A Decade of Short Videos for Foreign Language Teaching and Learning: A Review

Abstract

This literature review focuses on the use of short videos for foreign language (FL) teaching and learning from 2013 to 2022, a research area that has been attracting growing attention. The results were classified according to three categories based on the scope of the short videos in research: (1) short videos as a medium, (2) short videos as an intervention, and (3) short videos as the central focus of studies. Such a categorization enabled us to determine that short videos have become an independent research term in the field of FL teaching and learning and to describe current trends in this field. The intrinsic characteristics of short videos in current educational and multimedia environments are discussed, namely, the reasons why short videos are used in the classroom, as well as the potential of short videos as a learning resource created by young students and as an open educational resource (OER). Finally, we consider the differences between short videos and traditional audiovisual resources to highlight their innovative contributions to FL teaching and learning.

1. Introduction

As pedagogical resources, videos have been successfully used to present multiple sources of information in traditional, hybrid, and online classrooms. The use of these resources creates the opportunity for learners to be surrounded by visual images, sound effects, and written text at the same time [1], allowing them to experience and understand the content in a more relaxed and effective way [2]. It can also help overcome differences in the performance of learners with different learning profiles and promote more inclusive activities [3].

Compared to the established use of traditional videos in education [4], the use of short videos in different teaching and learning areas has been on the rise, mainly due to the widespread use of digital platforms [5,6,7].

In 2015, short video lecturing was used in a mathematics learning approach and its positive impact on increasing students’ motivation to learn mathematics was confirmed [8]. Due to its ease of use and accessibility, short video tutorials were used in a public health project that previously relied on traditional lectures in the same year [9]. In 2017, the effectiveness of using short videos in education was demonstrated [10]. These authors also investigated the duration of its efficacy in clinical education, demonstrating that short videos could only improve knowledge in the short term.

In the same year, short videos, with their characteristics of simplicity, effectiveness, and ease of access and dissemination, had a significant and consistent impact on students’ emotions in a nutrition education intervention [11]. Following that, the effectiveness of the intervention’s effects on clinical education-related factors was also confirmed [12]. Furthermore, short videos, in addition to direct interventions during teaching, served as feedback interventions to assess students’ learning situations [13].

Similarly, in the past decade, social networking platforms, such as Instagram and TikTok, have made educational short videos more available [14], and online learning courses make extensive use of short videos [15]. Therefore, focusing on the last 10 years may help us unveil new trends and research paths. Short videos have emerged as a FL teaching and learning resource [16,17] and as a way to assess and provide feedback on learners’ language skills [18,19]. However, in comparison to ongoing research on the use of traditional videos, studies on the use of short videos as a specific resource to develop learners’ language skills are still incipient.

1.1. Traditional versus Short Videos

In order to provide a clearer analysis of the particular theme we have chosen, it is necessary to distinguish between short videos and traditional videos used in FL teaching and learning. Obviously, the name “short video” stems from its own unique characteristics, namely the short duration of the video. However, the idea that relatively shorter scenes are easier to understand is well-known [20]. Thus, the short duration of videos is not an emerging feature but continues to be reflected in the study of the use of video in FL teaching and learning, even though these videos are not always given the name of short videos [21,22,23].

The greater advantage of the use of video in FL teaching and learning is the provision of authentic language input over the presentation of content [21]. Therefore, to some extent, “any selected short sequence from the programme can be utilized for FL intensive study” [23] (p. 68). That is why, in many studies, whether these videos with shorter duration are given the name of short videos or not, they have a common origin in that they are clips or segments directly extracted from traditional videos such as films, TV programs, etc.

Therefore, it appears that in most cases, the term short video is used in research due to its short duration. In other words, short videos seem to differ only in length from traditional videos and are even, in some ways, just another name for traditional videos that have been shortened to enter the FL classroom due to class time constraints. These shortened videos bring up an ongoing discussion about the effective duration of the video in teaching and learning.

Ellis and Childs [24] discovered that students lost interest after viewing 15-min video segments and suggested using shorter video clips. Lagerstrom et al. [25] indicated that the rule of thumb for maximum video length should be between 12 and 20 min. Prober and Khan [26] successfully used online videos shorter than 10 min to enable students to learn new concepts in their own time. And, according to Guo et al. [27], regardless of total video length, the median engagement time was no more than 6 min, and the shortest videos with less than 3 min had the highest engagement.

But these effective durations are not generalized and may be defined according to the audience and content of the video. As Çakir et al. [23] described “Two minutes of video can provide an hour of classroom work, or it can be used to introduce a range of activity for five minutes. A ten-minute programme can be useful for more advanced students” (p. 68).

However, it is worth noting that the shorter a video is, the more its construction becomes relevant to the producer, especially if it is not a clip from a traditional video but needs to be recreated. Guo et al. [27] put forward the hypothesis that shorter videos may contain higher-quality instructional content. This is because “it takes meticulous planning to explain a concept succinctly, so shorter videos are engaging not only due to length but also because they are better planned” [27] (p. 45). Furthermore, if the video is intentionally kept to one minute, it means that “It is important to build in accommodations in the video creation workflow for making updates when visuals change but content does not” [28] (p. 230).

