skip to main content
10.1145/3544548.3580671acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

How Older Adults Use Online Videos for Learning

Published:19 April 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

Online videos are a promising medium for older adults to learn. Yet, few studies have investigated what, how, and why they learn through online videos. In this study, we investigated older adults’ motivation, watching patterns, and difficulties in using online videos for learning by (1) running interviews with 13 older adults and (2) analyzing large-scale video event logs (N=41.8M) from a Korean Massive Online Open Course (MOOC) platform. Our results show that older adults (1) are motivated to learn practical topics, leading to less consumption of STEM domains than non-older adults, (2) watch videos with less interaction and watch a larger portion of a single video compared to non-older adults, and (3) face various difficulties (e.g., inconvenience arisen due to their unfamiliarity with technologies) that limit their learning through online videos. Based on the findings, we propose design guidelines for online videos and platforms targeted to support older adults’ learning.

Footnotes

  1. 1 These ages are indicated in Korean age. Korean age considers the birth year as year 1, which is equivalent to calculating the age as currentyearbirthyear + 1.

    Footnote
  2. 2 We define the coverage of a video as the percentage of a video clip seen by the viewer.

    Footnote
  3. 3 A Korean state-led MOOC platform, which launched in 2015 with 3.6M users by the end of 2018. It offered 520 courses open for enrollment as of January 2019, spanning various subject domains (e.g., humanities, social science, engineering, natural science) offered by 92 different universities.

    Footnote
  4. 4 Domain: Engineering, Level: Intensive major

    Footnote
  5. 5 Domain: Humanities, Level: Basic major

    Footnote
  6. 6 Domain: Medical sciences & Pharmacy, Level: Elective

    Footnote
  7. 7 Domain: Engineering, Level: Elective, A course that covers how to pick a good home, how to interior the house, how to invest using real estate, and knowledge for house taxation

    Footnote
  8. 8 Domain: Social science, Level: Elective

    Footnote
  9. 9 In this paper, we define ‘seek backward’ as jumping to a prior part of the video and ’seek forward’ as jumping to a later part of the video

