Currently viewing the category:
"Case Studies"
LearnTech have been trialing the Swivl for a while, but I had my first opportunity to try it out in anger at the CAMHS Children and Young People’s Mental Heath Conference at the Sunley Management Centre on 3rd July 2013.
The organiser’s were particularly interesting in capturing video (and particulalrly audio) of two keynote addresses but had limited facilities and budget. Panopto – which is installed on the Sunley lectern – was considered but the limited range and mobility of the web cam was deemed too limiting for a guest speaker and there was a risk that the presenter would move out of microphone range. It was subsequently discovered that the first presenter had a piece of video that was important that video viewers could not view in detail. This could have been subsequently edited from the Panopto capture, but would have added complexity.
The Swivl system is designed to track and record video from an iPhone or iPod. The base unit tracks the position of the presenter using the ‘necklace’, which also contains a microphone. It is a virtually ‘one button’ system which does not distract the presenter. The device can tilt too, but this feature wasn’t required on this occasion.
A fully charged iPod could be expected to video for around 90 minutes, which is adequate for most purposes. The front or back facing cameras can be used. The latter is higher quality, but circumstances often dictate that the front is used for visibility – as a presenter you can confirm where you are in frame from time to time. High quality means a larger file too – the low-quality front camera on an iPod Touch will generate 2GB of video in 90 minutes which is not trivial for rapid processing.
In this instance we were using Swivl as a robotic camera operator – speakers had no prior experience or training, just a short briefing on using the tracker necklace. They proved very good at managing the necklace but were unaware of the impact of their position on the camera’s perspective. A dramatic reduction in lighting during the first keynote speech had a significant impact – as an experienced self-presenter would have appreciated the issue and rectified it.
Although the free Swivl software offers direct upload to YouTube over wifi, the size of the video file made that impractical. Files were transferred to PC and uploaded to Kaltura, where they could be ‘topped and tailed’. File size makes this a little slow, but it is perfectly possible to get an hour’s presentation ready for public streaming in 2-3 hours.
The lessons learned? As a video blogger’s tool the Swivl is superb. Using it as a robotic cameraman works in ideal circumstances, but if there is no opportunity to brief presenters it is very likely to fail. Its particular strength is as an ad-hoc mobile audio capture device – for, at the very worst, the audio stream can be easily separated from the video. And the audio quality is remarkaby good. It doesn’t capture displayed slides particularly well, but these could be edited in if required.
The first keynote presentation (after minimal editing) can be seen here : http://tinyurl.com/cahmskey1
Finally, use the power adapter or have plenty of pairs of AA batteries around – the base uses a lot of power (the AAA batteries in the necklace seem to last a long time – the app has a battery meter). Take more than one iPod/iPhone to avoid running out of space or power. It is a pity the base unit power supply does not charge the iPod at the same time.
More details on the equipment at www.swivl.com . The unit costs around £180. LearnTech are happy to loan the equipment, help train users and supervise pilot exercises to establish if this equipment is right for you – however, we are not an event videoing service!
Ever keen to find new and accessible ways for UN staff to share best practice in the use of learning technology, I have begun to record a series of short audio case studies. In the space of five fleeting minutes, I chat informally with lecturers on examples of learning technologies they use and how they fit with their teaching. The podcasts are recorded using AudioBoo which is accessible via your web browser or mobile app.
In this first episode I talk to Anna Cox, who is a lecturer in the School of Education on her use of Xerte, the open source eLearning Authoring platform.
The intro to this episode mentions iPads, which was discussed in the second episode, so look out for that link.
I hope these podcasts will become a useful addition to our written and video case studies and other training resources, and any feedback or comments are very welcome, as are suggestions on future episodes.
Graham Mitchell presented a very personal view of electronic marking, emphasizing that it worked for him but accepting that there are a range of other opinions.
While there are some issues with sitting at a computer for extended periods, especially with a laptop or single screen that can make the process unpleasant, it is possible to save time.
Graham’s solution is based around a Word document which is used as a template and includes a marking rubric and commonly used comments. Graham’s presentation explains the process in detail. Each assignment has a unique format that is assembled when the assignment is set, which provides an excellent check on whether the assignment covers all the learning objectives required.
It is clear that students prefer detailed feedback and the response from Graham’s students, at least, has been very positive. Julia Brydon’s experience with audio marking using Turnitin’s Gradecentre would seem to confirm this.
