Download - Conclusion
Virginia Commonwealth University – Richmond, VA www.library.vcu.edu
Ease of Use
Maximum Video Run Time Software
InstallationVendor Technical
SupportAudio & Video
ClarityInteractivity &
Feedback
Alan T. Williams, Kristine M. Hughes, & Shannon D. Jones - Tompkins-McCaw Library for the Health Sciences, VCU Libraries
Of the three screencasting programs tested, Screencast-o-Matic was
clearly the best option for our use. Unsolicited feedback from our users
supports our conclusion.
Conclusion
1. Identified three free screencasting programs to evaluate and created a variety of library tutorials with each.
2. Screencast software and resulting tutorials were then ranked by librarians on a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being the highest rank.
3. Each tool was ranked based on the following criteria:
• Ease of use in creating and using screencast software
• Maximum video run time provided by software
• Ease of software installation
• Accessibility and quality of vendor technical support
• Audio & video clarity
• Ability for Interactivity with or feedback from users
Methods
To compare and contrast three popular free screencasting programs
and their effectiveness in delivering library instruction to remote users.
Objective
Think It’s Impossible To Find Cost-Effective Screencasting Software?Say ALOHA! To Three Free Programs & Their Applications In Library Instruction
Alan T. Williams: [email protected] or 804.828.1592Kristine M. Hughes: [email protected] or 804.827.1150Shannon D. Jones: [email protected] or 804.828.0626
Contact UsJing
www.jingproject.com Screencast-o-Matic
www.screencast-o-matic.comWink
www.debugmode.com/wink
For More Product Information
Comparison
Criteria
