Using Screencasting Technology to Learn Application Software<br />Yong Su Ting<br />
Introduction<br />Background <br />Purpose of research<br />What is screencasting?<br />Screencast Development<br />Classr...
Introduction<br />The first IT module for Foundation students: Learn Microsoft application software<br /><ul><li>PowerPoint
Excel
Access</li></ul>Diversity of Foundation students<br /><ul><li>Education background
Computer proficiency
Learning experience
Novice, intermediate or expert users?</li></li></ul><li>Background<br />Students have diverse learning pace.<br />An alter...
When student learning styles are matched with instructional strategies, student achievement is maximized (Ballone & Czerni...
Conventional Approach<br />New Approach<br />Screencasting is rapidly becoming a popular method of presenting content for ...
What is screencasting?<br />Screenast is “a digital movie in which the setting is partly or wholly a computer screen, and ...
Use of Screencasting in Education<br /><ul><li>University of Wales, UK (Thomas, 2006).
University of Stirling, UK (Winterbottom, 2007).
Saint Xavier University, US (Arman, Wilson & Shirvani, 2007).
George Fox University, US (Arman, Wilson & Shirvani, 2007).
Ohio University-Zaneville, US (Arman, Wilson & Shirvani, 2007).
Appalachian State University, US (Kurtz, Fenwick & Ellsworth, 2007).
University of Ulster, Northern Ireland (Wilson, Uhomoibhi & McCartan, 2008).
Edith Cowan University,  Australia  (Garner, 2008).
Montana State University, US (Peterson, 2007) – Distance Education.</li></ul>Live capture presentations (PPT lecture)<br /...
University of Ulster, Northern Ireland – AutoCAD (Wilson, Uhomoibhi & McCartan, 2008).
University of Texas-Pan American, US – Engineering Softaware: MathSoft‘s Mathcad & MSC‘s Working Model 2D (Freeman, 2004).
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Learning application software: conventional versus screencasts approach

2,409 views

Published on

5 March 2010 (Friday) | 15:30 - 15:50 | http://citers2010.cite.hku.hk/abstract/33 | YONG, Su Ting, The University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,409
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
124
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Learning application software: conventional versus screencasts approach

  1. 1. Using Screencasting Technology to Learn Application Software<br />Yong Su Ting<br />
  2. 2. Introduction<br />Background <br />Purpose of research<br />What is screencasting?<br />Screencast Development<br />Classroom Experiment<br />Students’ feedback<br />Discussion<br />Conclusion<br />Outline of Presentation<br />
  3. 3. Introduction<br />The first IT module for Foundation students: Learn Microsoft application software<br /><ul><li>PowerPoint
  4. 4. Excel
  5. 5. Access</li></ul>Diversity of Foundation students<br /><ul><li>Education background
  6. 6. Computer proficiency
  7. 7. Learning experience
  8. 8. Novice, intermediate or expert users?</li></li></ul><li>Background<br />Students have diverse learning pace.<br />An alternative teaching approach is needed.<br />
  9. 9. When student learning styles are matched with instructional strategies, student achievement is maximized (Ballone & Czerniak, 2001; Davidson, Savenye & Orr, 1992; Dunn, Denig & Lovelace, 2001; Gregorc, 1979). <br />
  10. 10. Conventional Approach<br />New Approach<br />Screencasting is rapidly becoming a popular method of presenting content for instruction (Brown, Luterbach& Sugar, 2009)<br />Screencasts<br />Notes<br />Notes<br />Software demonstration <br />Software demonstration<br />
  11. 11. What is screencasting?<br />Screenast is “a digital movie in which the setting is partly or wholly a computer screen, and in which audio narration describes the on-screen action” (Udell, 2005). <br />Screencast is a digital recording of the activity on a computer screen and it may contain sound tracks (Winterbottom, 2007; Lee, Pradhan & Dalgarno, 2008). <br />
  12. 12. Use of Screencasting in Education<br /><ul><li>University of Wales, UK (Thomas, 2006).
