Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide


  1. 1. Screencasting: Foregrounding Aurality/Orality in the FYC Classroom<br />Sarah Moseley<br />ENGL 820<br />4/26/11<br />
  2. 2. Introduction<br />Aurality/orality is important in the FYC classroom. Today, we commonly have students:<br />Give oral presentations of their work<br />Discuss in large and small groups<br />Work in small groups for peer review<br />Read aloud<br />Answer and ask questions<br />Student-teacher conferences<br />However, writing is too often regarded as “not simply one way of knowing; it is the way” (Dunn 15).<br />
  3. 3. This type of multimodality is valuable for several reasons:<br />Helps students make sense of their experience and everyday lives <br />Draws on a frequent form of communication in student culture<br />Respects students’ “rhetorical sovereignty” – print cultures are not privileged as much over oral cultures (Selfe 642).<br />
  4. 4. History of Aurality/Oralityin the U.S. University<br />Many scholars confirm that writing has only recently become dominant in the U.S. university (Russell, Berlin, Johnson, Halloran).<br />In the early 1800s, Western classical tradition prevailed, with recitations, orations, debates, etc.<br />In the later 1800s, with the rise of industrialization, preparation for specialized professional work became more important. This type of work relied increasingly on writing.<br />As writing culture waxed, oral culture waned in the U.S. university.<br />
  5. 5. Where are we today?<br />If we privilege print culture, we:<br />Perpetuate a binary division between writing and speaking (Biber, Tannen);<br />Teach a narrow understanding of language and literacy (Kress);<br />Limit our students’ ability to use multiple modes common in everyday and professional activities;<br />Value print culture over oral culture, which may work against our students, who come from a variety of backgrounds (Dunn, Royster).<br />
  6. 6. Screencasting: a tool for change<br />While the university still largely privileges print culture, FYC teachers continue to use aural/oral pedagogical methods. One technology that allows teachers to expand on their use of aurality/orality in the classroom is screencasting.<br />Screencasting is a type of digital recording technology that creates a video of a selected area on the computer screen. Many screencasts contain audio narration.<br />
  7. 7. Teacher usage<br />Teachers can use screencasting in multiple ways:<br />Giving students feedback on assignments (Vincelette)<br />Creating short tutorials or instructional videos <br />Showing how to insert a header or use the Purdue OWL website<br />Answering student questions with visual video assistance<br />Screencasting has been used to the advantage of teachers in traditional and distance FYC classrooms, with positive response from students.<br />
  8. 8. Student usage<br />Most sources focus on teacher use of screencasting, but there are also rich possibilities for students:<br /> Creating oral versions of traditionally written assignments<br />Transforming written assignments into an oral medium<br /> Giving classmates feedback in peer review<br />Demonstrating knowledge by labeling the parts of their essay <br />thesis, evidence, transition<br />Responding to discussion forum questions, holding asynchronous conversations.<br />
  9. 9. Limitations<br />While screencasting offers numerous benefits, there are some limitations:<br />Technology access – users must have computer, recording and internet access. <br />Electronic assignments - to make a screencast, the speaker comments upon documents on the computer screen.<br />Students with hearing or speaking impairments may not be able to fully participate.<br />Learning curve – screencasting programs are generally user-friendly, but any new technology requires some study.<br />Recording limitation – different screencasting programs allow for different lengths of recording, but none that I’ve found allow for infinitely long screencasts.<br />
  10. 10. 12 Screencasting Tools<br />Screenjelly<br />Screenpresso<br />Screenr<br />Screentoaster<br />Screencastle<br />Webinaria<br />CamStudio<br />Debut from NCH software<br />Faculte<br />Freescreencast<br />Jing<br />Screencast-O-matic<br />Of these 12 tools, Jing and Debut seem most promising to me. Both allow for screen and audio capture. Jing is easier to learn than NCH, but has a shorter recording time limit (5 minutes). <br />
  11. 11. Conclusion<br />Multimodal composition draws on students’ experience, develops a range of critical thinking and expression skills, and places value upon non-print cultures. Screencasting is a tool for teachers and students to increase the multimodality of the FYC classroom by foregrounding aurality/orality in the classroom.<br />
  12. 12. Questions? Suggestions?<br />Please, get in touch! <br />Sarah Moseley<br /><br />
  13. 13. Works Cited<br />Berlin, James A. Rhetoric and Reality: Writing Instruction in American Colleges, 1900-1985. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1987.<br />Biber, Douglas. “Spoken and written textual dimensions in English: Resolving the Contradictory Findings.” Language 62 (1986): 384-414.<br />Dunn, Patricia A. Talking, Sketching, Moving: Multiple Literacies in the Teaching of Writing. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 2001.<br />Halloran, Michael. “Rhetoric in the American College Curriculum: The Decline of Public Discourse” Pre/Text: The First Decade. Ed. Victor J. Vitanza. Pittsburgh: U of Pittsburgh P, 1993. 93-116.<br />Johnson, Nan. Nineteenth-Century Rhetoric in North America. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1991.<br />Kress, Gunther. “Multimodality.” Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures. Ed. Bill Cope and Mary Kalantzis. London: Routledge, 2000. 186-202.<br />Royster, Jacqueline Jones. “When the First voice You Hear Is Not Your Own.” College Composition and Communication 47.1 (1996): 29-40.<br />Russell, David R. Writing in the Academic Disciplines, 1870-1990: A Curricular History. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1991.<br />Selfe, Cynthia L. “The Movement of Air, the Breath of Meaning: Aurality and Multimodal Composing.” College Composition and Communication60.4 (June 2009): 616-663.<br />Tannen, Deborah. Ed. Spoken and Written Language: Exploring Orality and Literacy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1982.<br />Vincelette, Beth. "Performing your Grading: Beyond the Rubric." ENGL 664 Teaching College Composition. Old Dominion University. Norfolk, Va. 25 Oct. 2011. Classroom Presentation.<br />