Electronic marking tools are constantly improving in Turnitin and NILE to simplify the process and – combining this with the use of rubrics – can greatly improve the workflow.
If you have had a miserable marking experience this year, consider attending a LearnTech training session to reduce the pain next year. More details at: http://blogs.northampton.ac.uk/learntech/2013/04/24/learntech-training-may-june-2013/
Resources
Presentation 15th May 2013: Video (opens in new page)
Presentation 15th May 2013: PDF version of Powerpoint slides
(You may find it useful to look at the PDF file while watching the video as the slides are easier to read)
Catherine Fritz demonstrated the concept of flipped teaching – moving assignments into the classroom and delivering lectures as self-paced and scheduled events.
Lectures can be paused by the student to enable research to take place, and give students struggling with vocabulary the chance to look up a word. The lecture is also a much more powerful revision tool. Class work can be more active and collaborative as a result.
The University provides a number of applications to host flipped lectures – Panopto is probably the most suitable, but Kaltura video or NILE based tools like Xerte are also possible delivery mechanisms. In this case Catherine described how Powerpoint can be used to create slides supported with audio. Her presentation contained a step-by-step guide in how to do so.
Powerpoint proved an effective alternative, particularly when access to Panopto is not available. In some respects it is simpler to use than Panopto – amending text on a slide is very easy to do. However, long presentations can result in quite large files which are a problem for some distance learners. Dividing these lectures into sections may well be necessary. As with all asynchronous delivery, support for questions and discussion needs to be available for students at the same time. This will require monitoring, and often moderation, from the tutor.
Overall, this presentation is an excellent example of innovative teaching making used of simple technology and is well worth consideration as an approach. Many thanks to Catherine for producing what is effectively a multimedia instruction manual!
Since the Expo, a new version of Panopto for the iPad has been launched which offers offers a much better recording experience for tutors and an attractive and useful viewing platform for students. It is free to download from the App Store. Ensure you connect to northampton.hosted.panopto.com and login using NILE.
Resources
Original pptx file in ZIP folder, with audio (large file: 33MB)
Flipped Teaching presentation 15th May 2013 – Panopto recording
Flipped Teaching presentation 15th May 2013 – slide summary PDF
Panopto 4.4 release announcement
Further ‘flipped class’ information: blog.peerinstruction.net
The University of Northampton will become only the fourth UK university to host a Hydra Immersive Learning Suite in the very near future. A control room, three syndicate rooms and plenary room in the Naseby building at Park Campus will allow agencies in Northamptonshire to engage in a range of scenario-based training activities.
The Hydra foundation is a community of users from all around the world who share resources across a range of subjects – from counter-terrorism to child protection (see the Hydra Foundation site for examples). The system is ideal for developing and evaluating multi-agency procedures in a realistic but safe environment.
Teams are presented with a range of audio and video based material during a session and are required to record their decisions as the exercise progresses. The control room can monitor the activity of each team and vary the material they receive accordingly. At appropriate points, a subject expert can review decisions with the participants in a plenary session.
There is a licencing requirement which restricts the use of the suite to exercises which involve at least one emergency service, but this should not be seen as an onerous restriction. The development of innovative multi-disciplinary training at the University is an exciting prospect.
Resources
Hydra presentation 15th May 2013 – Panopto recording
Hydra Foundation: www.hydrafoundation.org
The JISC 2012 paper on Extending the learning environment provides information which assists in informing the review process of VLEs.
Earlier in 2012, Northampton went through a VLE review process and the notes and links below may be of interest to institutions which are going through a similar process. I have sub-titled this post ‘Caviar or Red Herring’ as the process may be seen as either a quality opportunity to ensure that you have the best product (the Caviar) or an opportunity to spend significant time comparing products with very similar functionality (the Red Herring) – you may not be sure which you have until you get to the end of the process…..and could end up with a mix of the two !
** Please note that the review below was conducted early in 2012 – all products mentioned were reviewed at that time and have changed significantly since in terms of functionality and version. **
We started the review process with a number of key principles:
- The institution is committed to reviewing its virtual learning environment to ensure suitability for purpose and cost effectiveness.
- Any change must enhance the student experience. Staff and students should evaluate the options and be involved in the change decision. Dedicated and nominated staff within the Schools should be allowed time to review the options with the support of their Dean.
- The change process can be disruptive for staff and students due to the migration needed. This can be mitigated though recruitment of dedicated staff to support the process.
