect these factors. The study employed a scenario‐based approach – an indirect strategy for deducing academic dishonest behaviors. Participants were 1055 school students from various grade levels, geographic locations and religious/ethnic sectors. Results regarding the role of technology revealed that, overall, digital academic dishonesty was less pervasive and deemed more legitimate compared to analog dishonesty. However, this relationship varied as a function of dishonesty type. Findings confirmed that students experienced some level of ethical dissonance, generalizing the EDI. Notably, individual differences did not affect the relationship between media, dishonesty type and the EDI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]