    Footnote
Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

3544548.3580671-talk-video.mp4

mp4

174 MB

References

  1. [1] Academic Credit Bank System (ACBS).2022. https://www.cb.or.kr/creditbank/info/nInfo7_1.doGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Yakup Akgül 2018. Web accessibility of MOOCs for elderly students: The case of Turkey. Journal of Life Economics 5, 4 (2018), 141–150. https://doi.org/10.15637/jlecon.266Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Subhashni Appana. 2008. A review of benefits and limitations of online learning in the context of the student, the instructor and the tenured faculty. International Journal on E-learning 7, 1 (2008), 5–22. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/22909/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. David Aspin and Judith Chapman. 2001. Lifelong learning: concepts, theories and values. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of SCUTREA. University of East London: SCUTREA, 38–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/026013700293421Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Xue Bai, Yiqin He, and Florian Kohlbacher. 2020. Older people’s adoption of e-learning services: a qualitative study of facilitators and barriers. Gerontology & geriatrics education 41, 3 (2020), 291–307.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Paul B Baltes and Margret M Baltes. 1990. Psychological perspectives on successful aging: The model of selective optimization with compensation.(1990).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Sharon Jeffcoat Bartley and Jennifer H Golek. 2004. Evaluating the cost effectiveness of online and face-to-face instruction. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 7, 4 (2004), 167–175.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Paul Bélanger. 2015. Self-construction and social transformation: Lifelong, lifewide and life-deep learning. UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Paola Beltran, Paul Rodriguez-Ch, and Priscila Cedillo. 2017. A Systematic Literature Review for Development, Implementation and Deployment of MOOCs Focused on Older People. In 2017 International Conference on Information Systems and Computer Science (INCISCOS). IEEE, 287–294.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Frank Bentley and Janet Murray. 2016. Understanding video rewatching experiences. In Proceedings of the ACM international conference on interactive experiences for TV and online video. 69–75. https://doi.org/10.1145/2932206.2932213Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Frank Bentley, Max Silverman, and Melissa Bica. 2019. Exploring online video watching behaviors. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video. 108–117. https://doi.org/10.1145/3317697.3323355Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Nicolas Biard, Salomé Cojean, and Eric Jamet. 2018. Effects of segmentation and pacing on procedural learning by video. Computers in Human Behavior 89 (2018), 411–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.002Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. J Martin Bland and Douglas G Altman. 2000. The odds ratio. Bmj 320, 7247 (2000), 1468. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7247.1468Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Way Kiat Bong and Weiqin Chen. 2016. How accessible are MOOCs to the elderly?. In International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs. Springer, 437–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41264-1_60Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Roger Boshier. 1977. Motivational orientations re-visited: Life-space motives and the education participation scale. Adult education 27, 2 (1977), 89–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/074171367702700202Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2012. Thematic analysis. (2012). https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-004Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Christopher G Brinton, Swapna Buccapatnam, Mung Chiang, and HV Poor. 2015. Mining MOOC clickstreams: On the relationship between learner behavior and performance. arXiv preprint arXiv:1503.06489(2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Katherine Brookfield, Sara Tilley, and Máire Cox. 2016. Informal science learning for older adults. Science Communication 38, 5 (2016), 655–665.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Christopher Brooks, Joshua Gardner, and Kaifeng Chen. 2018. How gender cues in educational video impact participation and retention. International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc.[ISLS].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Isaac Chuang and Andrew Ho. 2016. HarvardX and MITx: Four years of open online courses–fall 2012-summer 2016. Available at SSRN 2889436(2016). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2889436Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. John W Creswell and Vicki L Plano Clark. 2017. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. James Davidson, Benjamin Liebald, Junning Liu, Palash Nandy, Taylor Van Vleet, Ullas Gargi, Sujoy Gupta, Yu He, Mike Lambert, Blake Livingston, 2010. The YouTube video recommendation system. In Proceedings of the fourth ACM conference on Recommender systems. 293–296.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Thomas S Dee. 2005. A teacher like me: Does race, ethnicity, or gender matter?American Economic Review 95, 2 (2005), 158–165. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282805774670446Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Mª del Pilar Díaz-López, Remedios López-Liria, José M Aguilar-Parra, and David Padilla-Góngora. 2016. Keys to active ageing: new communication technologies and lifelong learning. SpringerPlus 5, 1 (2016), 768. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2434-8Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Ione Y DeOllos and David C Morris. 1999. The Internet as an information resource for older adults. Journal of Educational Technology Systems 28, 2 (1999), 107–120.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Richard Desjardins, Marcella Milana, and Kjell Rubenson. 2006. Unequal chances to participate in adult learning: International perspectives. Number 83. Richard Desjardins.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Michelle Dorin. 2007. Online education of older adults and its relation to life satisfaction. Educational Gerontology 33, 2 (2007), 127–143.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Richard Dorsett, Silvia Lui, and Martin Weale. 2010. Economic benefits of lifelong learning. Centre for Learning and Life Chances in Knowledge Economies and Societies.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Janet E. Truluck, Bradley C. Courtenay. 1999. Learning style preferences among older adults. Educational gerontology 25, 3 (1999), 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/036012799267846Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Maureen Ebben and Julien S Murphy. 2014. Unpacking MOOC scholarly discourse: A review of nascent MOOC scholarship. Learning, media and technology 39, 3 (2014), 328–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.878352Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Kenneth F Ferraro and Janet M Wilmoth. 2013. Gerontology: Perspectives and issues. Springer Publishing Company.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Brian Findsen and Marvin Formosa. 2011. Lifelong learning in later life: A handbook on older adult learning. Brill Sense.