Interactive Videos as Effective Tools for Media Literacy Education in Communication and Media Courses (2025)

1. Introduction

Nowadays, digital competence is of upmost importance in all aspects of everyday life due to the proliferation of digital technologies and the widespread use of the Internet and the services provided. Digital literacy skills should be established as emerging technologies come to the fore and change rapidly as well, and the need of users’ to adapt is imperative; thus, educational curricula, at all levels, have been adjusted, and continue to be, to encompass relative courses or incorporate digital skills acquisition in existing courses in terms of locating and consuming digital content, being creators of digital content, and lastly communicating the digital content [1]. We have to keep in mind that although contemporary students have grown up immersed in digital environments, which are part of their everyday life, the ever-evolving technologies and the continual social changes they bear require careful and effective navigation.

Furthermore, understanding the media environment and cultivating media literacy is a key issue in modern societies as multimedia content has gradually become more and more complex to decipher. It must be made clear that media literacy does not involve only reception and consumption, but also concerns the creation and transmission of messages and generally all actions that affect the communication process [2]. Therefore, in the new media era, citizens of all age groups must develop a set of skills that will allow them to understand in detail the way they consume and create multimedia content for multiple uses, such as news, advertisements, entertainment, social impact messages, etc. Especially when it comes to younger people who favor consuming and creating videos on multiple platforms, using their smartphones [3], and navigating cross-media, media literacy is crucial [4,5]. Theoretical frameworks view media literacy through various aspects, such as cognitive theory which identifies several factors that shape how individuals perceive, select, and interpret media messages.

In the era when generative AI tools are being employed extremely easily, the procedures of finding elements (text, images, audio, and video) and generating content for creating media products have moved to another level, just by posing questions (prompts). Hence, the demand for media literacy is becoming imperative as a social and cultural practice since it involves the way citizens evaluate, consume, and produce information composed not only by humans, therefore necessitating the cultivation of relative competencies [6]. This approach builds on the academic field of media studies, relying on interpretative epistemologies rooted in humanities and social sciences, contrasting with the science- and technology-focused epistemology [7]. Since media literacy is multi-dimensional in the sense that media influences people in more than one way, i.e., cognitively, emotionally, physiologically, etc., research is developed in different dimensions focusing mainly on one of them [8].

Being connected is a great part of everyday life, and communication besides classical forms of text and audio messages is also performed by sharing videos that express the opinions or feelings of the senders in socio-cultural digital platforms. Social media are used both as personal expression platforms and as sources of information and news seeking platforms; thus, examining the trustworthiness and the accuracy of the information is crucial [9,10]. Furthermore, the existence of fake news and misinformation is a fact and media literacy may aid in recognizing their features, enhancing our critique on the credibility of the information received and being able to comprehend the conveyed media content by deconstructing it. Especially when it comes to media workers, or future media workers, media literacy is foundational, encompassing information competencies, civic education competencies, and technological competencies [11] (p. 35) to provide the ability to operate effectively in the media environment.

Hence, media literacy as autonomous courses or as included lectures is considered vital in contemporary education and the educators’ role is to find the proper tools to achieve that [12], co-working across multiple sectors that involve policy, media, technology, and education [13]. As Ref. [14] (p. 434) argues “students need to learn both material practices and conceptual understandings as they undertake media production and analysis to develop digital media literacies”. Current students know how to work with digital technologies as part of their university obligations; in particular, videos are integral tools of contemporary education. However, they also need these tools to support creative and expressive work [15]. Students are fonder of being creators rather than consumers as they also pursue the practice and the field approach to come closer to workplace reality [16].

Constructivist educational approaches, which emphasize active, student-centered learning, offer a promising framework for developing media literacy skills that go beyond passive consumption to critical analysis and creation. Theories associated with a constructivist method underline that knowledge relates to the way it is produced [17], and three key components are important: the intended learning outcomes, the activities created to achieve these outcomes, and the methods used to assess the learning [18]. Rather than passively receiving information, students in a constructivist classroom actively construct their understanding through hands-on experiences, critical discussions, and reflection and knowledge is derived through meaning-making processes [19]. By means of cooperativity, peer interaction, and peer engagement, students’ critical thinking and creativity are positively influenced which in turn, impacts positively on their problem-solving abilities and academic performance, resulting in boosting their academic success [20].

This integration of constructivist methods into media literacy education fosters deeper engagement and equips learners with the skills needed to navigate and critically assess media in a complex digital world. Media literacy education involves active inquiry and critical thinking, and it recognizes media as a significant part of culture while acknowledging that people draw on their own skills, beliefs, and experiences to interpret media messages [21]. However, as Ref. [22] (p. 332) argue, there are several major challenges in designing and implementing a media literacy curriculum. Key obstacles include resistance from administrative bodies (such as ministries and national education institutions), overcrowded classrooms, and the need for comprehensive initial and ongoing teacher training. Furthermore, effective pedagogy of media literacy may vary among different ages, leading to the employment of diverse learning practices [23].

