Review of technology being used for Lecture Capture +.

Prior to the ALT Project I ambitiously concocted a set of technological ingredients which I would need to work together if the project was to set off in the right direction. Blackboard Collaborate would be central but used in a slightly different way. Collaborate would be used as a means to record my teaching sessions then be available for the students to watch again via a link to the session on Blackboard. The screen capture feature in Collaborate would capture desktop movements during the session. A Logitech C525 (http://goo.gl/ssQzX) webcam would capture the visual aspects of the presenter (me) both close up facial expressions and wider field body language. A Plantronics Voyager Pro HD Bluetooth headset (http://goo.gl/4CCI5) to wirelessly transmit voice capture ensuring a freedom to roam. And a laptop. To my amazement when these technologies were brought together they functioned very well and so I went ahead and began to lecture capture full sessions that I was conducting with Level 4 Product Design students. An example of one of these sessions can be found here and they are of about 2 hours in length. http://goo.gl/cRF53. Java must be installed to view this.

As the project progresses there is a developing need to question the effectiveness of full session lecture capture. This has prompted me to experiment with shorter ‘threshold concept’ movies that are on average ten minutes long, I have hosted these on Vimeo and the learners can link from Blackboard. An example can be found here, https://vimeo.com/52379670. This particular example uses a free web software called Screencastomatic which allows 15 minute screen captures to be recorded.

I have also conducted a number of sketch sessions which I again have condensed into a shorter movie these were conducted using a Flip HD video camera mounted on a tripod then the files compressed and uploaded to vimeo, an example can be viewed here, https://vimeo.com/50218306.

 

Advertisements
Posted in #altsep12, A1 Design and plan learning activities, A2 Teach and/or support learning, A4 Develop effective learning environments/support students, K2 Appropriate methods for teaching in subject area, K3 How students learn in subject area, K4 The use of learning technologies, Uncategorized, V2 Promote participation | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

More thoughts on Lecture Capture +

As I continue to think and read around the subject of Lecture Capture and Augmentation I continue to explore current pro’s and con’s and the future benefits. Some research suggests that when students are confident that their lecture will be digitally captured they can relax in the actual physical lecture and absorb it without minor disruptions such as note-taking as they are confident that by reviewing the digital copy after they can then take notes at a slower pace safe in the knowledge that they can pause and rewind the digitally captured lecture at any time according to Dickson et al (cited in Purcel and Hong-Ning, 2011:5) and Owston et al (2011). However this positivity toward lecture capture conflicts with the opinion of Smithers (2011), in his blog where he suggests that digital duplicates of a lecture don’t enhance the students educational experience and money should not be wasted by institutions. In addition, as traditional lectures are usually of long length as to fit in with timetabling constraints of the buildings they are conducted in and these traditional lecture habits should not permeate into digital lecture capture with there excessive length. He also suggest that shorter flexible recordings would provide richer content including screen captures as these are less passive and more engaging and would fit in more with the students lifestyle patterns. I feel it could also be added that a traditional lecture is expected to be of a long length by both students and staff due to our preconceived and mental expectation of what a traditional lecture is. I think the word flexible is important here as this suggests an opportunity to make the material suit an individuals educational needs and not a one size fits all model which is currently being pursued.

The above suggests that students are impatient with long lectures and wish to efficiently extract the threshold concepts of the lecture that they feel they may have missed, this would suggest a benefit of shorter movies, capturing the threshold concepts with a hope of them using on home and mobile devices on the move. Threshold concepts was a term first used by Meyer and Land (2003) and is best described as ‘something distinct within what university teachers would typically describe as ‘core concepts’’.

I feel at this stage it is in the projects interest to cover both bases by supplying a full recording of the lecture (which only minimally adds to current workload) and also a shorter key concepts which adds 30 minutes preparation time. I also wish to pursue the idea of moving up the Bloom’s Taxonomy triangle by exploring flexibiltiy of digital content. A comment to my previous post from Rebecca Jackson suggested my recordings could be used as an Open Educational Resource (OER), I think this is something I should consider. I suppose my material to date has been ‘open’ as lots has been posted to Vimeo for all to see but only a few have been viewed by outside people. As I increase in personal confidence, my digital content and my digital networking expands I feel I will need to consider that my material maybe increasing recognised as an open resourse. Barba (2012) suggests that as digital material becomes ‘open’ it enriches the experience of the on-campus students due to increased participation in the on-line forum. Barba (2012) also advocates the use of the ‘flipped classroom’ when using digital screencast’s as part of the learning experience.