  13. 13. University of Stirling, UK (Winterbottom, 2007).
  14. 14. Saint Xavier University, US (Arman, Wilson & Shirvani, 2007).
  15. 15. George Fox University, US (Arman, Wilson & Shirvani, 2007).
  16. 16. Ohio University-Zaneville, US (Arman, Wilson & Shirvani, 2007).
  17. 17. Appalachian State University, US (Kurtz, Fenwick & Ellsworth, 2007).
  18. 18. University of Ulster, Northern Ireland (Wilson, Uhomoibhi & McCartan, 2008).
  19. 19. Edith Cowan University, Australia (Garner, 2008).
  20. 20. Montana State University, US (Peterson, 2007) – Distance Education.</li></ul>Live capture presentations (PPT lecture)<br />Software/ Programming<br /><ul><li>Indiana University, US – Multimedia Software: Microsoft PPT, FrontPage, audio software & Windows Movie Maker (Ross & Ross, 2005).
  21. 21. University of Ulster, Northern Ireland – AutoCAD (Wilson, Uhomoibhi & McCartan, 2008).
  22. 22. University of Texas-Pan American, US – Engineering Softaware: MathSoft‘s Mathcad & MSC‘s Working Model 2D (Freeman, 2004).
  23. 23. University of Ballarat, Australia - BlueJ & Java (Lee, Pradhan, & Dalgarno, 2008). </li></ul>Step by step problem solution<br /><ul><li>University of Saskatchewan, Canada – Physics (Robinson, 2008).
  24. 24. University of Nottingham, UK- Mathematics.</li></li></ul><li>
  25. 25. Research Process<br />Screencast Development<br />Classroom Experiment<br />Students’ feedback<br />
  26. 26. Screencast Development<br />Sample Exercise: Microsoft Excel<br />Screencasts: Microsoft Excel & Access-demonstration of exercises<br />Limitation: No narration<br />
  27. 27. Experiment: Semester July 2009 (Semester 1 Foundation Programme)<br />Classroom teaching:<br />Week 4&5: Conventional approach<br />Week 6, 7&8: New approach<br />Week 9&10: New approach<br />Demonstration + Notes:<br />Microsoft PowerPoint<br />Demonstration + Notes + Screencasts: <br />Microsoft Access <br />Demonstration + Notes + Screencasts:<br />Microsoft Excel <br />
  28. 28. Students’ feedbackWeek 11 - Semester 1<br />Foundation in Bioscience – 30 students<br />
  29. 29. Conventional Approach<br />I can’t remember all the steps & functions.<br />If I miss one step, I will miss everything.<br />Sometimes, I don’t understand because it is too fast. <br />I am lost if the function is too complicated.<br />I can’t follow the demonstration. <br />I don’t understand by reading the notes.<br />I don’t like reading the notes.<br />If I miss the class, I will miss the whole lesson.<br />
  30. 30. New Approach<br />Learning experience<br />
  31. 31. Learning experience<br />Male<br />Female<br />
  32. 32. New Approach<br />1-Strongly Disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-Neutral, 4-Agree, 5-Strongly Agree<br />
  33. 33. New Approach<br />Video demonstrations enable the slower students to learn at their own pace and replay the required steps.<br />Video demonstrations can help me to learn and understand better than reading the notes.<br />Video demonstrations can help the students who miss the class.<br />Video demonstrations are interesting and fun.<br />Video demonstrations are helpful but the lecturer’s explanation is also important to make us understand better.<br />Video demonstrations are useful and helpful for the class and revision purpose.<br />
  34. 34. Feedbacks from students are very positive!<br />100% - Agreed that lecturer’s demonstration supported by screencast is a better teaching approach.<br />
  35. 35. Discussion<br />Screencasts can be used to supplementteaching materials (Peterson, 2007).<br />Students can replay the screencasts. & reinforce their learning (Ross & Ross, 2005).<br />Students can learn at their own pace& accommodate different learning styles and speeds (Educause, 2006).<br />Students can use screencasts for revisionbecause they are flexibility (Winterbottom, 2007).<br />Students can learn and understand betterbecause can help students to understand course concepts better (Freeman, 2004).<br />
  36. 36. Conclusion<br />Screencasting technology has a great potential to provide constructive learning experience in learning application software at tertiary level.<br />Suggestions for improvement:<br /><ul><li>Brief explanation.
