recording short student presentations with the use of lecture capture software (panopto). marco...
TRANSCRIPT
Students as lecture content creators
Recording short student presentations with the use of lecture capture software (Panopto).
Marco [email protected]
Student engagement
Practical relevance can be missing with lecture content◦ Relevant content can promote deep learning
Screencasting offers opportunities for different learning styles
The present project will focus on a ‘hot topic’ in biomechanics; students will create a short video detailing their view and related arguments on barefoot running.
Introduction
The aims of the present project were to:
- develop a student’s skills in literature resourcing
- evaluation and interpretation of ‘information’
- communication of their views with substantiated arguments.
Evaluation of the students’ experiences during 2013-2014 (cohort 1) and 2014-2015 (cohort 2)
Aims
2 hour practical
“Is barefoot running best?”
Independent working in small groups (3-4 students) ◦ Information resourcing consisted of scientific literature, but
also the ‘internet’.◦ Provide arguments from different perspectives◦ Evaluate and concluding opinion
Product: a short video
Cohort 1: Methods
Compared to cohort 1
1. Panopto available, replacing the screen being recorded with video
2. Prior information about topic of the practical, provided during preceding lecture
Cohort 2: Alterations
Install software + obtain microphones
Student records presentation, automatically uploaded
Panopto
Edit if required within AberCast and combine videos
Panopto
Videos were combined and shown in lecture◦ Interspersed with YouTube videos by ‘experts’.
Questionnaire administered following the lecture◦ ‘overall impression’, ‘video’, ’time allowed’, ‘learning style’,
‘knowledge gained’, ‘assessment’, and ‘impact’.- Five item Likert scale, strongly disagree strongly agree
◦ Two open questions: “I liked” & “I would have changed”
Students’ experience
Eleven (cohort 1) and seven (cohort 2) videos were produced◦ In cohort 2, two groups did not complete their project
Around 25 minutes of video in both cohorts◦ Lecture: interspersed with ‘expert’ talks from YouTube
Majority of videos of powerpoint + commentary◦ 3 videos showed ‘people’
Thirty-eight (cohort 1) and thirty (cohort 2) questionnaires completed
Results
Blue = cohort 1Red = cohort 2
0
20
40
60
80
stro
ng
ly d
isag
ree
dis
agre
e
neu
tral
agre
e
stro
ng
ly a
gre
e
I found the practical interesting to do
Res
pond
ents
(%
)
0
20
40
60
80
stro
ng
ly d
isag
ree
dis
agre
e
neu
tral
agre
e
stro
ng
ly a
gre
e
I learned more during this practicalthan in the other practicals
Res
pond
ents
(%
)
0
20
40
60
80
stro
ng
ly d
isag
ree
dis
agre
e
neu
tral
agre
e
stro
ng
ly a
gre
e
I gained new knowledge whenmaking the video
Res
pond
ents
(%
)
0
20
40
60
80
stro
ng
ly d
isag
ree
dis
agre
e
neu
tral
agre
e
stro
ng
ly a
gre
e
After the lecture, I learned newarguments on this topic
Res
pond
ents
(%
)
0
20
40
60
80
stro
ng
ly d
isag
ree
dis
agre
e
neu
tral
agre
e
stro
ng
ly a
gre
e
I did not want to speak in the video
Res
pond
ents
(%
)
0
20
40
60
80
stro
ng
ly d
isag
ree
dis
agre
e
neu
tral
agre
e
stro
ng
ly a
gre
e
I would not mind if this would be partof a marked assignment
Res
pond
ents
(%
)
0
20
40
60
80
stro
ng
ly d
isag
ree
dis
agre
e
neu
tral
agre
e
stro
ng
ly a
gre
e
I enjoyed the freedom we had inthis practical to find our own way
Res
pond
ents
(%
)
Overall, students showed a positive attitude◦Some exceptions
“we didn't have time to do proper research so most information came from google. It felt like a complete waste of time, learned nothing new. For £9000 of tuition fees a year, it was a 2hr practical wasted and insulting that our lecture was used to show us a bunch of average videos. 3hrs of potential teaching gone to waste.” (cohort 1 comment)
Discussion
“The fact that I learned about barefoot running in a more fun and interactive method rather than your standard lecture”
The topic chosen was one I'm interested in, so I enjoyed researching it
Having fun whilst learning
Freedom was perceived as a positive◦ Exploratory learning was ‘novel’
Enjoyable topic◦ Thus it is unlikely to work with ‘non-hot topics’
Shorter videos than anticipated
Informal nature, should not be assessed
Cohort 2 generally more positive than cohort 1◦ Less hesitant about presenting with Panopto◦ Better prepared
Discussion
Improvements to be made
1. More focus on video creation process1. More professional? Cadarn involvement?2. Alternatives? (Powerpoint only, or infographics)
2. Not showing of videos during the lecture
3. Allocation of specific foci related to barefoot running (performance/injury)
Limitations◦ No assessment of learning
Discussion
Enjoyment of exploratory learning
More assistance with video material◦Reluctance to present
Using a hot topic can be an effective way for students to create the module contents
Conclusion