It is especially in audiovisual education, where new media technologies and platforms constantly emerge, that students should adapt to new circumstances to enhance their ability to utilize new media tools and, furthermore, they should constantly update the acquired knowledge and skills. Participating as creators in audiovisual production may aid in more effective comprehension of media literacy due to the ability to express themselves through the processes of pursuing knowledge, applying it via specific techniques, and taking responsibility for the selected storytelling formats [24,25,26]. It is generally investigated and accepted that video production may provide students with the capability to achieve content-area knowledge as they become more involved with the subject [27].

Interactivity in video consumption is a component that was added to linear videos since one of the characteristics of Web 2.0 is the ability to interact with content, initially through hyperlinks and lately through decisions on posed questions or alternative navigating paths. Changing patterns of media consumption have led to the emergence of the genre of interactive documentary, as a hybrid form that includes film, journalism, and digital games. Interactive docs, and videos in general, utilize the features of Web 2.0 and apply to contemporary online audiences as it encompasses making choices in the viewing process through personalized actions [28,29,30,31]. Interactive features in videos employed in the educational procedure engage the student and increase awareness of the video content [32] while providing an attractive learning environment [33]. As Ref. [34] argue, they are used as tools to enhance learning, while providing the pedagogical benefits in active learning since the effectiveness that interactive videos provide comes from the ability for self-regulated information processing [35]. Among the functions that interactive videos encompass are the ability to create quizzes (false or true and/or multiple choice), to add further information in different formats (texts, hyperlinks, images, etc.), to fill in the blanks in sentences, etc. Furthermore, in more enhanced editions, different paths in following a story can be set.

Interactive videos, used for educational purposes, improve conceptual understanding, learning outcomes, and manage cognitive load more effectively than conventional videos, as derived by the research conducted by [36] in STEM education. In the same field, the research of [37] indicated that H5P-based interactive video is highly effective in fostering skill development, helping to address learning loss. In their study, [38] found that while adding interactive questions to hypervideos improved cognitive learning outcomes, the interactivity itself did not offer extra benefits for knowledge acquisition or application beyond what the questions alone provided, suggesting that instructors can effectively use interactive questions by prompting students to manually input responses and offering feedback and explanations after each submission. Interactive videos were viewed positively for teaching and learning by both students and staff through highly successful workshops on interactive video content creation in the study of [39]. The findings of this study highlighted that interactive videos enhance student engagement, support flexible and independent learning, and empower students by allowing them to take greater control over their learning process.

The aim of this research is to investigate the role of interactive video production to the understanding of media literacy concepts by communication and media students. Specifically, a pedagogical research project was implemented within the framework of the course of “Creative Studio and Audiovisual Productions” at the Department of Communication and Digital Media at the University of Western Macedonia, Greece, that involved understanding of theoretical concepts through applied technical knowledge. The objective for the students was, through the application of technical skills and their personal engagement as creators, to become aware of media literacy and its forms of application.

To cope with the research purposes, the following three questions were formed:

RQ1: What is the relationship between the examined digital literacy levels of the participants and their knowledge level on media literacy prior to the creation of interactive video production?

RQ2: How do the participants assess the role of video and interactive video production on media literacy prior to their personal involvement?

RQ3: Does the process of creating an interactive video on media literacy impact the participants’ perceptions on the usefulness of audiovisual productions on media literacy?

The rest of the paper is structured as follows: initially the applied process of the pedagogical project and the methodology followed are deployed (Section 2), consequently, the research results are presented (Section 3), categorized in sub-sections, which are afterwards discussed and commented upon (Section 4) part, and lastly the overall conclusions are highlighted, pointing out the limitations of the study along with future work suggestions.

2. Materials and Methods

The course “Creative Studio and Audiovisual Productions” is a compulsory one taught in the fourth semester of the curriculum of the Department of Communication and Digital Media at the University of Western Macedonia, Greece. It consists of 13 lectures on theory taught in the classroom for all students who wish to attend (presence is not mandatory) and of six mandatory laboratory courses taught in the labs in groups of twenty students. The purpose of the course is to provide the students with knowledge and skills on various forms of audiovisual productions and engage them creatively in the procedure of planning, shooting, and editing their own video production. Emphasis is placed both on the theories that govern the production of different forms of audiovisual productions, such as journalistic reports, documentaries, advertisements, etc., but also on the practical development of the necessary skills. Many productions were presented during the lectures and were commented upon, analyzing both the content and the techniques involved to reach the desired result. The students were steadily encouraged to participate in discussions on the productions by sharing their opinions and remarks, not only as spectators but as creators as well. As diverse points of view are expressed and considered, critical review is developed, and furthermore mutual respect evolves [25]. Especially in a department that prepares students to be employed in the scientific and professional fields of communication and journalism, it is necessary to develop social skills.

