Hi All -- having gone through some of the sample videos I found two that were effective (for me):
- the Kurt Vonnegut explainer on story arcs
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oP3c1h8v2ZQ&feature=youtu.be) - the Tech Insider explainer on the depth of the ocean
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwVNkfCov1k&feature=youtu.be)
In both cases, I found the videos effective as explainers because:
- they jump right into the concepts they are attempting to explain
- they mimic human conversation
- they use graph-type images to illustrate the concepts they are explaining
My sense is that learners turn to videos for micro-learning -- concentrated bits of knowledge that they can apply immediately.
If this is true, then don't added frills like general introductions, music, graphics for the sake of graphics (rather than those that provide added information to support the explanation of a concept), or cute animations actually dilute the concentrated knowledge that the learner is after?
These added frills may work great for entertainment or persuasion (i.e. advertising) -- which work by distraction -- but may actually work against learning by adding unnecessary noise that the learner has to do cognitive work to filter through to get to the information that they are looking for.
That would be my take on this. Thanks.