Disadvantages of video tutorials?

Question

IT education

Why are videos not worth watching? Heard about it many times. I want to know the reasons.

Answer 1

It takes a lot of hard work to write a decent book.
So that it does not have 10 pages, but a lot of good material, with examples, with tasks, with a presentation. Design, proofread, edit, negotiate with a publisher, release, get some kind of return.
You read a good book for a long time. A month, two, a year. You re-read.
You read the text at your own pace, easily reviewing and rereading paragraphs.
When you stop at a page in a book, you can simply glance at the previous page and continue reading. It doesn’t work that way with a video - everything flies out of your head, and you need to watch at least a couple of minutes before that, if you’ve been away for an hour or two.
At any moment you can find something in the text, peep something at a fast pace, and even in the paper version, just the content is enough for this. And in electronic form, text, commands, code, configs are easily copied from there.
Video rewind doesn't work that way. Bookmarks on the video in the form of a guide do not work. You don’t write notes to yourself in the form of a video, you don’t write out, and it’s easier to rewrite from a book than from a video.
Also, making a video is more difficult than writing a text. Much longer. Much more expensive.
Video editing is a much more tedious thing, so more often they just re-shoot short blocks, which again is not easy.
That is, making a video with the same quality of material and with the same density of material is ten times more expensive for all resources - money, time, equipment.
And while no one will watch a month of video (160 hours, for example). No one will do a search inside the video, bookmark the desired passages and use the video as a reference.
Transferring material from a book to a video is exorbitant work on the one hand and completely unclaimed on the other.
And therefore, no one has done, is not doing and will not make a video with the same filling of material as it can be done in the text.
A video is a one-time look at someone's practical material, one time to see how someone else does it.
And therefore, all the video courses that exist are a quick overview of something, no matter how long the course is, it is still much more superficial material than text.
The text requires more involvement from you than the video course, and learning is primarily an effort on the part of the student.
Yes, of course there are separate moments, and there are many of them, when a thought or idea can be conveyed through an image faster. But this is partly compensated by pictures, and partly - no one forbids watching videos in addition to text.
Yes, of course there are many videos and video courses where you can cover a topic quickly in order to capture the main idea or essence. But in programming, the nuances are everything, and the nuances are in the text - in the documentation, in articles, in books and in practice.
I would not say that the most important thing is the book.
The most important thing is documentation and perseverance.
But the book is the first compromise between dry documentation and good presentation, but just as deep and sufficient, plus examples and tasks, plus systematization, which is not in the documentation.
PS All of the above concerns development and administration. In "visual" professions, perhaps video can do much more. For example, choreography, fencing, music, perhaps design. But there are also many books that provide fundamental information better than videos.
PS One of the most important drawbacks of the video, I think is that you cannot receive information at a pace that is comfortable for you, with the ability to quickly reread a word/phrase and think it over. I myself give a lot of lectures, and this problem is when you say 2-3 sentences faster than usual and half of the students fall off with a meaningless look. So in a live course, you can pay attention to it and rephrase it, but you can’t change the recorded video.

Answer 2

Answer 3

Video lessons are like books "for dummies". As a rule, these are many particular examples, little theory. Plus, usually reading the same text will be faster than watching a video, because. read diagonally.
Video tutorials are suitable if:

• You have inductive thinking - 100 examples are better than a theory page.
  
• You perceive "by ear" better than by reading the text.
  

But sooner or later, the moment will come when the documentation will become a home, and video tutorials will be perceived as a waste of time, because time == money, and an hour of relaxation watching a video will cost too much.
But you should not refuse such formats at all. My electronics teacher, the smartest person, said: "Do not shun the books 'For Dummies' - they contain information concisely and as accessible as possible. And this minimum may be enough to start doing something already"

Answer 4

Watching what and about what. In general - a waste of time, reading the documentation is faster and more useful than listening to "eeee" and "yyyy" for 15 minutes. Plus, reading is more useful - it develops the brain, in contrast to.
Although I do not argue, there are also useful video tutorials, but they are very difficult to find among tons of frank shit.

Answer 5

Much depends on the characteristics of a particular person. For example, I perceive information in video lessons with great difficulty, and in my previous position I worked with a colleague who, on the contrary, perceived new things by ear much better, he just preferred video lessons.