So, what distinguishes short videos from traditional videos or short clips from traditional videos is not only their duration but the reconstruction of multimodal elements in short durations. In other words, to accomplish the complex phenomenon of video processing, these multimodal elements need to be carefully selected and combined [4]. And for FL learning, it is also considered that linguistic choices must provide affordances for language learning. This innovative combination of multimodal elements is the key to the quality of short videos and the fact that they can be studied independently of traditional videos.

Based on the above, and on the conclusions drawn by Larreta-Azelain e Monje [16], in this study, we define traditional videos as audio-visual materials that are transmitted by traditional media and are longer than 10 min. Short videos are audio-visual materials shorter than 10 min that are transmitted by new media.

1.2. Short Videos in FLs

The use of short videos in FL teaching and learning dates back to 1981, when Garber and Holmes [29] identified that short video films could be used to help FL students develop their written and oral skills. Following that, in 1995, instructional content with the same narrative was delivered both by a short video clip and by the teacher reading aloud in addition to showing images to see if the videos improved student comprehension. This constituted concrete evidence of a short video contribution to enhance teaching and learning [30].

In 1998, short television videos were used to encourage students to capture the focus of visual and verbal discourse [31]. Later, they were used to practice language pronunciation [32]. However, in contrast to oral skills, complex grammar was found to not be acquired from short film presentations [33]. In 2007, short videos were combined with text and images, and the impact of incidental learning was tested. Results showed that the combination of visuals and words was positively connotated [34].

In 2010, short instructional videos were used as an additional comprehension task to assess perceptive foreign language proficiency. The overlap between comprehension measures (viewing, listening, and reading) demonstrated their effectiveness in the assessment of foreign language comprehension [18]. Short videos with and without subtitles were used in parallel to test the effect of subtitles on listening activities. Results demonstrated that the use of subtitles led to greater attention, reinforced the acquisition of vocabulary, and allowed learners to determine meaning through the unpacking of language chunks [19]. Saugera [35] even encouraged students to add captions and write commentaries based on the production of the short films to promote reflection on different writing styles.

The studies referred to so far demonstrate the potential use of short videos for FL teaching and learning, but the last decade was marked by strong technological development and a surge of different digital tools and platforms that amplified the access to and availability of this kind of resource. Short videos are more appealing to students and therefore have the potential to raise their motivation and engagement [16]. They further have the power to enliven and challenge the FL teaching and learning process while successfully simulating professional contexts [36]. The most critical thing is that shorter videos may be better suited than longer ones for minimizing or managing the influence of learners’ unique cognition, in response to the reduction in differentiation [37].

In this regard, we believe that a literature review on the use of short videos for FL teaching and learning could be beneficial. The following literature review will allow us to describe research developments in FL teaching and learning via short videos by focusing on the last decade (2013–2022).

2. Methods

The review was carried out using three international online databases: (i) Web of Science, (ii) Scopus, and (iii) ERIC. The search was restricted to the years 2013 to 2022, with a focus on FL teaching and learning via short videos. “Foreign language” AND (short AND video OR clip OR film OR television program OR movie OR segment) were the terms used for conducting the search. Following the removal of duplicates, this search yielded 122 results (cf. Figure 1).

To further refine our review, we established the following exclusion criteria: (1) In the title, abstract, and keywords, “short” is not used as a qualifier for the video typology; (2) reference to non-educational contexts; (3) reference to videos longer than 10 min; (4) reference without the development of specific skills. This search yielded 11 results and these studies make up our analysis corpus.

3. Results

Table 1 summarizes the studies included in the current work, which are arranged vertically in descending order based on their publication date. It specifies the number of participants and their identities, the type of FL and proficiency level (when available), the study methodology, and the study object or role. It also displays the average video duration (when available); video type (the term used for the video resources in the article); video source (“editing” refers to the re-editing of existing open video resources and the recollection of text, images, and audio; “recording” refers to the manual recording of video); video property (“teaching” refers to videos provided by teachers, “learning” refers to videos provided by students); and video environment (“online” refers to videos that are accessible via the internet, “offline” refers to videos that are only used in a traditional classroom setting).

The educational levels mentioned in these studies vary between secondary and higher education, according to the review of these 11 articles. The studies were mainly from Spain [16,36,38,39] and other European countries [40,41,42], while the rest covered Asia [17], Africa [15], South America [43], and Oceania [44]. The most common are studies of English teaching and learning in those that report it, which indicate that the participants’ FL proficiency level is below B2 in the Common European Framework of References for Languages [45]. In terms of video characteristics, short videos are mostly derived from the re-editing of existing resources and are kept under 5 min. They are primarily provided by teachers as teaching resources but are also well suited to be created by students as their learning resources and as part of their learning process. Furthermore, while they are frequently viewed in an offline environment for speaking, vocabulary, and translation exercises, their potential as an OER is also noted.