Barba, L. A. (2012) Open Education, Flipped Instruction & Social Learning, NEA, FOEE Symposium Application 2012, Boston University. [On-line at: http://figshare.com/articles/Application_for_the_NAE_Frontiers_of_Engineering_Education_Symposium_2012/96413]

Meyer, J.H.F. & Land, R. (2003) Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: linkages to ways of thinking and practising, ETL Project Universities of Edinburgh, Coventry, and Durham 2003. [See also for an on-line version: Enhancing Teaching-Learning Environments in Undergraduate Courses, ETL Project, Occasional Report 4, May 2003   last accessed 25 October 2012]

Owston, R., Lupshenyuk, D., & Widemann, H. (2011) Lecture Capture in Large Undergraduate Classes: What is the Impact on the Teaching and Learning Environment? Institute for Research on Learning Technologies, York University, Toronto, Canada.

Pursel, B. & Hong-Ning, F. (2011) Lecture Capture: Current Research and Future Directions, The Schreyer Institute for Teaching Excellence. [See also for an on-line version: http://www.psu.edu/dept/site/pursel_lecture_capture_2012v1.pdf    last accessed 25 October 2012]

Smithers, M. (2011) ‘Is lecture capture the worst educational technology. Learning and Educational Technology in Higher Education [Blog] http://www.masmithers.com/2011/03/11/is-lecture-capture-the-worst-educational-technology/ [accessed 27 October 2012]

Posted in #altsep12, A1 Design and plan learning activities, A2 Teach and/or support learning, A4 Develop effective learning environments/support students, A5 Engage in continuing professional development, K1 The subject material, K2 Appropriate methods for teaching in subject area, K3 How students learn in subject area, K4 The use of learning technologies, Uncategorized, V1 Respect learners and communities, V2 Promote participation, V4 Acknowledge wider context for practice | Leave a comment

Lecture Capture +. (Project Post)

Prior to the beginning of the ALT module I was organised, energised and ready for what the module had in store. Sadly in the early weeks of the module my Father passed away and so it took my organisation, energy and readiness and mashed it up quite substantially. I now ready myself for the remainder of the project with a view to making it a success. My project area of ‘Lecture Capture’ is one that I have explored for a number of years. After the hurdles of getting the technology to work in a productive way I then found that from a pedagogic standpoint that the long lecture captures were of little use and few if any students used them as part of their educational journey. So I now ask the question, How much pedagogic value does straight lecture capture give the educator and the learner?. Owston, Lupshenyuk & Wideman (2011) discuss the issue of whether an institution is wise to invest in technology, training and support of its staff to provide this facility. They conclude that low achievers are more likely to interact and benefit from this facility whilst high achievers tend to fast forward and view certain sections only once and therefore is likely to benefit low achievers more.  Also in Stasko and Caron (2010), cited in Purcel and Hong-Ning (2011), the average time spent by a student watching a recorded lecture is 4 minutes. I sense there is more we can do to enhance the online offer to students to make educators material more engaging. I recently took part in a webinar as part of a JISC funded project REC:all, The Pedagogy Framework (www.rec:all.info). Young (2012) uses Bloom’s Taxonomy to describe how as educators we can progress up the Taxonomy triangle to words such as apply, analyse, evaluate and create rather than just playing around at the bottom of the triangle by remembering and understanding which is what simple lecture capture is actually doing. Young (2012) also says ‘The project is looking towards how we can exploit lecture capture to see if we can think more deeply about pedagogical issues and practices we can adopt using these systems’ this is further communicated by the use of the word ‘augmenting’ which means make something greater by adding to it.

Owston, R., Lupshenyuk, D., & Widemann, H. (2011) Lecture Capture in Large Undergraduate Classes: What is the Impact on the Teaching and Learning Environment? Institute for Research on Learning Technologies, York University, Toronto, Canada.