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Jens Friebe and Bernhard Schmidt-Hertha. 2013. Activities and barriers to education for elderly people.Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies/Sodobna Pedagogika 64, 1(2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Ernest Furchtgott and Jerome R Busemeyer. 1981. Age preferences for professional helpers. Journal of gerontology 36, 1 (1981), 90–92. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/36.1.90Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Rod P Githens. 2007. Older adults and e-learning: Opportunities and barriers. Quarterly Review of Distance Education 8, 4 (2007), 329.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Joselyn Goopio and Catherine Cheung. 2021. The MOOC dropout phenomenon and retention strategies. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism 21, 2 (2021), 177–197.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Mackenzie Robinson Graves. 2018. Lifelong learning: Applying cognitive load theory to elder learners suffering from age-related cognitive decline. SFU Educational Review 11, 1 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Philip J Guo. 2017. Older adults learning computer programming: motivations, frustrations, and design opportunities. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 7070–7083. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025945Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Philip J Guo, Juho Kim, and Rob Rubin. 2014. How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference. 41–50. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566239Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Angela H Gutchess, Carolyn Yoon, Ting Luo, Fred Feinberg, Trey Hedden, Qicheng Jing, Richard E Nisbett, and Denise C Park. 2006. Categorical organization in free recall across culture and age. Gerontology 52, 5 (2006), 314–323.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. James W Hardin. 2005. Generalized estimating equations (GEE). Encyclopedia of statistics in behavioral science (2005).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Luqman Hidayat, G Gunarhadi, and Furqon Hidayatulloh. 2017. Multimedia based learning materials for deaf students. European Journal of Special Education Research (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Laura Holyoke and Erick Larson. 2009. Engaging the adult learner generational mix.Journal of Adult Education 38, 1 (2009), 12–21.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Jonas Langset Hustad, Andreas Schille, and Eirik Wattengård. 2019. Escaping the talking head: Experiences with three different styles of MOOC video. In Proceedings of the the 6th European Conference on Massive Open Online Courses. 151–156.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. The Chosun Ilbo. 2018. Workers Face Earlier Retirement Than Expected. http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2018/11/01/2018110100695.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Consumer Insights. 2015. Attention spans.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Bora Jin, Junghwan Kim, and Lisa M Baumgartner. 2019. Informal learning of older adults in using mobile devices: A review of the literature. Adult Education Quarterly 69, 2 (2019), 120–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713619834726Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. [48] K-MOOC.2021. http://www.kmooc.krGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Juho Kim, Philip J Guo, Carrie J Cai, Shang-Wen Li, Krzysztof Z Gajos, and Robert C Miller. 2014. Data-driven interaction techniques for improving navigation of educational videos. In Proceedings of the 27th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology. 563–572. https://doi.org/10.1145/2642918.2647389Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Juho Kim, Philip J Guo, Daniel T Seaton, Piotr Mitros, Krzysztof Z Gajos, and Robert C Miller. 2014. Understanding in-video dropouts and interaction peaks inonline lecture videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference. 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566239Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Jeongyeon Kim and Juho Kim. 2021. FitVid: Towards Development of Responsive and Fluid Video Content Adaptation. In Workshop on Imagining Post-COVID Education with AI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Jessica Kriegel. 2013. Differences in learning preferences by generational cohort: Implications for instructional design in corporate web-based learning. Drexel University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Marjan Laal. 2011. Barriers to lifelong learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 28 (2011), 612–615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.116Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Marjan Laal. 2011. Lifelong learning: What does it mean?Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 28 (2011), 470–474.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Youngju Lee and Jaeho Choi. 2011. A review of online course dropout research: Implications for practice and future research. Educational Technology Research and Development 59, 5(2011), 593–618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9177-yGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. Nan Li, Łukasz Kidziński, Patrick Jermann, and Pierre Dillenbourg. 2015. MOOC video interaction patterns: What do they tell us?. In European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning. Springer, 197–210.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Xingyu Liu, Patrick Carrington, Xiang’Anthony’ Chen, and Amy Pavel. 2021. What Makes Videos Accessible to Blind and Visually Impaired People?. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Ziming Liu. 2005. Reading behavior in the digital environment: Changes in reading behavior over the past ten years. Journal of documentation(2005). https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410510632040Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. David W Livingstone. 2001. Adults’ informal learning: Definitions, findings, gaps and future research. (2001).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Tharindu Rekha Liyanagunawardena and Shirley Ann Williams. 2016. Elderly learners and massive open online courses: a review. Interactive journal of medical research 5, 1 (2016), e4937. https://doi.org/10.2196/ijmr.4937Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  61. Kate Manuel. 2002. Teaching information literacy to generation. Journal of library administration 36, 1-2 (2002), 195–217. https://doi.org/10.1300/J111v36n01_12Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  62. Richard E Mayer. 2002. Multimedia learning. In Psychology of learning and motivation. Vol. 41. Elsevier, 85–139.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Mary C Milliken, Susan O’Donnell, Kerri Gibson, and Betty Daniels. 2012. Older citizens and video communications: A case study. The Journal of Community Informatics 8, 1 (2012).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and others. 2018. How people learn II: Learners, contexts, and cultures. National Academies Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Andrew Ng and Jennifer Widom. 2014. Origins of the modern MOOC (xMOOC). Hrsg. Fiona M. Hollands, Devayani Tirthali: MOOCs: Expectations and Reality: Full Report (2014), 34–47.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Tuan Nguyen. 