  37. 37. Narration & audio.</li></li></ul><li>References<br />Agarwal, A. (2007) Camtasia Studio 5 Review - The Best Screen Recorder Ever. Digital Inspiration. Retrieved February 18, 2009 from http://www.labnol.org/software/download/camtasia-studio-5-screencasting-desktop-videos/1475/<br />Aman, J., Wilson, B. & Shirvani, S. (2007) Maintaining lecture context in a blended course. Consortium for Computing Sciences in Colleges.<br />Ballone, L.M., & Czerniak, C.M. (2001). Teacher’s beliefs about accommodating students’ learning styles in science classrooms. Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH 43402, Electronic Journal of Science Education, 6 (2), 1-41. <br />Barbe, W., & Swassing, R. (1988). Teaching through modality strengths : Concepts and practices. Columbus, OH: Zaner-Bloser.<br />Becta. (2005). Learning styles – an introduction to the research literature. British Educational Communications and Technology Agency.<br />Brown, A., Luterbach, K. & Sugar, W. (2009). The Current State of Screencast Technology and What is Known About its Instructional Effectiveness. In I. Gibson et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2009 (pp. 1748-1753). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.<br />Carpenter, C. and Steiner, S. (2007) Using Web 2.0 Technologies to Push E-Resources. 2007 Electronic Resources and Libraries Conference.<br />Carrera, F. (2006) Informal training, a window of opportunity for e-learning. Distance learning conference & workshop 2006.<br />Clark, J.D. & Kou, Q. (2008) Captivate and Camtasia. Journal of Medical Library Association, 16(1). <br />Coiro, J., Malloy, J. and Rogers, A. (2006) Patterns of effective strategy use among adolescent online readers. In National Reading Conference. Los Angeles, CA, November 29, 2006.<br />Davidson, G.V., Savenye, W.C., & Orr, K.B. (1992). How do learning styles relate to performance in a computer applications course? Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 24, 348-358.<br />Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1978). Teaching students through their individual learning styles: A practical approach. Reston, VA: Reston Publishing Company. <br />Dunn, R.S., Denig, S.J., & Lovelace, M.K. (2001). Two sides of the same coin or different strokes for different folks? Teacher Librarian, 28(3), 9-16.<br />Educause (2006). 7 Things that you should know about screencasting. Retrieved January 6, 2010 from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7012.pdf<br />Freeman, R.A. (2004) Asynchronous teaching of Math and Engineering software within the context of a course in Mechanisms. Proceedings of DETC’ 2004: The 2004 ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & The Computer and Information in Engineering Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, September 28-October 2, 2004.<br />Garner, S. (2008). The Use of Screencasting and Audio to Support Student Learning. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2008 (pp. 4693-4698). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.<br />Goodwin, S. (2005) Using screen capture software for web site usability and redesign buy-in. Library Hi Tech, 23(4), 610- 621.<br />Gregorc, A.F. (1979). Learning styles: Differences which profession must address. In C. Vacca and J. Maegher (Ed), Reading through content. pp. 232-235. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut press.<br />Iding, M. (2000) Can strategies facilitate learning from illustrated science texts? International Journal of Instructional Media, 27(3), pp 289-307.<br />Keefe, J. W. (1988). Development of the NAASP Learning Style Profile. In J.W. Keefe (Ed.), Profiling & utilizing learning style (pp.1-21). Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principles.<br />Kurtz, B.L., Fenwick, J. B. and Ellsworth, C. C. (2007) Using podcasts and tablet PCs in computer science. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual Southeast Regional Conference (Winston-Salem, North Carolina, March 23 - 24, 2007). ACM-SE 45. ACM, New York, NY, 484-489.