To round out the review, we have divided the studies into three categories based on the scope of short videos assumed in the articles. (1) Short videos as a medium: short videos are only used as a vehicle for information to aid in the study implementation, and the study conclusion does not address their contribution to FL teaching and learning. (2) Short videos as an intervention: while short videos are designed to assist with only one phase of a study and their use is not the study’s primary goal, their presence is indispensable. (3) Short videos as a central focus: (short) videos are included in the article keywords and they serve as the central element in connecting the study’s various phases and goals.

Table 1

Overview of the studies.

Studies	Participants	Language/Level of Proficiency	Methodology (Explicitly Presented in the Text)	Object/Role	Video Duration (Average)	Video Type	Video Source	Video Property	Video Environment
Perez et al [42] (2014)	226 undergraduate students	French B1	Test and questionnaire for students after the project	Listening comprehension	7′57″ 5′44″ 2′29″	Short clips	Editing	Teaching	Offline
Talaván and Rodríguez-Arancón [38] (2014)	20 undergraduate students	English B1	Mixed-method approach (the students’ responses to questionnaires and the teachers’ observations were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively to triangulate the results)	Translation, writing	2′24″ 2′04″	Short clips	Editing	Learning	Offline
Couvaneiro and Pedro [40] (2015)	53 basic education students, 2 teachers	English A2	Pragmatic paradigm, mixed-method approach (students and teachers were surveyed before and after the unit)	Oral skills	------	Short videos	Editing	Learning	Online
Larreta-Azelain and Monje [16] (2016)	174 adult learners in online distance education	English, French, Italian, Greek, German	Quantitative techniques (student tracking in the virtual course) and qualitative ones (questionnaires before and after the project for teacher and student)	Oral skills, vocabulary, grammar	<10′	Short videos	Recording	Teaching	Online
Bolaños [39] (2017)	97 undergraduate students	English B2	Product-oriented empirical study with an electronic survey (questionnaire) and a blind experiment (including an assessment test)	Translation	6′ 3′	Short clips	Editing	Teaching	Offline
Masruddin [17] (2018)	25 high school students	English	Pre-experimental method with pre-test and post-test design	Oral skills	------	Short videos	Editing	Teaching	Offline
Olivier [15] (2019)	82 undergraduate students	Dutch	Qualitative research (questionnaire containing closed and open-ended questions for students)	Critical interaction, exposure to new technologies	1′02″	Short videos	Recording, editing	Learning	Online
Caruso et al. [44] (2019)	50 undergraduate students	French, Italian, Korean	Mixed quantitative and qualitative approach, triangulation (analysis of the coversheets, the survey, and the focus group session)	Awareness of the feedback process	5′	Short videos	Recording	Teaching	Online
Redzioch-Korkuz [41] (2019)	20 high school students	English B2	Pilot study (student comments of experimental and control groups)	Vocabulary	1′	Short video clips	Editing	Teaching	Offline
Ogea [36] (2020)	47 undergraduate students	English	Questionnaire for students	Translation	3′41″	Short movies	Editing	Teaching	Offline
Arredondo-Tapia and Garcia-Ponce [43] (2021)	5 extra-curricular students	English B1	Combination of quantitative (identification of fluency and accuracy patterns) and qualitative (questionnaires for students) data	Writing	4′	Short videos	Editing	Teaching	Offline

3.1. Short Videos as a Medium

As noted before, in pre-2013 cases, short videos were assumed to be traditional videos that had been shortened to fit into the FL classroom due to class time constraints. The same phenomenon has been observed in recent studies, particularly those focusing on subtitle application and use. Short videos, here, were only used as a medium or a vehicle for delivering information to aid in the study implementation, and the study conclusion does not address their contribution to FL teaching and learning.

Perez et al. [42] used short clip presentations to investigate the effects of non-captioned, fully captioned, and keyword-captioned videos on listening comprehension, and they clarified participants’ strong perceived need for fully captioned videos. Talaván and Rodríguez-Arancón [38] demonstrated that using reverse captioning as a collaborative language learning tool can improve translation and writing skills by practicing captioning short clips. Bolaños [39] measured short videos from free television programs with fansubs (amateur subtitling as opposed to officially licensed translations), but only acknowledged their widespread use for entertainment and self-study, without explicitly demonstrating whether they had positive or negative effects on formal English education. Redzioch-Korkuz [41] compared traditional paper-based and audiovisual translation-based techniques and presented the educational potential of using short video clips with integrated subtitles. Ogea [36] used short movies with original subtitles for translation exercises to confirm if they could affect technical term acquisition and improve student motivation.

3.2. Short Videos as an Intervention

In addition to being a medium to aid in study implementation, another role of short videos is to act as an intervention. That is, the use of short videos is not the primary goal of the study, but it is used to aid a phase of the study and its presence is critical, particularly in multipurpose studies such as the four studies below.