Answer 6

Video lessons are scolded for 2 reasons:
- they envy popular bloggers who film them;
- want knowledge to remain inaccessible to a wide range of people;
But in fact, if video lessons are useless, then we can say that lectures at a university with a live teacher are useless. After all, you can just read a textbook, but for some reason, all the same, professors invite him to read and explain.

Answer 7

Because to learn to program, you have to write code. And watching a video is not writing code, so it is of little use.

Answer 8

Because you will not find normal video tutorials in practice. And with the new YouTube policy, when dislikes stopped showing up, even more so. The video is 2 hours long, there are 20 cubes of water there. Not to mention all sorts of "put a plus sign who hears", if we talk about webinars or streams. In fact, during this time you will be able to read so much material on the same topic in different sources that you will understand much more than watching the video.
But there are exceptions. I myself love video tutorials where they tell what and WHY. Almost everyone in articles or in video tutorials omits explanations of why it is impossible to do otherwise. They just say "do it like this". This terribly annoys me, and I don’t understand why it can’t be done differently, especially when there are 20 options in my head how to implement it differently. Then I'm also looking for video tutorials, but few of them explain. The rest is a waste of time.

Answer 9

"Video tutorials are not worth watching" - this is a loud headline so that there is something to discuss.
If they just wrote "video tutorials from amateurs and info gypsies are not worth watching," then there would be nothing to argue about and no one would open the article.
With regards to our industry, there is a difference in the percentage / quality of what is learned. Reading activates one part of the brain, listening activates another. There are many factors on which the quality of education depends, and one of them is practice. If you just watch a video / read a book and do not try to run the code, then the book / video tutorial is useless ...

Answer 10

If you watch only 1 author, then there is a high probability that you will miss an important fact,
because the
information is presented faster in the video than in the book, you have less time to memorize the facts.
Therefore,
if you have your own study plan,
then watch videos of different people on 1 topic,
write your summary in a thesis, on the contrary, you will get a lot of chips, hot keys, working methods,
and sometimes it’s just nice to listen to a living person instead of watching text in books and lectures.

Answer 11

I am a system administrator and I watch video courses on my subject.
I have experience and I understand where it is useful, and where water can be rewound, not looked.
For me, one view is not enough, you will forget what you watched in a day / week / month
Until you do what you study in your head, you won’t gain a foothold.

Answer 12

Not exactly as an answer, but still. There used to be a program on the Discovery Channel "How It's Made". There was a good transfer of material there, everything is concise and accessible. But all the same, it's like a general analysis, like an excursion - you got acquainted with the monuments of architecture or whatever is closer to you, but to thoroughly study the history of at least one monument is already a little different. Or you need to make a series - that is, 5-10-15 minutes on one topic, then continue.

Answer 13

As far as I know superficially, there are "visuals" and "audials", it seems to be innate. Initially, I was visual (it was always very easy for me to read texts) and it was much more difficult to perceive by ear (moreover, with a video, where there is both an image and speech, it is noticeably easier), but life forced me to finish my studies as a relative generalist.
From the practice of communicating with customers (not IT business) - about 70-80% are simply unable to read the text, they simply cease to understand more than a few meaningful phrases. And... call back!! to "discuss". You have to almost literally dictate what is written. This is the trick (for the sake of interest I conducted various experiments) - you can almost literally read what was previously written and then the person seems to "turn on". But the trick is also in the fact that usually such a "switching on" is very short-lived, that is, despite the seeming understanding (during a voice conversation), pretty soon the same person returns with the same question.
What I wanted to say, more accurately guess.
People who can easily read books are a minority, which is probably heavily concentrated in the sciences and IT, where the importance of documentation is very high. As for fiction, I don't know... yes, you often see books (sometimes a lot) on the shelves when you're visiting. But how directly they are read in its entirety and carefully - I'm not sure.
And the video reflects (in a remote format) traditional learning as much as possible. (in the classrooms), there, after all, they also speak and write something on the blackboard. Moreover, you can write much less than it allows you to make a sheet of a book or a computer screen. I think that the majority of such training is perceived as the most effective also due to the fact that it carries some kind of "archetypal" signals of trust (and not a text in a book devoid of timbre and beard). This is how the psyche works - it is looking for support (a living source of knowledge), and without it, immediately at the input, the information is assessed as insufficiently reliable and poorly absorbed.
But it's hard to overestimate the convenience of video when you just need to listen to something overview while walking the dog, for example.