During the laboratory courses, the students work hands-on with the computers with the free, open source, cross-platform video editor Shotcut (https://shotcut.org, accessed on 1 November 2024) on exercises of escalated difficulty and Lumi (https://lumi.education/en/#, accessed on 1 November 2024) that employs H5P, which is an open source content creation tool, to create, among other things, interactive videos. It has to be mentioned that for the students to enroll in the specific course they must have already been positively evaluated (graded with five or more out of ten) for the course “Principles of Audio and Video Capture and Editing” taught in the second semester, thus having acquired basic knowledge and skills on video production.

At the beginning of the spring semester of the academic year 2023–2024 the students that attended the course “Creative Studio and Audiovisual Productions” were informed about the evaluation which included the creation of a three-minute duration interactive video production on the topic of media literacy. They were free to choose the way they wanted to present the issue, i.e., as a journalistic report, as an educational or instructional video, or even as a social impact message or an entertainment video. Media literacy education concerning news media can be more suitable for adults, as their need to critically understand news is often more pressing. However, as university students, despite being adults, may be more interested in media types that hold greater relevance for young people, such as entertainment media, the choice of topic and approach for their projects was left up to them [21,40]. The concept was to empower students to develop their perspectives without constraints, and to use their own aesthetics and critical opinions. Furthermore, they were free to decide whether they would work on their own or in groups of up to five students, highlighting the importance of teamwork in media production. This approach aligns with the creative and participatory methods typical of a constructivist educational framework [7].

Since modern smartphones are equipped with very good camera lenses and large storage spaces, the participants were advised to use their own devices that they already knew how to handle. Also, they could choose to work with the video editing software they were most acquainted with, however, they had to use Lumi (https://lumi.education/en/#, accessed on 1 November 2024) to add the selected interactive elements. Any kind of technological support needed would be provided to avoid disappointment and probable withdrawal caused by technological issues.

After being informed in detail about the production during the first lecture of the course, a questionnaire prepared on Google Forms was sent to them via the online platform eclass (https://eclass.uowm.gr/courses/CDM137/, accessed on 1 September 2024) that is used for the communication and upload of all information (i.e., presentations, guidelines, additional reading material, etc.) regarding the course. Since all the students that attend the course were enrolled in the online platform, it was decided that the most appropriate method to disseminate the questionnaire to reach the whole population under study was to mail it through the official announcements of the course. All necessary information and instructions were discussed in the classroom, pointing out the confidentiality and the anonymity of the research. The students were chosen as a sample for research on media literacy since they already possessed foundational knowledge and skills in video production acquired in the prior course; thus, they have been involved as media creators at least once. Furthermore, as the “Creative Studio and Audiovisual Productions” course is twofold, encompassing both theoretical and hands-on practice, it can provide both the analysis of concepts, through lecturing and discussions, along with the practical environment to apply them. The software used was freely available and the students could work at their own personal pace without restrictions imposed by commercial products, while increasing their awareness of accessible resources in media production. Lastly, the specific students were considered as an ideal sample for research on media literacy due to their overall studies in a department that prepares them for careers in communication and journalism.

All information was given in the first part of the questionnaire, which consisted of the following six units. A: Unit 1, informed consent to participate in research; b: Unit 2, students’ knowledge of the concept of Media Literacy; c: Unit 3, device use and personal settings while searching and receiving online information; d: Unit 4, creation of video productions; e: Unit 5, knowledge level on interactive video productions; and f: Unit 6, demographics that included data only of gender and age. The inclusion criteria for the participation in the research were: a. to be students of the Department of Communication and Digital Media, of the University of Western Macedonia, Greece, and b. to attend the course “Creative Studio and Audiovisual Productions” at the spring semester of the academic year 2023–2024.

The questionnaire items were based on already existing guides and instruments for measuring media literacy levels and [2,3,11] which were adapted to meet the demands of the study. The skills the participants had (i.e., performing computer tasks and Internet navigation), the competency in producing media content, and their ability to critically consume media content [3] were credited and utilized in the first questionnaire. The closed-ended answers were based on the five-point Likert scale, and they varied according to the questions. For example, the students were asked to rate on a five-point Likert scale (not at all to perfect) their knowledge on the term media literacy (Do you know the term “Media Literacy”?) in terms of frequency (never to 2–3 h every day), the device employed while being informed (For our information reception, you use:), and also in terms of frequency (never to always) and the security measures taken when connecting to the Internet (When you connect to the Internet you use:). Furthermore, the participants were asked to evaluate on a five-point Likert scale (not at all certain to very certain) their level of confidence as Internet users and their ability to assess the content (i.e., perceived fake news or disinformation) and the level of confidence (totally disagree to totally agree) in using the correct settings on their social media accounts to control the visibility of the shared photos and videos. The topics searched online were also quested in terms of frequence (never to always).

