“Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the

Remote Student’s Desktop”

Eric Flower and Stacey SawaUniversity of Hawai‘i-West O‘ahu

flower@hawaii.edussawa@hawaii.edu

StreamingVideoOnTheNet.com

E-Learn 2005, Vancouver

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 2

Table of Contents• Introduction/Purpose• System Design• Methodology• Results• Methodological Problems• Classroom Management• Secondary Observations• Future Research

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 3

Purpose of the Study (1)• To identify levels of preparation and

support (equipment, software, staffing, training, facilities, infrastructure, etc.) necessary to produce and distribute good quality narrow bandwidth (384Kbps or less) streaming video to students in their home or at their offices We did not broadcast to studios or computer

labs where students would gather to participate in a site-to-site model

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 4

Purpose of the Study (2)• To see if we could design a low cost

Internet streaming video system without a large capital equipment investment, heavy infrastructure requirements, or a large technical support staff

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 5

Purpose of the Study (3)• To see if we could design a “system on

a cart” to make it portable• To see if classes could be broadcast

from any campus classroom or conference room and not be tied to a studio, lab, or other special purpose facility

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 6

Purpose of the Study (4)

• To make some preliminary determination on the effectiveness of synchronous streaming of classroom-based instruction when compared to the traditional classroom setting

= ?

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 7

Streaming Video Process

Capture withRealProducer

Encode withRealProducer

Distribute with RealServer, view with RealPlayer/

RealOne

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 8

Hardware/Production System

MixerSplitter

Videotape backup Video

monitor

Encoding PC

Audio capture

Videocapture

Audio monitor

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 9

Distribution System

UH ITS StreamingServer

RealPlayer/RealOne Clients

Chat session

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 10

Equipment Cart

Click here to see our equipment list

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 11

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 12

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 13

Methodology (1)• Using the streaming video system we

designed and built, we taught four semesters of “Computer Skills for Administrators” from 2001 to 2004

• Over that period, there were 41 students in the classroom and 29 online students receiving synchronous streaming video

• Course is an elective with no pre-requisites offered in the Professional Studies Division

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 14

Methodology (2)• Each semester, both groups had the

same class presentations, readings, and assignments, wrote the same reports, took the same tests, and worked on similar projects

• Both groups could watch the archived class video files that were posted the next day

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 15

Methodology (3)• In a retrospective study, we compared

student course grade scores for each group (in-class vs. online) Used a t-test for unequal variances Ho:u1 = u2

(Null hypothesis: means of the two groups are equal)

Ha:u1 <> u2(Alternative hypothesis: means of the two groups are not equal)

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 16

Grade Score Components• Testing throughout the semester: 45%• Final exam: 20% • Class participation/

Quality circle participation: 10% • Group presentation/

Group presentation contribution: 15% • Critical review of Visions: How Science

Will Revolutionize the 21st Century by Michio Kaku: 10%

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 17

Results (1)• We found that off-the-shelf hardware

and software were adequate to produce good quality narrow bandwidth (384Kbps or less) streaming video

• Significant investments in broadcast studios may not be necessary where high production values are not an essential part of the instructional process

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 18

Encoding Rates and File Size

• Triple stream video files encoded at 56Kbps, 150Kbps, and 256Kbps use 3.9 megabytes of storage per minute Stream to the viewer at the highest reliable

connection, typically 34, 150, or 225Kbps This multistream provides a good balance of

sound and picture quality and targets dial-up, LANs, and broadband

In 2004 we upped the top rate to 384 Kbps encoded and 350Kbps received

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 19

Results (2)• Marginal operating costs were relatively

small and limited mainly to the salary of the technician operating the camera and performing post-production work

• It was possible to stream from virtually any classroom or conference room on campus with the mobile cart

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 20

Results (3)• Analysis of the student course grade

scores for each group (in-class vs. remote) shows a strong similarity of the means

• Using the t-test for unequal variances, the p-value was 0.84; this provides a strong statistical conclusion that the means are not different

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 21

Results (4)• Low cost narrow bandwidth

synchronous streaming of classroom-based instruction appears to be as effective as the traditional classroom environment in this instance

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 22

Methodological/Data Problems• Groups are not random

Groups are self-selected by enrollment in a classroom or online section

Neighbor Island students have no choice; they must enroll in an online section

• There is no information about the students aside from their group and their final course grade score

• Not “blind”; instructor knows who is in each group

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 23

Classroom Management (1)• Instructor’s teaching style and course

content must be amenable to this delivery method if it is to be successful

• Instructors don’t need to change their classroom methods very much to succeed with Internet streaming video broadcasting; long periods of training appear to be unnecessary

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 24

Classroom Management (2)• Preparation, rehearsal, and timely

distribution of supporting material are critical to successful streaming video presentations

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 25

Classroom Management (3)• Faculty workload increases in this

environment, but not nearly as much as in an asynchronous text or multimedia-based online teaching environment

• Time spent on preparation and production is less with streaming video, though post-production work may be more, depending on the faculty member’s decisions on how much to do after class

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 26

Secondary Observations (1)• Students watched archived

classes they missed due to illness, travel, work, etc.

• Students reviewed or intensively studied classes or portions they did not understand when the material was originally presented

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 27

Secondary Observations (2)• Instructor could review class files to

correct errors in presentations or to add supplementary material to a web-based errata file

• Instructor could review class files to examine their methods for teaching effectiveness and make improvements where necessary

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 28

Secondary Observations (3)• Class files could be reviewed for

teaching effectiveness when making decisions relating to contract renewal, tenure, post-tenure review, and professional development

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 29

Secondary Observations (4)• Synchronized Multimedia Integration

Language (.smil) files may be used to create, or contribute to, learning modules of any length to improve instruction

• .SMIL file-based learning modules may be used to make material available to other classes or groups

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 30

Secondary Observations (5)• System was reliable• There were very few incidents of

hardware failure, software failure, broken links to server, or server failure

• Slow connections, network congestion, and lack of Quality of Service (issues of network packet priority) were problems for some dial-up students

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 31

Secondary Observations (6)• Students want more classes offered via

streaming video if they have access to fast connections like Oceanic Time Warner Cable RoadRunner service

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 32

Secondary Observations (7)

• Network bandwidth is the critical variable in streaming video viewer satisfaction Faster connections support notably better

viewer experiences No amount of preparation can overcome

problems associated with a slow connection or network congestion

• Viewers will blame you or the technologyif their picture is bad

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 33

Future Research (1)• More rigorous study and analysis of

classroom-based synchronous streaming video needs to be performed to confirm these preliminary findings

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 34

Future Research (2)• Students thought viewing archived

streaming video class files on demand (asynchronously) could be as effective from an instructional viewpoint as participating in the live class (synchronously), provided they could then interact with the instructor via e-mail, chat, or videoconferencing Asynchronous delivery with a scheduled

online class meeting component could increase access

Flower and Sawa, “Synchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Student’s Desktop ” 35

Future Research (3) • Archived files could be viewed when

network traffic was low, or, archived files could be distributed on CDs which would eliminate delivery problems associated with slow network connections or network congestion—this could be a boon to less developed areas with weak infrastructures

Thanks for watching!Eric Flower and Stacey Sawa

University of Hawai‘i-West O‘ahu