English 895 Blog Entry 3: A combination of text and video feedback may be best

Silva, Mary Lourdes. "Camtasia In The Classroom: Student Attitudes And Preferences For Video Commentary Or Microsoft Word Comments During The Revision Process." Computers & Composition 29.1 (2012): 1-22. Academic Search Complete. Web. 30 May 2012.

Many teachers are turning to screen-capture software, like Camtasia, to provide feedback on written assignments. In this article, Mary Lourdes Silva shares data comparing student perceptions of audio/visual comments through screen-capture software with those of written comments in Microsoft Word. Silva’s students served as the subjects, and she used course management system statistics, surveys, and observations to obtain her data. Students who favored screen-capture comments cite its conversational quality, its emphasis on higher order concerns, and its clarity of expectations. Others find the comments in Microsoft Word to be easier to locate, particularly for lower-order concerns. The results point to combining modes and media, using screen-capture in conjunction with text-based comments to highlight different problem areas and support different points in the writing process.

Silva argues that screen-capture software can assist in adding new layers to the feedback an instructor gives a student. Instead of simply jotting down a few words or phrases, screen-casting enables the reviewer to highlight large amounts of text, move or delete text, even leave the essay and refer to the prompt or a library source. These opportunities have led to an increase in the use of screen-capture software, but Silva points out that little research has been done on its efficacy as a form of critique. The little research there is points to positive results. Among that research, Silva cites Scott Warnock’s 2006 CCCC’s presentation revealing the efficiency and popularity of screen-captured feedback. 

She found that students experienced some difficulties with Microsoft Word when it came to integrating it with the CMS, Sakai, early in the semester; otherwise, students didn’t express complications with Word. Similarly, screen-capture technology didn’t pose a barrier. Sakai stats revealed that all of the students viewed their video feedback, and most viewed it within three days. Surveys show that, of the 17 who responded, 8 preferred video and 6 found value in both. Many students felt the video were more personal, but some felt the written comments expedited their revision process because it helped them find problem areas more quickly. 

According to Silva, “As instructors transition to teaching within online contexts and experiment with new technologies, it is important to examine the significance of the mode and medium of teacher feedback in student perceptions, participation, and writing practices” (1). As a result, I felt this article would be valuable for teachers of online writing; such teachers must examine tools for capturing a F2F experience for their online students, and screen-capture software can assist in that process as long as it is used correctly. I would particularly recommend this article to any fellow students focusing on screen-capture software for their instructional tool review in this class.

English 895 Blog Entry 2: Video may not be worth the money or bandwidth

Berner, Eta S., and Barbara Adams. "Added Value Of Video Compared To Audio Lectures For Distance Learning." International Journal Of Medical Informatics 73.2 (2004): 189. Academic Search Complete. Web. 24 May 2012.

Eta S. Berner and Barbara Adams conducted a trial that compared audio and video technology in an online lecture.  They organized a random sample of 50 M.S. Health Administration students from two classes at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. One group of students viewed a presentation with audio and video of the lecturer; the other group viewed the same presentation with audio only. 

According to Berner and Adams, research shows that audio-enhanced computer-based lectures are as effective as live lectures, but little research had been done on video-enhanced computer-based lectures. They point out that advocates of video-recorded lectures believe it personalizes the class experience; opponents cite the expense and the bandwidth required to produce and broadcast it. Their goal is to determine whether video is worth adding to the online classroom experience. 

Using data from surveys taken after students viewed the presentations, Berner and Adams found that the majority of students in the audio-only lecture said they would have preferred it with video; however, less than half of those in the video lecture found the video to be helpful, and a third of them felt the video was distracting. They concluded that students “think” they would prefer video-enhanced lectures, but when they get it, they don’t find it very helpful or satisfying; as a result, video recordings may not be worth the trouble.  

I question whether the medium impacted students’ opinions. Because students would be focused on the slides in the presentation, naturally they would be distracted by video and favor audio. If the lecture wasn’t paired with any visual aids, students may find video more helpful and more engaging. In other words, it seems that students would prefer to have some kind of visual; they just wouldn’t want those visuals to compete. The researchers do point out that this study needs to be repeated with other course content in order to arrive at a more definite conclusion.