The students’ viewpoint on the ease of creating audiovisual productions along with their effectiveness as media literacy tools were queried using a five-point Likert scale in terms of disagreement and agreement (totally disagree to totally agree). Finally, the participants were asked to state their level of acquaintance with interactive video production (not at all to perfect) and their opinions on the ease of creating interactive video productions along with their effectiveness as media literacy tools (totally disagree to totally agree).

The questionnaire was answered by 85 students, although 144 (60% response rate) were enrolled in the course, one of which in unit one replied that he/she did not wish to participate in the research therefore his/her answers were not included in the final analysis. The replies received were coded and inserted into the IBM SPSS Statistics 25 software to be further analyzed. It is assumed that the relatively low response rate was due to the students’ ignorance of the topics of media literacy and interactive videos which were mentioned by them during the first lectures. The participants’ gender allocation was 35.7% males, 61.9% females, and 2.4% stated themselves as “other” and their age was distributed as follows: 19–20 years old 58.3%, 21–22 years old 20.2%, 23–25 years old 11.9%, 26–30 years old 3.6%, 31–40 years old 2.4%, and 41–over years old 3.6%.

During the semester, the students attended, among others, a lecture on media literacy and a lecture on interactive videos and their multiple uses; furthermore, they were provided with extensive additional reading material and online sources on both topics. The point of communicating their ideas freely was indicated many times during the lectures and through personal communication. At the beginning of each lecture, they were urged to discuss their thoughts, ideas, encountered problems, and the process of their work regarding the interactive video production on any of the production stages. As the approach was based on constructivism, a flexible framework was employed, allowing individuals to tailor their work to their specific contexts and leverage their strengths [41]. However, considering the challenges of this endeavor, space for discussion of the emerging issues was allowed. Peer feedback, discussion, and exchange of ideas, assisted in deepening students’ understanding of media literacy by learning from each other’s viewpoints. All issues were addressed, and solutions were sought through an overall discussion among peers that aided in identifying strengths and weaknesses.

Furthermore, the evaluation criteria were announced in the first lecture, were uploaded to the online platform of eclass, and students were also reminded when needed. The students knew that the video should reflect media literacy principles using at least two interactive elements to engage viewers in a way that they could be aided to learn or apply media literacy skills by stimulating critical thinking and promoting engagement. It also had to last around three minutes and be technically sound. At the end of the semester, and after having submitted the interactive video productions, a second questionnaire was handed out in paper form on the course’s written exam day and the students were instructed to fill it in after having completed the exam. Afterwards, 115 received answers, out of the 120 students that took the exam, and were coded and inserted into the IBM SPSS Statistics software for further analysis. This questionnaire consisted of eight questions self-evaluating the knowledge acquired and assessing the procedure of creating interactive video productions along with the evaluated usefulness. Two more questions concerned the same demographics used in the first questionnaire, gender and age. Two different five-point Likert scales were employed. The first one (not at all to perfect) concerned the students’ updated knowledge on the term media literacy. The other one, in terms of disagreement and agreement (totally disagree to totally agree), was used for the questions on their updated ability to assess the content (i.e., perceived fake news or disinformation), and the updated viewpoint on the ease of creating audiovisual productions along with their effectiveness as media literacy tools. Students were asked their opinions on the ease of creating interactive video productions along with their effectiveness as media literacy tools. Finally, the participants’ viewpoints on whether the process of producing an interactive video aided in the comprehension of media literacy in a more friendly way and on whether the interactive audiovisual productions can be effective communication tools were investigated using the same scale. The participants’ gender allocation in the second research was 46.1% males, 53.0% females and 0.9% stated themselves as “other” and their age was distributed as follows: 19–20 years old 56.5%, 21–22 years old 22.6%, 23–25 years old 13.9%, 26–30 years old 3.5%, 31–40 years old 1.7%, and 41–over years old 1.7%.

As the study involved pre- and post-test investigation, statistical analysis employed quantitative analysis (descriptive and correlations) to answer the three research questions. The pre-test analysis aimed at capturing data on participants’ digital literacy, media literacy knowledge, confidence levels, and initial perceptions, while the post-test analysis aimed at assessing changes in media literacy knowledge and the influence of the interactive video production experience.