2015. The effectiveness of online learning: Beyond no significant difference and future horizons. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 11, 2 (2015), 309–319.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Anna Nishchyk, Norun Christine Sanderson, Weiqin Chen, 2017. How elderly people experience videos in MOOCs. In DS 88: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (E&PDE17), Building Community: Design Education for a Sustainable Future, Oslo, Norway, 7 & 8 September 2017. 686–691.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Ozlem Ozan and Yasin Ozarslan. 2016. Video lecture watching behaviors of learners in online courses. Educational Media International 53, 1 (2016), 27–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2016.1189255Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. Fred Paas, Gino Camp, and Remy Rikers. 2001. Instructional compensation for age-related cognitive declines: Effects of goal specificity in maze learning.Journal of educational psychology 93, 1 (2001), 181.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Denise C Park. 2002. Aging, cognition, and culture: a neuroscientific perspective. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 26, 7 (2002), 859–867.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  71. Amy Pavel, Colorado Reed, Björn Hartmann, and Maneesh Agrawala. 2014. Video digests: a browsable, skimmable format for informational lecture videos. In Proceedings of the 27th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology. 573–582.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  72. Nola Purdie and Gillian Boulton-Lewis. 2003. The learning needs of older adults. Educational gerontology 29, 2 (2003), 129–149.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Kathryn Rindskopf and Don C Charles. 1974. Instructor age and the older learner. The Gerontologist 14, 6 (1974), 479–482. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/14.6.479Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  74. Sandra Sanchez-Gordon and Sergio Luján-Mora. 2013. Web accessibility of MOOCs for elderly students. In 2013 12th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET). IEEE, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITHET.2013.6671024Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  75. Anne Shumway-Cook, Marcia A Ciol, Kathryn M Yorkston, Jeanne M Hoffman, and Leighton Chan. 2005. Mobility limitations in the Medicare population: prevalence and sociodemographic and clinical correlates. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 53, 7 (2005), 1217–1221. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53372.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  76. Thomas A Simonds and Barbara L Brock. 2014. Relationship between age, experience, and student preference for types of learning activities in online courses.Journal of Educators Online 11, 1 (2014), n1. https://doi.org/10.9743/JEO.2014.1.3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  77. Jaisie Sin, Rachel L. Franz, Cosmin Munteanu, and Barbara Barbosa Neves. 2021. Digital Design Marginalization: New Perspectives on Designing Inclusive Interfaces. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445180Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  78. Barbara A Soloman and Richard M Felder. 2005. Index of learning styles questionnaire. NC State University 70(2005).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. Sylvaine Tuncer, Barry Brown, and Oskar Lindwall. 2020. On Pause: How Online Instructional Videos are Used to Achieve Practical Tasks. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376759Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  80. Mojtaba Vaismoradi, Jacqueline Jones, Hannele Turunen, and Sherrill Snelgrove. 2016. Theme development in qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis. (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  81. Pascal WM Van Gerven, Fred Paas, Jeroen JG Van Merriënboer, Maaike Hendriks, and Henk G Schmidt. 2003. The efficiency of multimedia learning into old age. British journal of educational psychology 73, 4 (2003), 489–505.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. Christina Victor. 2004. The social context of ageing: A textbook of gerontology. Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  83. Feliciano Villar and Montserrat Celdrán. 2013. Learning in later life: Participation in formal, non-formal and informal activities in a nationally representative Spanish sample. European journal of ageing 10, 2 (2013), 135–144.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  84. Gang Wang, Xinyi Zhang, Shiliang Tang, Haitao Zheng, and Ben Y Zhao. 2016. Unsupervised clickstream clustering for user behavior analysis. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858107Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  85. Abeer Watted and Miri Barak. 2018. Motivating factors of MOOC completers: Comparing between university-affiliated students and general participants. The Internet and Higher Education 37 (2018), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.12.001Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  86. Maryanne Wolf. 2018. Skim reading is the new normal. The effect on society is profound. Sat 25(2018), 09–41.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  87. Xiang Xiao and Jingtao Wang. 2017. Undertanding and detecting divided attention in mobile mooc learning. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 2411–2415. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025552Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  88. Jie Xiong and Meiyun Zuo. 2019. Older adults’ learning motivations in massive open online courses. Educational Gerontology 45, 2 (2019), 82–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2019.1581444Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  89. Saelyne Yang, Jisu Yim, Aitolkyn Baigutanova, Seoyoung Kim, Minsuk Chang, and Juho Kim. 2022. SoftVideo: Improving the Learning Experience of Software Tutorial Videos with Collective Interaction Data. In 27th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. 646–660.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  90. Beste F Yuksel, Pooyan Fazli, Umang Mathur, Vaishali Bisht, Soo Jung Kim, Joshua Junhee Lee, Seung Jung Jin, Yue-Ting Siu, Joshua A Miele, and Ilmi Yoon. 2020. Human-in-the-Loop Machine Learning to Increase Video Accessibility for Visually Impaired and Blind Users. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 47–60.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  91. Tom Zhang, Michelle Taub, and Zhongzhou Chen. 2021. Measuring the Impact of COVID-19 Induced Campus Closure on Student Self-Regulated Learning in Physics Online Learning Modules. In LAK21: 11th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference. 110–120.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. How Older Adults Use Online Videos for Learning

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '23: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      April 2023
      14911 pages
      ISBN:9781450394215
      DOI:10.1145/3544548

      Copyright © 2023 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 19 April 2023

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

      Upcoming Conference

      CHI '24
      CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 11 - 16, 2024
      Honolulu , HI , USA

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Full Text

    View this article in Full Text.

    View Full Text

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format