Another factor influencing these results is the lecturer’s constraints and charisma. The researchers note that a zoomed-in shot of a speaker limits his/her performance of body language and, therefore, wouldn’t be as helpful as a full view of the speaker in motion; additionally, the speaker just might not be very exciting. A study of various video angles with different speakers would help draw further conclusions. 

I recommend this article for anyone interested in the affordances and limitations of audio and video lectures in distance education. I think we assume video-enhanced lectures are better because they seem to get us closer to the F2F experience; however, video can be distracting for those on the screen and for those watching it, and audio provides us with enough of that personal touch that we may not need video for certain content. This article shows that DE instructors and administrators shouldn’t automatically turn to video for course content, particularly presentational lectures; instead they should carefully examine the impact video will have on students’ interaction with course content before choosing to utilize it.

Behaviorism continues its work

http://feeds.gawker.com/~r/gizmodo/excerpts/~3/dEhC_syeQCw/pavlovian-pacifier-teaches-premature-babies-to-eat

I'm interested in behaviorism I think because I'm interested in gamification.  Since the 1800s behaviorists have been saying "do this and you'll get that" and of course such an exchange has been going on long before. Behaviorism freaks people out: we don't like the idea that we can be programmed to act in certain ways and we want to see ourselves as more advanced than Skinner's rats and Pavlov's dogs, but look at what good it can do. I say it's fine to be wary, but be open-minded too. Reward systems can be beneficial.

The best games explain themselves!

http://feeds.gawker.com/~r/kotaku/excerpts/~3/vYSVDDeSUAg/how-to-play-video-games

I really appreciated this guide to gaming; I've been paying attention to the crossroads between game design and instructional design.  There are some cute parallels: all creators/players should save often. But its notable that the best games encourage exploration and don't require tutorial/exploration. We aim for the same targets in the classroom.

English 895 Blog Entry 1: A comparative study of modalities in a collaborative online assignment

Ciekanski, Maud and Thierry Chanier. "Developing Online Multimodal Verbal Communication To Enhance The Writing Process In An Audio-Graphic Conferencing Environment." Recall 20.2 (2008): 162-182. Academic Search Complete. Web. 21 May 2012.

Maud Ciekanski and Thierry Chanier share their findings from a methodological study that tracked the use of multimodal verbal communication in an audio-graphic synchronous environment (AGSE). Both L1 and L2 participants collaborated in a variety of modes (textual, spoken, iconic, graphic, and spatial) to produce an online text document, using a variety of modalities: word processor, text chat, whiteboard, audio, vote, and others. The purpose of the article is to provide a better understanding of the features of these modalities and their roles in a collaborative online writing process.

Ciekanski and Chanier point out that, in verbal communication, speakers make choices about the best way to represent meaning (168). Online environments give users a limited set of options for making meaning, and they wish to track the use of those options and their roles in the writing process (Ciekanski and Chanier 168-169). They describe the coding system used to track the use of certain modalities and discuss their findings. They point out that, throughout the collaborative writing process, audio conference was used the most (Ciekanski and Chanier 173). They determined the reason it was favored was its speed and ease, affording a “more ‘synchronous’” experience than text chat (Ciekanski and Chanier 173). Text chat and audio were used most often to navigate roadblocks in the writing process and to prewrite and edit (Ciekanski and Chanier 174 and 176). For L2 learners, audio was actually used at times to produce a first draft of the written work (Ciekanski and Chanier 178).

They discovered that, for the group participants, the more difficult the task, the more modalities were used in the process (Ciekanski and Chanier 178). They conclude that intermodality, or the combined use of audio, text chat, and others, promotes the writing process and facilitates collaboration among participants (Ciekanski and Chanier 175 and 178). The use of different modalities throughout the process also enabled learners of different abilities to participate in different ways, further promoting the level of collaboration (Ciekanski and Chanier  175).

I would recommend this article for anyone interested in focusing their pedagogy project on a collaborative writing assignment that utilizes different modalities in the process (text chat, video or audio conferencing, whiteboard, etc). It may also benefit anyone who is interested in the exploring the similarities and differences between different modalities as they are used in the writing process. For my pedagogy project, (for now) I’m interested in the role audio plays in online education, the writing process, and collaboration, so I found the emphasis on audio conferencing and the affordances of this modality particularly notable.