However, the first test performed was the reliability test (Cronbach’s alpha) to check the instrument’ s level of self-consistency. At this point, it must be mentioned that no pilot testing was performed; however, the questionnaire was extensively discussed with academic peers of the author to reach its final form. The overall instrument resulted in alpha = 0.65; thus, one item was discarded and not considered further in the analysis. Specifically, the item that was discarded was: For reception of information, you use: a. free TV channels, b. on-demand platforms, c. radio and d. podcasts. The remaining items presented alpha = 0.71 which is an acceptable value [42], and we proceeded with the analysis.

3. Results

After collecting the data of both questionnaires, the dual analysis was initiated commencing from the one that was performed prior to the interactive video production. In this section the findings will be presented along with short comments.

4. Discussion

The aim of this research was to assess the interactive video production as a medium in enhancing media literacy of students in the fields of communication and journalism who, as found in other research [44], present enhanced critical news media consumption in contrast to students in non-media courses. Through awareness techniques, i.e., familiarizing themselves with the genre of interactive video, personal experimental production at all stages, and conceptual understandings [14], the students, as stated, acquired skills and knowledge on media literacy, understanding its role in our lives. Although both the topic and the procedure were unknown at the beginning of the semester, most of them managed to create very good interactive productions in a wide variety of genres (journalistic reporting, educational, instructional, advertising, even story dramatization) and as argued during the presentation day, it was a very enjoyable process. Students’ experience with the media was connected with digital media applications, supporting the improvement of their critical thinking, creativity, and communication skills in personal areas of interest [21]. Therefore, besides gaining knowledge and skills which are of upmost importance in an educational procedure, the students, through employing human-computer interaction, were creatively expressive, revealing their interests, worries, and talents.

Regarding RQ1 (What is the relationship between the examined digital literacy levels of the participants and their knowledge level on media literacy?), that was examined via the answers provided prior to the creation of the interactive production, the results revealed there is a moderate statistical correlation between the use of security software and the media literacy term knowledge levels. This may be explained since users who use security software can be more aware of the potential risks associated with digital environments, leading them to search for information on related issues that could include media literacy topics or result in achieving media literacy, thus concluding that enhancing digital literacy may also improve media literacy. Moreover, the participants do not feel confident enough as safe Internet users, however they feel more confident in recognizing fake news and misinformation on the Internet, which was found to be statistically correlated with media literacy knowledge. In fact, the critical thinking skills that are expressed as recognizing fake news and misinformation is what media literacy is about; critically analyzing and evaluating information. Therefore, regarding the first RQ of the study, it is deduced that digital literacy is a significant parameter in acquiring media literacy and it is expected that students who are equipped with media literacy are able to recognize trustworthy and credible information.

As derived from the responses, the participants, prior to their personal involvement, highly value the role of video and interactive video production on media literacy (RQ2). Videos, as revealed by the findings of this research, are the most searched items on the Internet, therefore being favored as they capture attention with multiple stimuli and they maintain audience interest even across difficult to express concepts. Videos may use various storytelling techniques to demonstrate the selected topics, thus applying to different learning styles [45], and by adding interactions their comprehension may be enhanced since the decisions that will have to be made demand active participation. As observed during the lectures, the students’ past experiences with video tools aided in the completion of the endeavor since they were more occupied with the content of the production and interested in learning what media literacy is to be able to present it in the best possible way. Of course, there were few students that were reluctant to present the topic through video but through repetitive clarifications they proceeded in the production. Hence, concerning the second RQ regarding the students’ initial assessment of the role of video and interactive video production on media literacy, it may be assumed that the participants recognize interactive video production as an effective tool for media literacy.

Regarding the third RQ (Does the process of creating an interactive video on media literacy impact the participants’ perceptions on the usefulness of audiovisual productions on media literacy?), it can be safely concluded that the process followed with hands-on media creation allowed the students to acquire knowledge on media literacy and skills on interactive audiovisual production. The findings, without doubt, revealed that through the procedure of independently creating an interactive video production, they comprehended the media literacy concepts and led to greater appreciation of the interactive documentary genre. As the goal of modern education is to develop skills and competencies relevant to students’ future careers following the principles of a constructivist-centered classroom [19], this approach of active learning environment proved highly effective. Therefore, the answer to the third RQ of the study is that creating interactive videos significantly enhanced students’ understanding of media literacy concepts.

