Most students do not want to watch videos

This was the clearest finding from the research. Two of the three participants showed low or no interest in video content. One stated outright that she actively avoids videos, citing a short attention span and a strong preference for reading. Another would only engage if the video was directly and immediately relevant to her situation, and even then her decision rested heavily on the title and how long the video appeared to be.

Only one participant engaged readily with video, and notably, he was at a specific point of relevance: he was actively working on job applications, and the content matched his immediate need. This matters because it suggests that video engagement is not simply a question of format preference, it is a question of timing and context. The same video, shown at the wrong moment, might not get watched at all.

Even though 15 minutes isn’t long, I would like to know what I spent it learning. You decide in the first few seconds if you want to continue watching.

– Participant, Graduating student

The title is the first and most important decision point

For participants who were willing to consider watching, the title was the single biggest factor in whether they clicked. Titles that named a problem the viewer already had, and implied a clear answer, consistently outperformed broader or more generic framing.

A title like “Why wasn’t my application successful?” performed well because it is direct, addresses something the viewer is likely already worried about, and signals that the video will answer a specific question. By contrast, titles like “Top Tips” or broad sector titles were seen as vague, leaving participants uncertain about what they would actually gain from watching. One participant put it plainly: she did not know what she would get out of a broader title, and that uncertainty was enough to stop her from starting.

What this tells us is that if a title does not tell someone what they will learn and why it matters to them, most students will not give the video a chance to do so itself. The window to make that case is a matter of seconds.

Attention spans are shrinking among students

Multiple participants mentioned short attention spans without being prompted. None were willing to watch a video over an hour long, and one participant was explicit that long videos were simply not something she would engage with at all. The upper threshold for something being considered watchable appeared to sit somewhere under 15 minutes, and even then only if the content felt directly relevant.

This is not simply a case for keeping videos short. One participant suggested that chapter-style signposting at the start of a video would significantly change her willingness to engage. If she could see upfront what would be covered, and at what point in the video, she would feel more in control of her time. Knowing that the section she needed was four minutes in would make her far more likely to watch than facing an unlabelled block of content with no way to navigate it.

When written content already exists, the video is less likely to be watched

When participants knew or suspected that the same information existed in text form elsewhere on the page, or as an automated transcript on Media Hopper, they were noticeably less interested in watching a video covering the same ground.

Videos should not be used as a parallel format for content that already works well in writing. It should be reserved for things where the medium genuinely earns its place, such as demonstrations, walkthroughs, or anything where showing something is meaningfully better than describing it. Using video to duplicate written content risks producing material that most users will simply scroll past. It is also worth noting that every video hosted and streamed carries an environmental cost. According to the Carbon Trust, streaming one hour of video generates approximately 55g of CO2 equivalent.

Can audio do the job?

Video should not be the default. Given the low and conditional engagement observed in the research, it should be reserved for content that genuinely benefits from the medium, such as demonstrations and walkthroughs, rather than anything that could be communicated equally well in text. Where written content already exists in the newsletter, avoid duplicating it in video form. Participants are less likely to watch if they can read it instead, and every unnecessary video adds to the environmental footprint of the platform.

Where audio adds value but visuals are not needed, consider using the MP4 audio format instead. Audio files are significantly smaller, require less energy to stream, and can carry the same content at a fraction of the environmental cost.

Get the title right

If the title does not tell a student what they will learn and why it matters to them, most will not click. Use direct, problem-focused titles that address something the viewer is likely already thinking about. “Why wasn’t my application successful?” works because it names a specific concern and implies an answer. “Top Tips” does not, because it could mean anything. Where possible, address the viewer directly in the title. It signals relevance immediately, and relevance is what drives the decision to watch.

Keep it short and make it navigable

The research pointed to an upper threshold of around 15 minutes for something to feel watchable, and even then only if the content felt directly relevant. But length alone is not the whole picture. One participant was clear that chapter-style signposting at the start of a video would significantly change her willingness to engage. Knowing what would be covered, and when, made her feel in control of her time in a way that an unlabelled block of content did not. Opening each video with a summary of what will be covered, and using timestamps or chapter markers throughout, gives viewers the information they need to decide whether to watch and where to start.

Turn off autoplay

Autoplay is likely to cause disengagement, particularly among users who prefer text and did not actively choose to watch. It also adds unnecessary weight to the page, causing video to load and stream regardless of whether the user has chosen to engage with it. Disabling autoplay is one of the simplest changes a publisher can make, and it has both a user experience and a sustainability benefit.

Always provide a transcript and a written summary

A text transcript alongside every video supports users who prefer reading, users with accessibility needs, and those who want to skim content before committing to watching. A short written summary below each video allows text-preferring users to get the key points without watching at all, and reduces the likelihood of users loading a video only to abandon it partway through.

Think before you film

The research does not argue against videos. It argues for using it more carefully, with a clearer sense of when it earns its place and when something simpler would serve students better. And given the environmental cost sitting behind every videos we produce and host, that question of whether it is really necessary is worth asking every time.