ALT-C 2009 Infrastructure Technologies

Infrastructure technologies
2 short paper(s)
92 Effective Technology for Effective Reading: Innovative use of hyperlinks in online readings for low prior knowledge learners
Jon Loose

If a learner is able to navigate their own way, they can facilitate a representation of the information as they take their own path through the text, so hypertext is good.

pros:

  • non-linear structure is beneficial to learning

cons:

  • not directing the user can inhibit knowledge construction
  • can be disorienting
  • lack of coherance
  • need for prior knowledge
  • metacognitive demands

Reading Styles:

  • Linear Readers:
    • fast
    • slow
  • Lookback Readers:
    • Non-selective reviewers
    • topic structure processors (best comprehension)

(Hyona & Nurminen, 2006; Hyona, Lorch, & Kaakinen, 2002)

Can hyperlinked text facilitate low-knowledge learners?

152 Large scale implementation of a lecture capture system: a value added initiative?
Philip Bradley, Carol Summerside, Mark Agar, Phil Ansell, Robin Humphrey, Julian Knight, Az Mohammed, John Moss, Carys Watts, Janet Wheeler, Dave Wolfendale

Top down approache, decision to roll out across site

2 groups. implementation group, educational-use group

used lectopia rebranded as ‘ReCap’ to get across that it was in addition to lectures rather than replacement – http://teaching.ncl.ac.uk/recap

Videos behind password protected site, available only to University members – not open

Book system in advance, then when mic picks up sound (as long as it is turned on), it starts recording, and afterwards you are emailed a link.

Educational uses

  • lecture recording
  • supplementary information
  • reprocessing of support materials
  • staff training materials
  • conferences and public lectures
  • recruitment and marketing
    • i.e. open day videos for overseas students
  • administration
  • research seminars

Institutional Implementation

  • ReCap Education Steering Group

Feedback and Evaluation

  • overwhelming student positive response
  • 92% of students said it didn’t affect their attendance of lectures
  • staff disagreed

Main staff issues are training and getting them to accept that it records the performance of the day, no editing, warts and all.

5 year vision

  • Ubiquitous, all locations allow
  • increase ease of use to
    • editing
    • lecture room control
    • desktop capture
  • integration with VLE
  • transition from pilot to production service
  • searchability

Costs: 2-5K per lecture theatre

ALT-C 2009 Technology enhanced feed-forward

Technology enhanced feed-forward
1 research paper(s)
207 Technology enhanced feed-forward for learning
Sue Rodway-Dyer, Matthew Newcombe, Liz Dunne
(same room as the last session so no frantic running around)
Research paper. Not technology oriented, but teaching and learning.
Video of teacher circulating in a lab talking to students, checking their work, answering questions, asking them questions, praising, and explaining.
Feedback is a misnower, more interested in ‘feedforward’. Needs to be usable for staff and students. Example video is now used as part of training for new staff as well as for ‘feedforward’ to students.
Students don’t pay attention to extensive verbal feedback in labs, and don’t value it as such. Watching video after the fact is very helpful.
Stimulated recall: when you play the audio/video back to lecturer afterwards, then interview them afterwards about what they think the quality of their feedback was.
39% of students felt they got no feedback ever. They weren’t able to recognise the feedback that took part in the lab that the video caught actually happening.
capturing live video feedback time consuming (post processing etc)
audio feedback expected to be better than written – with tone of voice brining the feedback to life over written text, is it?

  • 80% of students wanted audio and written feedback
  • 20% thought written feedback was illegible
  • 10% thought feedback written and audio would have no impact on future performance
  • 76% wanted face-to-face feedback
  • advantage of audio feedback is greater depth and clarity
  • negative experience: did not like tone of voice, especially with critical comments
  • some could not listen to the audio feedback all the way through

Stimulated Recall:

  • balance between criticism and praise might need to be altered to be more positive to make audio feedback easier to hear for students
  • inappropriate language and terminology easy to slip into audio feedback than written
  • may come acorss more negatively than intended
  • pace of questions to class too fast
  • lab environment made learning difficult – noise levels

Feedback on stimulated recall: gives time for informed reflection which isn’t part of routine performance
Thought processes of audio feedback very different to written, the teachers need to learn the new skill. Almost like counselling – needing to be positive as solely-negative audio feedback seems to be emotionally/intellectually damaging.