The main objective of Couvaneiro and Pedro [40] was to combine FL teaching with the use of tablet computers. For this reason, digital educational resources such as iBooks were created, and students explored them in the classroom together. Each group created a short video that was shown in class to assess the impact of the combination on students and teachers.

The main goal of Caruso et al. [44] was to introduce a set of online tools to the language classroom that would help students engage with feedback more meaningfully. To help students understand the feedback process and guide them in the use of learning strategies, a series of instructional use videos supporting interactive covers were recorded.

The primary objective of Arredondo-Tapia and Garcia-Ponce [43] was to see if procedural repetition had any effect on EFL students’ writing. The study used a narrative task to assess students’ writing fluency and accuracy, which involved narrating a story in written form after watching animated short films.

3.3. Short Videos as a Central Focus

In contrast to the two categories of short videos mentioned above, which serve as a research aid, when they connect the various stages and goals of the study, they can be understood as the central focus of the study and be embedded in the article keywords. We paid closer attention to these studies that used short videos as the focal point of the research and conducted a descriptive analysis.

By integrating short video lessons into multiple language courses, Larreta-Azelain and Monje [16] aimed to improve the FL skills of 174 adult learners in online distance education in English, French, Italian, Greek, and German courses. The short video lessons covered a wide range of topics related to language learning, including oral comprehension. Most of the videos were under 10 min long and were recorded by the teacher before being uploaded to the virtual courses. Student tracking in virtual courses, as well as pre-course and post-course questionnaires for teachers and students, have shown that short video courses helped online students improve their oral comprehension skills while reinforcing their knowledge of grammar and vocabulary. Authors believe one of the underlying reasons for that is that students must work harder to listen and understand what the speaker is saying, regardless of which aspect of language learning the short videos covered.

In terms of the videos themselves, one of the study recommendations is to look into the possibility of using existing media platforms to keep the videos accessible after the course has ended. Another is to improve the recording quality to address the video’s lack of high-quality sound. Yet another is to include subtitles to assist students with hearing impairments and limited FL skills.

Masruddin [17] wanted to verify if short videos were effective in teaching oral skills to English students. Twenty-five high school students from the English class took part in the study. The teacher used the film resources to re-edit the video, which was then presented in an offline lesson. After a group discussion, the teacher asked questions and guided the students in understanding the video. The study assessed students’ speaking in four areas: fluency, accuracy, vocabulary, and comprehensibility, using an experimental pre-test and post-test design. The pre-test was created to determine students’ basic oral skills, and the post-test was created to determine students’ progress following the intervention using short videos in group work. The results confirmed that the use of short videos in group work is effective in improving oral skills.

The study also explains the effectiveness of using short videos for language learning through group work in two ways: first, short videos can be used as a technique to bring real-world situations into the classroom, allowing students to interact with the teacher and encouraging them to explore and express themselves. Second, group work encourages students to share ideas and information, fostering a positive classroom environment and increasing their participation in the use of language.

Olivier [15] discussed how students in classrooms learned to create and use short instructional videos as a multimodal OER. The participants were chosen from a group of 82 undergraduate students enrolled in a Dutch course. The lecturer and the students discussed and determined the requirements for the videos in a group setting. The students then recorded or animated the videos, which were approximately one minute long and used in class. Participants submitted reflections via a questionnaire with closed and open-ended questions.

The study acknowledges the benefits of incorporating short videos into the classroom to stimulate learners’ interest and claims that students’ creation of short instructional videos can support them on three levels: emotions, knowledge, and skills. Students thought that making short videos was a novel way of working with content that allowed them to express themselves and feel accomplished. However, the difficulties that students face in terms of technical support and teamwork were also brought up. Some participants, for example, were unfamiliar with various websites and software, lacked the physical space and recording equipment required for filming, and had to overcome the autonomy of video production to work effectively in a collaborative group.

However, the study is more interesting in that it discusses the reuse of open video resources and encourages students to act as video producers or replicators. Also, the study makes it clear that students and teachers must be made aware of the impact of video complexity on cognitive load. The significance of connecting video topics to real communicative contexts is also emphasized, as is the possibility of including interactivity to support cognitive behavior in video presentations or uploading them as OER to media platforms.

4. Discussion

In this work, we reviewed literature focusing on the use of short videos for FL teaching and learning in the past decade. As mentioned in the methodology, we extended the search terms to audiovisual resources related to the semantics of short videos, such as “short clip OR short film OR short television program OR short movie,” to avoid the concept of short videos being presented as other terms in the study. However, the results revealed that in the studies grouped in the category of short videos as a medium, the types of video were mostly described as “short clip” and “short movie” rather than “short video”.