The process of creating interactive videos was founded in the conception that personally performing the tasks needed for an interactive audiovisual production deepens someone’s ability to analyze and critique media while thinking about the interests of their audience and how to engage them. Since the target was for the students to learn what media literacy is, this endeavor was planned as a hopefully effective intervention. Watching the media productions, analyzing statistically the answers of the second questionnaire, conducting a further analysis (Mann–Witney U test), and based on the discussion with the students, the project’s outcome proved impactful, demonstrating significant benefits for the participants. Participating in the creation of interactive videos enabled students to critically engage with media content, assess credibility, and recognize bias through a joyful and innovative way. In general, positive results are associated with the employment of video production as part of content-area instruction [28].

A limitation of the project that the author had in mind was that not all students think alike and not all learn at the same pace and by following the same procedures and that personality is associated with student perceptions of audiovisual technology acceptance [46]. To overcome this issue, there was constant free communication with anyone that needed to express queries or reservations and the students were urged to express themselves through the ways and the messages they felt most comfortable with. By all means, the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in the educational processes may stimulate perceptual skills that lead to effective learning if personal characteristics of the learners are considered [47].

The most important asset received through educational procedures, especially regarding issues that are of a technological nature that change rapidly, is that students are equipped with the sense of learning how to learn, therefore being able to adapt to innovations [48]. In this way, sustainability challenges can be met in a conceptual aspect, however, since the resources used in this project were personal devices (smartphones) and free software (Shotcut and Lumi) the students may continue creating more media productions without investments in technology.

This study contributes to the field of media literacy education by demonstrating the effectiveness of interactive video production as a hands-on, constructivist learning approach for communication and journalism students. The findings highlight how engaging with interactive media creation enhances students’ critical analysis skills and confidence in evaluating information credibility. By aligning digital literacy with media literacy, the study shows that interactive video production may cultivate essential skills and unite critical thinking with creativity. Additionally, it is in the author’s opinion that it provides a sustainable educational model by utilizing accessible, low-cost tools (smartphones, free software), making media literacy development achievable across various educational contexts without the need for high-end resources. However, it must be mentioned that there is a greater need to encompass media literacy courses in the basic educational curricula that could assist students in realizing its significance, especially within the current digital environments.

5. Conclusions

In the era of generative AI and of excessive amounts of daily produced and disseminated informational content, media literacy is imperative for a healthy society. As Ref. [49] argue, the technological knowledge acquired can help in the matter of functioning perspectives, however, the processes and the concepts support the socio-cultural perspective. Critical thinking skills are of great importance and should be cultivated through educational programs of all stages; even educators could benefit from audiovisual knowledge and skills acquisition to strengthen their media literacy competence [50]. Students’ engagement with personal creations can provide more powerful skills and enhanced knowledge levels, thus empowering them to distinguish fake news and misinformation [51] and develop news media literacy which is considered even harder to achieve [12]. More effective participation in societies is achieved through gained knowledge and media literacy. Especially when it comes to future journalists and communicators that will create and disseminate information shaping public opinions and holding ethical responsibility on the expressed discourse, the need to be media literate is crucial. They can model critical thinking and encourage the audience to do the same.

As with all research, this one comes with limitations too. First, the sample is rather small and consisted of students that study at a certain university in Greece, therefore the results cannot be generalized to larger populations. However, they offer a basis for further research, providing initial evidence that may inspire similar studies across more diverse or larger populations to corroborate and expand upon these findings. Also, as the results are primarily descriptive, they are interpreted within the specific context, and they provide an overview of the outcomes within the studied subpopulation. As part of future research, it would be interesting to follow those students in the next semesters (longitudinal study), since as participants of this research they have completed the 4th out of eight semesters, and examine whether the experience of this project has helped them both educationally and in terms of comprehending the media ecosystem. Moreover, it would be interesting to track them as they become professionals and investigate the effect, if there is any, of the knowledge and skills acquired through this project (longitudinal study). In another field, research on the impact of interactive video production on other curricula, across diverse educational settings, would identify the possibility of incorporating more of this genre in the education procedure and evaluate the adaptability and impact of interactive video production.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Data is available upon request to the author.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank students of the Department of Communication and Digital Media, at the University of Western Macedonia, Greece for their participation in the research; without their help this work could not be completed.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