<br />Lauffer, S. (2002). The translation process: An analysis of observational methodology.<br />Lee, J.W., Pradhan, S. & Dalgarno, B. (2008). The Effectiveness of Screencasts and Cognitive Tools as Scaffolding for Novice Object-Oriented Programmers. Journal of Information Technology Education, Vol 7 (2008).<br />Lemire, D. (2001). An introduction to learning styles for college teachers. Journal of college reading and learning , 32(1), 86-92.<br />Letteri, C. A. (1988). The NASSP Learning Style Profile and cognitive processing. In J.W. Keefe (Ed.), Profiling & utilizing learning style (pp.22-34). Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principles.<br />Library Hi Tech, 22(4), pg 366-374.<br />Mayer, R.E., Steinhoff, K., Bower, K. and Mars, R. (1995) A generative theory of textbook design: using annotated illustration to foster meaningful learning of science text. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(1), pp 31-44.<br />Nichols, R. and Anderer, C. (2007) Using video podcasts outside the classroom. SIGUCCS’07, October 7-10, 2007, Orlando, Florida, USA. pg 6-8.<br />Peterson, E. Incorporating Screencasts In Online Teaching. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Vol 8, No 3 (2007), ISSN: 1492‐3831<br />Pival, P.R. (2006). Show and Tell the Easy Way: An Introduction to Screencasting. Retrieved January 6, 2009 from http://distlib.blogs.com/screencasts/SDIScreencasting-Pival.ppt <br />Reid, J.M. (1995). Learning Styles in the ESL/EFL Classroom. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.<br />Robinson, A. (2008) Easy implementation of internet-based whiteboard physics tutorials. The Physics Teacher, 46(8), pp 456-459.<br />Ross, J. M. and Ross, K. R. (2005) Developing web-based video training modules to aid students learning multimedia skills. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 21(2), 281-287.<br />Sim, G. and Horton, M. (2005), Performance and Attitude of Children in Computer Based Versus Paper Based Testing,<br />Stewart, K. L., & Felicetti, L. A. (1992). Learning styles of marketing majors. Educational Research Quarterly, 15(2), 15-23.<br />Sweller, J. and Chandler, P. (1994) Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognitive and Instruction, 12(3), pp 185-233.<br />Tang, J.C., Liu, S.B., Muller, M., Lin, J. & Drews, C. (2006) Unobtrusive but invasive: using screen recording to collect field data on computer-mediated interaction. Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Proceedings of the 2006 20th anniversary conference on Computer supported cooperative work, Banff, Alberta, Canada, pp 479 – 482.<br />TechnoTarget (2008). Best Screencasting Software. Retrieved February 18, 2009 from http://technotarget.com/bestscreencast-software/<br />Thomas, K. (2006) The power of the pod cast. Viewpoint, January 2006. www.futurelab.org.uk/viewpoint/art70.htm<br />Treichler, D.G. (1967) Are you missing the boat in training aid? Film and A-V Communication, 1, pp 14-16.<br />Udell, J. (2005). What is Screencasting. Digital Media (November, 16, 2005). Retrieved January 26, 2009 from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmedia/2005/11/16/what-is-screencasting.html<br />Ward, J.L. (2006) Web site redesign: the University of Washington Libraries’ experience. OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library, 22(3), 207-216.<br />Wilson, N., Uhomoibhi, J. and McCartan, K. (2008) Technology-enhanced teaching and learning: A strategic perspective. EUNIS 2008: Vision IT - Visions for use of IT in Higher Education, June 24-27, 2008, University of Aarhus, Denmark.<br />Winterbottom, S. (2007) Virtual lecturing: Delivering lectures using screen casting and pod casting technology. Planet 18, World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, Montreal.<br />Xiao, Y., Pietraszewski, B.A. & Goodwin, S.P. (2004) Full stream ahead: database instruction through online videos.<br />

×