Moes, S., Young, C. (2012) The Pedagogy Framework. http://www.rec-all.info/events/rec-all-webinar-the-pedagogy-framework

Pursel, B. & Hong-Ning, F. (2011) Lecture Capture: Current Research and Future Directions, The Schreyer Institute for Teaching Excellence. [See also for an on-line version: http://www.psu.edu/dept/site/pursel_lecture_capture_2012v1.pdf    last accessed 25 October 2012]

Posted in #altsep12, A1 Design and plan learning activities, A2 Teach and/or support learning, A4 Develop effective learning environments/support students, A5 Engage in continuing professional development, K1 The subject material, K2 Appropriate methods for teaching in subject area, K3 How students learn in subject area, K4 The use of learning technologies, V1 Respect learners and communities, V2 Promote participation, V4 Acknowledge wider context for practice | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

Ready for ALT!

Just about to begin the Application of Learning Technologies (ALT) module here at the University of Salford and am about to set out on my first task. Since completeing my first teaching module I have become interested in the use of technology with teaching and learning within the Higher Educational environment. My main learning goal is to explore the capturing of teaching activities through video and other technical means that will make the generated material engaging and immersive beyond that of simply capturing and publishing the lecture material, as I have previously explored (https://vimeo.com/despard/videos/sort:plays/format:thumbnail). Areas of ‘flipping the classroom’ and analysis of other possible technologies which could mesh with video will have to be researched. I recently took part in a webinar titled “The Pedagogy Framework” held on 4 september last week (http://www.rec-all.info/video/rec-all-webinar-the-pedagogy-framework) which is acting as a catalyst for my area stated above.  I hope to post my opinions and thoughts on the webinar soon.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | 9 Comments

My comments and reflection on different aspects of the PGCAP course so far!

Image

This is a link (http://goo.gl/iywFh) to 5 videos of me commenting and reflecting about my experiences on the PGCAP after the first module.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Conclusion Post

This conclusion takes me back to my original action plan which I set at the beginning of the module in my Educational Biography 1/6. At the time I hesitantly and unconfidently set 5 unambitious goals which I feel I have addressed with flying colours. Not only that, I have created many more goals along my journey of which I am very proud. The UK:PSFs dimensions and module learning outcomes where at the time quite intimidating. At the time I was concerned that my 5 actions did not venture deep enough into the true ethos of the PGCAP here at Salford. I quickly realised that I was on a focused, advanced and serious course with energy and ambition and I quickly became ‘caught up’ in its pace. This has helped transform and re-ignite my passion for education. These combining factors have enabled me to further develop my action plan in through my written reflection blog pages and posts and have benefited from addressing the UK: PSFs Dimensions and Module Learning Outcomes in  a much greater depth. I believe I have fully demonstrated the demands of  Descriptor 1 and have developed well within Descriptor 2. Dare I say that I have my eye on developing myself into the areas and requirements of Descriptor 3. Who Knows! I will find out in time:). To acknowledge and demonstrate my alignment to the UK: PSF I have placed evidence at the bottom of each page and used categories for my posts. Thanks to all on the PGCAP both tutors and fellow students, it has been a pleasure!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 1 Comment

Professional Discussion post-thoughts

Here is my lego model that helps to describe my journey on the PGCAP. The gun is for shooting my demons along the way. The path gets more robust as I have stepped forward and my path has become more colourful and creative. And now I can see through the window of opportunity!. The discussion went well, I talked about elements of my good practice including my use of video to record sessions, my use of Captivate to produce short tutorial movies, and how I have used the PGCAP to bolster my teaching foundation and explore new and innovative teaching methods and become more creative in my delivery. I also talked of my increasing confidence with presenting, working in group’s and meeting with other University collegues. Also mentioned my enjoyment of partaking in the peer observations and how I did extra of these and wish to use them in the future. I also mentioned my impromtu presentation at the MELSIG event. I did not discuss e-portfolio’s  and the power of online networks to extend the classroom and improve my own practice via peer to peer discussion. There are other things I did not discuss that I wish I would have and I also feel that I could have gone into more depth with regard to teaching and learning benefits for the students.

Posted in A1 Design and plan learning activities, A2 Teach and/or support learning, A3 Assess and give feedback to learners, A4 Develop effective learning environments/support students, A5 Engage in continuing professional development, K1 The subject material, K2 Appropriate methods for teaching in subject area, K3 How students learn in subject area, K4 The use of learning technologies, K5 Methods of evaluating effectiveness of teaching, K6 Implications of quality assurance and enhancement, V1 Respect learners and communities, V2 Promote participation, V3 Evidence-based approaches, V4 Acknowledge wider context for practice | Tagged , , | 2 Comments