- Whether we maintain the current platform under the current VLE or move to an alternative platform, the review is an opportunity for staff to fully engage with all students and University stakeholders.
- Material and structure should be reviewed and improved where possible. Templates and support will be provided and staff will engage with these. Additional long term support will need to be considered.
- All platforms under the VLE should be externally hosted at present to provide maximum uptime.
[The decision to go hosted with the current VLE (Blackboard] was made in 2007 based on the need for high level system availability which could not be guaranteed with internal hosting. This decision was based on Northampton’s internal culture and infrastructure. It was decided at the time of the VLE review that the system should be maintained as a hosted operation]
As part of the process we were aware that several other institutions had conducted VLE reviews in the past year and contacted these to obtain a copy of their findings – some were more open than others (for obvious reasons).
This brief report is a summary of the six VLE reviews which we were able to obtain.
Reviews were instigated by either / and:
- Issues caused with current internal hosting
- An impending significant upgrade to the current system
- A perception that a move will save money
Four of the six will continue to use Blackboard; one is moving to Moodle on cost grounds; ** are considering moving to Moodle.
Uptime is considered a key issue for all reviews and most are considering, or have already moved to hosted option regardless of the product chosen.
Functionality reviews have tried to compare the latest features of each system and there is an inevitable cross over between them. Analysis of the reviews seems to indicate that Blackboard currently has a more intuitive structure ‘out of the box’. Flexible designs may be achieved in Moodle.
All reviews have noted that there is a ‘transition cost’ which pushes up the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO). Moodle options necessitate the need for a developer (or team) in house to make best use of the system and customise the interface.
The majority of academic staff within the reviews noted no pedagogical advantage in moving from Blackboard to Moodle and felt that any such a change would present a significant risk to the current status of the University’s core business and its likely future development. Retraining would be needed in any transition.
** noted that staff development and training needs were often overlooked, or severely underestimated in transitions. They had migrated to Moodle as a perceived cost saving.
Recommendations:
- The TCO of any migration is fully costed
- Staff and students need to be fully consulted in current and future needs
- Regardless of the option chosen – staff need to be fully supported and encouraged to make best use of it. Some current poor student reviews within the current VLE were prompted by poor academic engagement with the system rather than any lack of functionality.
- The review process must review the latest available version of each VLE.
- Considering the current IT infrastructure, we need to maintain a hosted solution regardless of the option selected.
The final report which was presented to the University Executive Group summarised the 4 month review process. Please note that some confidential details have been removed for obvious reasons.
The decision to remain with Blackboard for a further three years was based on a wide range of factors and not just the basic cost. The TCO which included price, cultural issues and migration meant that the decision was the best for Northampton at that time. I’m fully aware that other institutions will conduct reviews which will be conducted within a completely culture and with different needs which will lead them down a different path. We will be looking for a formal review again in 2014/15 – let’s hope that this is a ‘Caviar’ experience.
For further details on the review process please contact Rob Howe
Gill Gourlay – Senior lecturer in Marketing and Entrepreneurship has the challenge of marking around 350 level 4 papers with a marking team of 6 tutors. Marking criteria for this assignment already existed and Gill and the team used paper based rubrics to mark the work in previous years.
With varying benefits and challenges the team successfully marked and fed back to all students. Have a look at the case study for more details about the process: Using NILE (Blackboard) Rubrics to mark Turnitin assignments
Sally Laurie – Senior lecturer in Marketing and Entrepreneurship has been using innovative technology within NILE for a few years now. Over the last academic year Sally has started to use the Rubrics tool within NILE to evaluate her students’ work using existing marking criteria based on the UMF guidelines and learning outcomes for each module.
With support from Learning Technology, Sally has successfully used rubrics within a classroom, while students present, to mark and feedback on their work. Moderation also took place at the same time.
The case study describes all the details, benefits, challenges and key points: Using NILE (Blackboard) Rubrics to mark Presentations
This case study describes using the Xerte online eLearning Authoring system to develop resources for a blended learning course.
The aim was to increase the quality of communication of the module content, through interactive learning opportunities for distance learners. It was also anticipated that supplementary materials for other modules in the School of Education could progressively be provided in this format.
Case Study (case study, PDF 515.6 KB)
This case study describes using Panopto and iPad for easy and mobile recording of student assessments.
The main aim was to record student assessments and upload immediately to our VLE, minimising editing and publishing while maximising availability for external moderation.
Case Study (case study, PDF 171.6 KB)