As noted before, in pre-2013 cases, we described short videos in FL teaching and learning research that seemed to differ only in length from traditional videos. Even though this phenomenon emerged in the last decade, it has been replaced by the term “short clips” in the case analyzed, which has more characteristics of traditional video clips. “Short video” is the only term used in studies where short videos are considered as an intervention or central focus. Therefore, in some ways, when the general constitution of short videos shifted from extracting video clips to re-recording and editing, it meant that the multimodal elements required to constitute a short video are reconsidered, reflecting the fact that short videos have followed a different path than traditional videos and have become an independent research term in the field of FL teaching and learning. This also reveals the reason why we focused on studies published within the last 10 years.

According to our results, FL classes using short videos for teaching and learning have included a variety of languages, but most of the classes were geared towards undergraduate and high school students and mostly for teaching and learning English. There are two possible reasons why short videos are so popular among young people in FL courses. One is that they tend to rely heavily on audiovisual and network environments in their language learning [16]. The second is that videos with a short duration can reduce their cognitive load in terms of complexity [15].

Short videos as audiovisual resources combine visual and auditory elements to establish specific associations with specific characters for these young FL learners [41], providing examples of authentic language use [16] in their familiar multimedia environment [46]. Furthermore, students are unconcerned about the level of enjoyment they derive from short videos and recognize that they are not necessarily intended for entertainment [44]. However, because video delivery content combines audio, visual, and textual elements, we must edit the material to segment it into cognitively comprehensible units [47] to better balance the elements.

According to Kalyuga [48], the cognitive load imposed by linguistic redundancy can be reduced if the pictorial and verbal information are not interdependent, if the textual material is short, or if the redundancy is of low complexity overall. Breaking audiovisual material into multiple sequences will result in more comprehensible input with this understanding [3]. It will be more accessible to learners if the videos are kept short and focused on the learning objectives [49]. Although Larreta-Azelain [50] suggests keeping video length to a maximum of 10 min, we discovered that most videos in the analyzed studies were less than 5 min long, and student evaluations were overwhelmingly positive as well [44].

We also identified the various educational properties of the videos in Table 1. Although short videos were primarily used as teaching resources provided by teachers in the studies we reviewed, they are also well suited to be used as learning resources created by students, implying that the pedagogical implications of students as makers can also be intriguing [15]. According to Couvaneiro and Pedro [40], there is now a need to focus on tasks and support student productions in the classroom, enabling students to move from content recipients to producers. Because, in contrast to the passive reception of knowledge by students in ritualized classrooms [51], these productions emphasize learner autonomy and ownership of learning, particularly in communicative tasks involving real-life situations [52].

Although some studies claim that students lack certain skills in video production [15], video-based creation sources cover resource reuse [53], which does not add more burden on young students. Our results show that video sources are mostly remixed clips of existing videos, allowing video production activities to be used in a variety of language courses for students of various language levels [52]. Furthermore, students’ involvement in the production process is regarded as well-planned and active [51], as this process not only improves their FL skills but also their digital skills [46].

Several studies suggest increasing the number of short online video courses [16] and incorporating online videos into the design of traditional, online, and hybrid courses [54]. This can be interpreted as a consideration based on the fact that short videos as an OER can be easily adapted and reused on the platform, and users can also quickly access and evaluate them [55]. Such resources not only allow teachers to observe contextualized practices and find contexts similar to their own [55] but also allow for the integration of student-created videos and social networks [56]. In particular, the short video platforms represented by Instagram and TikTok have enough potential to complete the general transfer of these resources from content to community [57]. This will enable these unrestricted, globally accessible educational resources [56] to fully realize the value of the diverse content and up-to-date materials created for teachers and students [54].

In short, we discussed the reasons why short videos are used in the classroom, the potential of short videos as a student-created learning resource, and as an OER. But it is the fact that there appears to be a link between these aspects that deserves more attention. Short videos are used in FL classes for young students because they are more accustomed to being surrounded by audiovisual and network environments [16], and also, because of their length, they can reduce students’ cognitive load [15]. Furthermore, video-based creation sources cover the reuse of open resources [53], which does not burden young students but rather emphasizes their learning autonomy. These short videos derived from open resources directly carry the characteristics of an OER and fit within the media environment to which students are accustomed. As a result, the application of short videos might form a continuous cycle for students’ learning.

Our salient discussion of these aspects is not, however, to dismiss the use of videos as an educational resource provided by teachers applied offline, as their efficacy has been proven by plenty of research [22,23]. What we are more interested in learning from this literature review is the intrinsic characteristics of short videos disseminated by new media, which are distinct from traditional media platforms, and the use of these characteristics in FL teaching and learning.

There are limitations in this work that must be considered. Since there is no uniform measurement standard for educational short videos, some short videos are not given relevant terms by educators, or educators do not realize that the resources used are short videos. Therefore, in this context, this work is based on 11 specific studies, and it is not possible to identify the full use of short videos in FL teaching and learning. Nevertheless, we believe this review provides an overview of the use of short videos for FL teaching and learning that may help researchers and practitioners to identify best practices developed in the past decade.

