This article by Gómez-Ortega, Macías-Guillén, Sánchez-de Lara, and Delgado-Jalón advances an idea that is as simple as it is powerful: when a course is perceived as “difficult,” the first step is to identify that difficulty using the most reliable compass available: the students themselves.
Based on questionnaires administered at the end of each unit, the authors construct a difficulty map (a kind of pedagogical “traffic light”) that precisely identifies which concepts cause bottlenecks, where recurring doubts concentrate, and which areas of the syllabus require targeted intervention. Using this information, they design ad hoc videos to address specific conceptual knots, avoiding the common mistake of producing generic audiovisual resources that may sound good but fail to tackle the core problem. The proposal is situated in a post-pandemic context in which virtuality is no longer a plan B but a structural complement, and it reframes feedback as more than correction, elevating it to a mechanism for instructional design.
Methodologically, the study stands out for its three-stage structure: feedback, video production, and analysis, and for its careful attention to instrument reliability, combining expert validation with internal consistency analyses using Cronbach’s alpha (both for the difficulty questionnaires and the satisfaction survey). The pilot test in Financial Accounting II goes beyond a simple “students liked it”: it shows that most students perceive the subject as difficult, that the videos are widely used (not merely as decorative resources), and that their usefulness is highly rated in terms of depth of learning, complementarity, and teaching methodology.
The difficulty map also functions as a bridge between subjective perception and teaching intervention: it translates feelings (“this is hard for me”) into concrete decisions (“let’s create a video on impairment, amortized cost, or dilution effects”), adding traceability and a sense of pedagogical engineering to the innovation.
The most compelling evidence emerges when the proposal is tested against an outcome that matters deeply to universities: academic performance. By comparing groups with and without access to the videos, the study reports overall improvements in grades and related patterns (lower absenteeism, fewer failures, more passes), supported by statistically significant mean-difference tests in most cases.
From a dissemination perspective, the article can be read as an argument for “GPS-guided” teaching: first identifying the dangerous curves in the syllabus, then placing clear signs (short, focused videos), and finally checking whether the journey improves. Its most ambitious promise, transferability to any discipline, is plausible because it does not depend on accounting as a field, but on the procedure itself: diagnosing with data, intervening with targeted resources, and evaluating with evidence. As a future research agenda, a particularly fertile line remains open: linking difficulty maps, viewing patterns, and motivational or socio-emotional variables to understand not only whether the approach works, but why it works and for whom it works best.
---
How to Cite: Gómez-Ortega, A., Macías-Guillén, A., Sánchez-de Lara, M. Ángel, & Delgado-Jalón, M. L. (2024). An effective video-based learning approach: a solution for complex university subjects. RIED-Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 27(1), 345–372. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.27.1.37569