1. Grimus, M. Emerging Technologies: Impacting Learning, Pedagogy and Curriculum Development. In Emerging Technologies and Pedagogies in the Curriculum. Bridging Human and Machine: Future Education with Intelligence; Yu, S., Ally, M., Tsinakos, A., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2020; pp. 127–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
2. CML. Media Literacy: A Definition and More. Center for Media Literacy. Empowerment through Education. CML MediaLit Kit™: Malibu, CA, USA. Available online: www.medialit.com/media-literacy-definition-and-more (accessed on 12 August 2024).
3. Lee, L.; Chen, D.T.; Li, J.Y.; Lin, T.B. Understanding New Media Literacy: The Development of a Measuring Instrument. Comput. Educ. 2015, 85, 84–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
4. Picone, I. Conceptualizing Media Users Across Media: The Case for ‘Media User/Use’ as Analytical Concepts. Convergence 2017, 23, 378–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
5. Podara, A.; Matsiola, M.; Kotsakis, R.; Maniou, T.A.; Kalliris, G. Generation Z’s Screen Culture: Understanding Younger Users’ Behaviour in the Television Streaming Age—The Case of Post-Crisis Greece. Crit. Stud. Telev. 2021, 16, 91–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
6. Tiernan, P.; Costello, E.; Donlon, E.; Parysz, M.; Scriney, M. Information and Media Literacy in the Age of AI: Options for the Future. Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
7. Leaning, M. An Approach to Digital Literacy through the Integration of Media and Information Literacy. Media Commun. 2019, 7, 4–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
8. Potter, W.J. The State of Media Literacy. J. Broadcast. Electron. Media 2010, 54, 675–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
9. Reisoğlu, İ.; Toksoy, S.E.; Erenler, S. An Analysis of the Online Information Searching Strategies and Metacognitive Skills Exhibited by University Students During Argumentation Activities. Libr. Inf. Sci. Res. 2020, 42, 101019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
10. Craft, S.; Ashley, S.; Maksl, A. News Media Literacy and Conspiracy Theory Endorsement. Commun. Public 2017, 2, 388–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
11. Muratova, N.; Grizzle, A.; Mirzakhmedova, D. Media and Information Literacy in Journalism: A Handbook for Journalists and Journalism Educators; UNESCO: Taskent, Uzbekistan, 2019. [Google Scholar]
12. Kleemans, M.; Eggink, G. Understanding News: The Impact of Media Literacy Education on Teenagers’ News Literacy. J. Educ. 2016, 5, 74–88. [Google Scholar]
13. Bulger, M.; Davison, P. The Promises, Challenges, and Futures of Media Literacy. J. Media Literacy Educ. 2018, 10, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
14. Dezuanni, M. The Building Blocks of Digital Media Literacy: Socio-Material Participation and the Production of Media Knowledge. J. Curric. Stud. 2015, 47, 416–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
15. Henderson, M.; Selwyn, N.; Aston, R. What Works and Why? Student Perceptions of ‘Useful’ Digital Technology in University Teaching and Learning. Stud. High. Educ. 2017, 42, 1567–1579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
16. Matsiola, M.; Spiliopoulos, P.; Tsigilis, N. Digital Storytelling in Sports Narrations: Employing Audiovisual Tools in Sport Journalism Higher Education Course. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
17. O’Connor, K. Constructivism, Curriculum and the Knowledge Question: Tensions and Challenges for Higher Education. Stud. High. Educ. 2022, 47, 412–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
18. Biggs, J.B.; Tang, C. Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 4th ed.; Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press: Maidenhead, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
19. Krahenbuhl, K.S. Student-Centered Education and Constructivism: Challenges, Concerns, and Clarity for Teachers. Clear. House J. Educ. Strateg. Issues Ideas 2016, 89, 97–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
20. Almulla, M.A. Constructivism Learning Theory: A Paradigm for Students’ Critical Thinking, Creativity, and Problem Solving to Affect Academic Performance in Higher Education. Cogent Educ. 2023, 10, 2172929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
21. Hobbs, R.; Jensen, A. The Past, Present, and Future of Media Literacy Education. J. Media Lit. Educ. 2009, 1, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
22. Fedorov, A.; Levitskaya, A.; Camarero Calandria, E. Curricula for Media Literacy Education According to International Experts. Eur. J. Contemp. Educ. 2016, 17, 324–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
23. Rasi, P.; Vuojärvi, H.; Ruokamo, H. Media Literacy Education for All Ages. J. Media Lit. Educ. 2019, 11, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
24. Friesem, E. A Story of Conflict and Collaboration: Media Literacy, Video Production and Disadvantaged Youth. J. Media Lit. Educ. 2014, 6, 44–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
25. Matsiola, M.; Spiliopoulos, P.; Kotsakis, R.; Nicolaou, C. Technology-Enhanced Learning in Audiovisual Education: The Case of Radio Journalism Course Design. Educ. Sci. 2019, 9, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
26. Nicolaou, C. Media Trends and Prospects in Educational Activities and Techniques for Online Learning and Teaching Through Television Content: Technological and Digital Socio-Cultural Environment, Generations, and Audiovisual Media Communications in Education. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