5. Conclusions

As the focus of this literature review, we discovered that FL teaching and learning via short videos have entered a new era in the last decade, with short videos becoming an independent term in research. Their role has evolved from that of a medium for delivering information to that of an intervention that assists in the implementation of part of the stages of study and even as a central focus of study. The intrinsic characteristics of short videos in current educational and multimedia environments are also discussed, namely, the reasons why short videos are used in the classroom, as well as the potential of short videos as a learning resource created by young students and as an OER. In general, we believe that short videos have become a specific and effective resource for FL teaching and learning. However, even in studies where short videos are the central focus, we can see that the purpose of these studies essentially revolves around the effectiveness of short videos on various aspects of FL teaching and learning.

Although short videos, as a new type of audiovisual resource distinct from traditional videos, must be revalidated to some extent in terms of their efficacy in various aspects of FL teaching and learning, it is undeniable that they are still essentially audiovisual resources, that is to say, they have the basic properties of audiovisual resources. As a result, if audiovisual resources are known to make a significant contribution to a particular field of FL teaching and learning, a specific study on short videos can treat this premise as a known factor to avoid repeated validation. More importantly, it can impose additional constraints on more specific studies based on the intrinsic characteristics of short videos in current educational and multimedia environments, which differentiates them from traditional audiovisual resources, so that short videos can be studied with both their originality and solid theoretical support, better validating the innovative contribution of short videos with new media properties for FL teaching and learning.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.Z.; methodology, Y.Z.; investigation, Y.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.Z.; writing—review and editing, M.L. and L.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figure and Table

Figure 1. PRISMA diagram of the literature review process.

References

1. Schmerbeck, N.; Lucht, F. Creating Meaning through Multimodality: Multiliteracies Assessment and Photo Projects for Online Portfolios. Unterrichtspraxis; 2017; 50, pp. 32-44. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tger.12020]

2. Hung, S.T.A. Enhancing Feedback Provision through Multimodal Video Technology. Comput. Educ.; 2016; 98, pp. 90-101. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.009]

3. Campoy-Cubillo, M.C. Functional Diversity and the Multimodal Listening Construct. Eur. J. Spec. Needs Educ.; 2019; 34, pp. 204-219. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2019.1581402]

4. Kruger, J.; Doherty, S. Measuring Cognitive Load in the Presence of Educational Video: Towards a Multimodal Methodology. Australas. J. Educ. Technol.; 2016; 32, pp. 19-31. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3084]

5. Jong, P.G.M.; Pickering, J.D.; Hendriks, R.A.; Swinnerton, B.J.; Goshtasbpour, F.; Reinders, M.E.J. Twelve Tips for Integrating Massive Open Online Course Content into Classroom Teaching. Med. Teach.; 2020; 42, pp. 393-397. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2019.1571569]

6. Muñoz-Merino, P.J.; Ruipérez-Valiente, J.A.; Delgado Kloos, C.; Auger, M.A.; Briz, S.; de Castro, V.; Santalla, S.N. Flipping the Classroom to Improve Learning with MOOCs Technology. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ.; 2017; 25, pp. 15-25. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cae.21774]

7. Suhonjić, A.; Despotović-Zrakić, M.; Labus, A.; Bogdanović, Z.; Barać, D. Fostering Students’ Participation in Creating Educational Content through Crowdsourcing. Interact. Learn. Environ.; 2019; 27, pp. 72-85. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1451898]

8. Kinnari-Korpela, H. Using Short Video Lectures to Enhance Mathematics Learning—Experiences on Differential and Integral Calculus Course for Engineering Students. Inform. Educ.; 2015; 14, pp. 67-81. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2015.05]

9. Hund, L.; Getrich, C. A Pilot Study of Short Computing Video Tutorials in a Graduate Public Health Biostatistics Course. J. Stat. Educ.; 2015; 23, [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10691898.2015.11889736]

10. Giuliano, C.; Nofar, T.; Edwin, S.B. Can a Short Video Improve Apixaban Knowledge in an Inpatient Setting?. Pharm. Ther.; 2017; 42, pp. 256-260.

11. Winkler, P.; Janoušková, M.; Kožený, J.; Pasz, J.; Mladá, K.; Weissová, A.; Tušková, E.; Evans-Lacko, S. Short Video Interventions to Reduce Mental Health Stigma: A Multi-Centre Randomised Controlled Trial in Nursing High Schools. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol.; 2017; 52, pp. 1549-1557. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00127-017-1449-y] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29101447]

12. Cowdery, J.E.; Powell, J.H.; Fleming, Y.A.; Brown, D.L. Effectiveness of a Short Video-Based Educational Intervention on Factors Related to Clinical Trial Participation in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Pre-Test/Post-Test Design. Trials; 2019; 20, 7. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-3097-2] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30606224]

13. Alvarenga, P.; Cerezo, M.Á.; Wiese, E.; Piccinini, C.A. Effects of a Short Video Feedback Intervention on Enhancing Maternal Sensitivity and Infant Development in Low-Income Families. Attach. Hum. Dev.; 2020; 22, pp. 534-554. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2019.1602660] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30961424]

14. Fiallos, A.; Fiallos, C.; Figueroa, S. Tiktok and Education: Discovering Knowledge through Learning Videos. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on eDemocracy and eGovernment (ICEDEG); Quito, Ecuador, 28–30 July 2021; pp. 172-176.

