Using Screencasting to Teach Writing at a Distance

A tool review for
Jing And Screencast-o-matic
Using Screencasting to Teach Writing at a Distance
By Danielle Roach
Old Dominion University
June 21, 2010

Introduction
What is screencasting?
A screencast records the activity on a computer screen along with accompanying audio either from the computer itself or from a microphone.
Thus, screencast software allows you to record yourself performing an activity on your computer and narrating that activity, and then allows you to save the clip of that activity on your computer and/or online.

Why screencast?
Synchronous communication seems to be the gold standard for conferencing and tutoring (Hewett& Ehmann, 2004; Neff & Whithaus, 2008), but sometimes that is unattainable due to tech limitations (ex. TCC).
Asynchronous communication allows for revisiting and frees students from the restraints of time (Warnock, 2009).
Screencasting combines some of the benefits of synchronous communication with the flexibility of asynchronous interaction.

Why screencast?
Benefits for students:
Multimedia appeals to visual learners and to students used to getting info in other-than-print format
Tool allows for visual demonstration of physical activities and operation of other tools (“scaffolding” as described by Grady and Davis, 2005)
Best for skills-based problems, "how-to" demonstrations
Voiceover allows students to connect with instructor in auditory capacity (something that may be limited in other areas of the course)

Limitations of screencasting
Drawbacks:
No two-way communication
If used haphazardly, can reinforce "sage-on-stage”
No active interface for user (e.g., if there is a link on your screen, the user cannot click it to find out more information)
File types vary by software, and accessibility issues can present themselves depending on how file is saved and hosted

What are my options?
Available for purchase:
Camtasia(by TechSmith) and Adobe Captivate
Benefits: tons of features, extensive tech support (Archie 2008)
Drawbacks: quite expensive for the individual user

Other software I considered:
Screenr:
Benefits: free, easy interface, impressive website
Drawbacks: screencasts directly to Twitter
CamStudio:
Benefits: free, open-source
Drawbacks: dated web site, clunky interface

Criteria:
User-friendly web site
Intuitive interface
Multiple ways to post and interact with clips
FREE (Reilly & Williams, 2006)
Ultimately, I chose to examine two:
Jing
Screencast-O-Matic (SOM)

Jing
Features:
Saves as Shockwave Flash (.swf) file
Allows for downloading and/or online (Screencast.com) storage and hosting of clips
Offers screen capture (still shots)
Allows direct posting to YouTube, Facebook, Flickr, and Twitter
Provides some EDU support on their website

Jing
Drawbacks:
Free version limited to short clips (5 minutes)
Files only downloadable in .swf format (large file size)
Program software must be downloaded on computer with minimum requirements (e.g., Jing won't run on my netbook)

Features:
Available completely online (no download necessary-uses Java platform)
Saves as Quicktime (.mp4), Windows Media Player (.avi), or Flash (.flv)
Offers automatic upload to YouTube and to your free account on SOM's site as well as option to download clips to your computer
Allows recordings up to 15 minutes on SOM/10 minutes on YouTube

Drawbacks:
Framed by GoogleAds
Does not offer any direct EDU support
Based on Java (which bugs some machines)

Examples of uses
Research tutorial
Word formatting tutorial
Individual paper review (to account for inability to conference synchronously)
PowerPoint with narration (just remember that any links will not be interactive for the user)

Screencast Samples
Jing:
Jing Sample Research Tutorial: TCC's Academic Search Complete
Jing Sample Student Essay: Comments on a Lit Essay
Jing Sample Student Essay: Formatting Help in MS Word
Screencast-o-matic (SOM):
SOM Sample Research Tutorial: ODU's Academic Search Complete from a Distance
SOM Sample Student Essay: Formatting Help in MS Word

Findings
Both Jing and SOM are easy to use, and the fact that they are freeware helps increase their appeal to individual instructors.
Why choose Jing?
Researchers in information studies (Rethlefsen, 2009; Tagge, 2009) have touted Jing as the most viable freeware screencasting option available for educators.
Jing offers support in terms of presentation and content advice specific to EDU users.
Why choose SOM?
The web-based availability of SOM may appeal more to educators working from multiple machines or those whose computers do not meet the technical specifications necessary to run software on their local machines.
The multiple formats available through SOM (.avi, .mp4, .flv) allow for more flexibility in embedding and using clips in multiple online settings.

Conclusion
Screencasting software offers instructors:
A valuable teaching tool that can imitate the instructor side of many types of face-to-face interactions.
A platform to demonstrate step-by-step computer procedures instead of providing text-only explanations
An opportunity to engage in multimedia interface with students who cannot communicate synchronously with video and audio
Integration of this tools in online writing courses can help supplement instruction, especially in situations where “showing” works better than “telling.”

References
Adobe Captivate 5. (2010) Retrieved 15 Jun 2010, from http://www.adobe.com/products/captivate/
Archee, R. K. ( 2008). Screencasting—the Future of Technical Communication? Intercom, 55(3), 39.
Camtasia. (2010) Retrieved 15 Jun 2010, from http://www.techsmith.com/camtasia
Grady, H. M., & Davis, M. T. (2005). Teaching Well Online with Instructional and Procedural Scaffolding. In K. Cargile Cook & K. Grant-Davie (Eds.), Online education: global questions, local answers (pp. 101-122). Amityville, NY: Baywood Pub.
Hewett, B. L., & Ehmann, C. (2004). Preparing educators for online writing instruction: principles and processes. Urbana, Ill.: National Council of Teachers of English.
Jing. (2010). Retrieved 15 Jun 2010, from http://www.jingproject.com/
Neff, J. M., & Whithaus, C. (2008). Writing across distances & disciplines: research and pedagogy in distributed learning. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Reilly, C. A., & Williams, J. J. (2006). The price of free software: Labor, ethics, and context in distance education. Computers and Composition, 23(1), 68-90.
Rethlefsen, M. L. (2009). Screencast Like a Pro. [Article]. Library Journal, 134(7), 62-63.
Screencast-O-Matic. (2010). Retrieved 15 Jun 2010, from http://screencast-o-matic.com/
Tagge, N. (2009). Jing and Yang: balancing asynchronous and synchronous training. Library Hi Tech News, 26(10), 6-7. doi: 10.1108/07419050911022261
Warnock, S. (2009). Teaching writing online: how and why. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Using Screencasting to Teach Writing at a Distance

by Danielle on Jun 20, 2010

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

2 Embeds 11

Statistics

Using Screencasting to Teach Writing at a Distance — Presentation Transcript

http://danielleatadistance.blogspot.com	10
https://api.turnitin.com	1