27. Snelson, C. Video Production in Content-Area Pedagogy: A Scoping Study of the Research Literature. Learn. Media Technol. 2018, 43, 294–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
28. Aston, J.; Gaudenzi, S. Interactive Documentary: Setting the Field. Stud. Doc. Film 2012, 6, 125–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
29. Kim, N.; Kim, S. Interactive Documentary on Perspective of New Media. Int. J. Multimed. Ubiquitous Eng. 2014, 9, 117–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
30. Podara, A.; Giomelakis, D.; Nicolaou, C.; Matsiola, M.; Kotsakis, R. Digital Storytelling in Cultural Heritage: Audience Engagement in the Interactive Documentary New Life. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
31. Dowling, D.O. Interactive Documentary and the Reinvention of Digital Journalism, 2015–2020. Convergence 2022, 28, 905–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
32. Kolås, L. Application of Interactive Videos in Education. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET), Lisbon, Portugal, 11–13 June 2015; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
33. Dieck-Assad, G.; Hinojosa-Olivares, J.M.; Colomer-Farrarnos, J. Study of the Effectiveness of Interactive Videos in Applied Electronics Courses. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. 2020, 14, 983–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
34. Ti-Shen, E.T.; Sen, A. Effective Use of Interactive Videos as an Educational Tool in Higher Education—An Asian Context. In Proceedings of the EDULEARN19, Palma, Spain, 1–3 July 2019; pp. 10379–10385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
35. Merkt, M.; Weigand, S.; Heier, A.; Schwan, S. Learning with Videos vs. Learning with Print: The Role of Interactive Features. Learn. Instr. 2011, 21, 687–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
36. Desai, T.S.; Kulkarni, D.C. Assessment of Interactive Video to Enhance Learning Experience: A Case Study. J. Eng. Educ. Transform. 2022, 35, 74–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
37. Susanti, I.; Suyatna, A.; Herlina, K. Development of H5P Moodle-Based Interactive STEM-Loaded Videos to Grow Performance Skills as an Effort to Overcome Learning Loss in Electrical Measuring Materials. J. Penelit. Pendidik. IPA 2023, 9, 6974–6984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
38. Deng, R.; Yang, Y.; Shen, S. Impact of Question Presence and Interactivity in Instructional Videos on Student Learning. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2024, 1–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
39. Gedera, D.S.; Zalipour, A. Use of Interactive Video for Teaching and Learning. In ASCILITE 2018; Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education: Geelong, Australia, 2018; pp. 362–367. [Google Scholar]
40. Moody, K.E. A Constructivist Approach to Media Literacy Education: The Role of the Library. In Proceedings of the World Library and Information Congress: 75th IFLA General Conference and Assembly, Milan, Italy, 23–27 August 2009; pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar]
41. Kosnik, C.; Menna, L.; Dharamshi, P.; Beck, C. Constructivism as a Framework for Literacy Teacher Education Courses: The Cases of Six Literacy Teacher Educators. Eur. J. Teach. Educ. 2018, 41, 105–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
42. Taber, K.S. The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Res. Sci. Educ. 2018, 48, 1273–1296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
43. Panagıotou, N.; Lazou, C.; Baliou, A. Generation Z: Media Consumption and MIL. İmgelem 2022, 6, 455–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
44. Vraga, E.K.; Tully, M. Effectiveness of a Non-Classroom News Media Literacy Intervention Among Different Undergraduate Populations. J. Mass Commun. Educ. 2016, 71, 440–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
45. Nicolaou, C. The Secret Power of Digital Storytelling Methodology: Technology-Enhanced Learning Utilizing Audiovisual Educational Content. In Enhancing Education through Multidisciplinary Film Teaching Methodologies; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2023; pp. 235–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
46. Manolika, M.; Kotsakis, R.; Matsiola, M.; Kalliris, G. Direct and Indirect Associations of Personality with Audiovisual Technology Acceptance Through General Self-Efficacy. Psychol. Rep. 2022, 125, 1165–1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
47. Nicolaou, C.; Matsiola, M.; Kalliris, G. The Challenge of an Interactive Audiovisual-Supported Lesson Plan: Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs) in Adult Education. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
48. Veglis, A. Education of Journalists on ICTs: Issues and Opportunities. J. Appl. Journal. Media Stud. 2013, 2, 265–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
49. Dengel, A.; Heuer, U. A Curriculum of Computational Thinking as a Central Idea of Information & Media Literacy. In Proceedings of the 13th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education, Potsdam, Germany, 4–6 October 2018; p. 1. [Google Scholar]
50. Plank, M.; Molnár, A.D.; Marín-Arraiza, P. Extending Media Literacy Education: The Popular Science Video Workshop; IFLA: Hague, The Netherlands, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
51. Damico, J.S.; Baildon, M.; Panos, A. Media Literacy and Climate Change in a Post-Truth Society. J. Media Lit. Educ. 2018, 10, 11–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]