15. Olivier, J. Short Instructional Videos as Multimodal Open Educational Resources for a Language Classroom. J. Educ. Multimed. Hypermedia; 2019; 28, pp. 381-409.

16. Larreta-Azelain, M.D.C.; Monje, E.M. Students’ Engagement in Online Language Learning Through Short Video Lessons. Porta Ling.; 2016; 26, pp. 177-186. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.30827/Digibug.53943]

17. Masruddin, M. The Efficacy of Using Short Video through Group Work in Teaching Speaking to Indonesian English as Foreign Language (EFL) Students. Arab. World Engl. J.; 2018; 9, pp. 282-293. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol9no3.19]

18. Schroeders, U.; Wilhelm, O.; Bucholtz, N. Reading, Listening, and Viewing Comprehension in English as a Foreign Language: One or More Constructs?. Intelligence; 2010; 38, pp. 562-573. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.09.003]

19. Winke, P.; Gass, S.; Sydorenko, T. The Effects of Captioning Videos Used for Foreign Language Listening Activities. Lang. Learn. Technol.; 2010; 14, pp. 65-86.

20. Baltova, I. The Impact of Video on the Comprehension Skills of Core French Students. Can. Mod. Lang. Rev.; 1994; 50, pp. 507-531. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.50.3.507]

21. Secules, T.; Herron, C.; Tomasello, M. The Effect of Video Context on Foreign Language Learning. Mod. Lang. J.; 1992; 76, pp. 480-490. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1992.tb05396.x]

22. Canning-Wilson, C. Practical Aspects of Using Video in the Foreign Language Classroom. Internet TESL J.; 2000; 6, 36.

23. Çakir, İ.; Üniversitesi, K.; Fakültesi, E. The Use of Video as an Audio-Visual Material in Foreign Language Teaching Classroom. Turk. Online J. Educ. Technol.; 2006; 5, pp. 67-72.

24. Ellis, R.; Childs, M. The Effectiveness of Video as a Learning Tool in On-line Multimedia Modules. J. Educ. Media; 1999; 24, pp. 217-223. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1358165990240305]

25. Lagerstrom, L.; Johanes, P.; Ponsukcharoen, U. The Myth of the Six Minute Rule: Student Engagement with Online Videos. Proceedings of the 122nd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition; Seattle, WA, USA, 14–17 June 2015.

26. Prober, C.G.; Khan, S. Medical Education Reimagined: A Call to Action. Acad. Med.; 2013; 88, pp. 1407-1410. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182a368bd]

27. Guo, P.J.; Kim, J.; Rubin, R. How Video Production Affects Student Engagement: An Empirical Study of MOOC Videos. Proceedings of the 1st ACM Conference on Learning at Scale; Atlanta, GA, USA, 4–5 March 2014; pp. 41-50.

28. Rush, L.; Stott, R. Minute to Learn It: Integrating One-Minute Videos Into Information Literacy Programming. Internet Ref. Serv. Q.; 2014; 19, pp. 219-232. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10875301.2014.978929]

29. Garber, C.; Holmes, G. Video-Aided Written/Oral Assignments. Foreign. Lang. Ann.; 1981; 14, pp. 325-331. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1981.tb01652.x]

30. Hanley, J.E.B.; Herron, C.A.; Cole, S.P. Using Video as an Advance Organizer to a Written Passage in the FLES Classroom. Mod. Lang. J.; 1995; 79, pp. 57-66. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb05416.x]

31. Maxim, H.H. Authorizing the Foreign Language Student. Foreign. Lang. Ann.; 1998; 31, pp. 407-430. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1998.tb00585.x]

32. Parker, M. Pronunciation and Grammar Using Video and Audio Activities. Engl. Teach. Forum; 2000; 38, pp. 52-68.

33. Van-Lommel, S.; Laenen, A.; d’Ydewalle, G. Foreign-Grammar Acquisition While Watching Subtitle Television Programs. Psychol. Rep.; 2003; 294, pp. 1-12.

34. Akbulut, Y. Effects of Multimedia Annotations on Incidental Vocabulary Learning and Reading Comprehension of Advanced Learners of English as a Foreign Language. Instr. Sci.; 2007; 35, pp. 499-517. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11251-007-9016-7]

35. Saugera, V. Scriptwriting as a Tool for Learning Stylistic Variation. Foreign. Lang. Ann.; 2011; 44, pp. 137-152. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2010.01122.x]

36. Ogea, M. Subtitling Documentaries: A Earning Tool for Enhancing Scientific Translation Skills. Curr. Trends Transl. Teach. Learn. E; 2020; 7, pp. 445-478. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.51287/cttl_e_2020_14_mar_ogea.pdf]

37. Lee, P.-J.; Liu, Y.-T.; Tseng, W.-T. One Size Fits All? In Search of the Desirable Caption Display for Second Language Learners with Different Caption Reliance in Listening Comprehension. Lang. Teach. Res.; 2021; 25, pp. 400-430. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168819856451]

38. Talaván, N.; Rodríguez-Arancón, P. The Use of Reverse Subtitling as an Online Collaborative Language Learning Tool. Interpret. Transl. Train.; 2014; 8, pp. 84-101. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2014.908559]

39. Bolaños, A. The Effects of Fansubs on EFL Education for Translation and Interpreting Students: An Empirical Approach. J. Spec. Transl.; 2017; 28, pp. 122-163.

40. Couvaneiro, S.R.; Pedro, N. Collaborative Learning Using Tablets in EFL to Develop Oral Communication. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality; Porto, Portugal, 7–9 October 2015; pp. 139-143. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2808580.2808602]

41. Redzioch-Korkuz, A. Gaining More Benefits from a Film Lesson: Integrated Subtitles. Audiovisual Translation—Research and Use; 2nd ed. Deckert, M. Peter Lang: Bern, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 287-302.

42. Perez, M.M.; Peters, E.; Desmet, P. Is Less More? Effectiveness and Perceived Usefulness of Keyword and Full Captioned Video for L2 Listening Comprehension. ReCALL; 2014; 26, pp. 21-43. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0958344013000256]

43. Arredondo-Tapia, D.L.; Garcia-Ponce, E.E. Role of Task Repetition and Content Familiarity in EFL Students’ Fluency and Accuracy in Narrative Tasks: A Case Study. J. Lang. Educ.; 2021; 7, pp. 45-63. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17323/jle.2021.11202]

44. Caruso, M.; Fraschini, N.; Kuuse, S. Online Tools for Feedback Engagement in Second Language Learning. Int. J. Comput.-Assist. Lang. Learn. Teach.; 2019; 9, pp. 58-78. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.2019010104]

45. Council of Europe. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2001.

46. Talaván, N. Creative Audiovisual Translation Applied to Foreign Language Education: A Preliminary Approach. J. Audiov. Transl.; 2019; 2, pp. 53-74. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47476/jat.v2i1.57]

47. Schwan, S.; Riempp, R. The Cognitive Benefits of Interactive Videos: Learning to Tie Nautical Knots. Learn. Instr.; 2004; 14, pp. 293-305. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.005]

48. Kalyuga, S. Instructional Benefits of Spoken Words: A Review of Cognitive Load Factors. Educ. Res. Rev.; 2012; 7, pp. 145-159. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2011.12.002]

49. Brame, C.J. Effective Educational Videos: Principles and Guidelines for Maximizing Student Learning from Video Content. CBE Life Sci Educ; 2016; 15, pp. es6.1-es6.6. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-03-0125]

50. Larreta-Azelain, M.D.C. Language Teaching in MOOCs: The Integral Role of the Instructor. Language MOOCs: Providing Learning, Transcending Boundaries; Martín-Monje, E.; Bárcena, E. Walter de Gruyter GmbH: Berlin, Germany, 2014; pp. 67-90.

51. Nikitina, L. Student Video Project as a Means to Practice Constructivist Pedagogy in the Foreign Language Classroom. J. Pendidik Dan Pendidik.; 2009; 24, pp. 165-176.

52. Naqvi, S.; Al-Mahrooqi, R.L. ICT and Language Learning: A Case Study on Student-Created Digital Video Projects. J. Cases Inf. Technol.; 2016; 18, pp. 49-64. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4018/JCIT.2016010104]

53. Godwin-Jones, R. Emerging Technologies Digital Video Revisited: Storytelling, Conferencing, Remixing. Lang. Learn. Technol.; 2012; 16, pp. 1-9.

54. Sherer, P.; Shea, T. Using Online Video to Support Student Learning and Engagement. Coll. Teach.; 2011; 59, pp. 56-59. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2010.511313]

55. Whyte, S.; Schmid, E.C.; van Hazebrouck Thompson, S.; Oberhofer, M. Open Educational Resources for CALL Teacher Education: The ITILT Interactive Whiteboard Project. Comput. Assist. Lang. Learn.; 2014; 27, pp. 122-148. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2013.818558]

56. Terantino, J.M. YouTube for Foreign Languages: You Have to See This Video. Lang. Learn. Technol.; 2011; 15, pp. 10-16.

57. Comas-Quinn, A.; Beaven, T.; Pleines, C.; Pulker, H.; de Los Arcos, B. Languages Open Resources Online (LORO): Fostering a Culture of Collaboration and Sharing. EUROCALL Rev.; 2011; 18, pp. 3-16. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2011.16278]