Hi Olaf, Do you have any screen shots or mockups of both modalities. I am a visual person so it's difficult to wrap my head around structured annotations. Will this tool create points in the video where students will have to answer questions or add comments?
~Adam On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Schulte Olaf A. <[email protected]> wrote: > Allow me to chime in here with respect to work Entwine will be doing for > ETH in a Swiss project "Annotating academic video" this year (and pardon if > I don't go into some of the didactical details of the thread): This will > actually incorporate both modes of interactivity you mention, though that's > probably not totally true because the devil is in the details of defining > which is what. > > The feature on the one hand is to allow for note-taking (which we refer to > as "private annotations" because they mainly serve the student as a tool > for learning with the video), so we expect them to be textual mainly, but > allow for a kind of "stamping" the video (for relevant parts etc.) also. > These we would expect to be used with lecture recordings mainly. > > On the other hand, there are annotations - "public annotations" as we > termed them because they are supposed to be shared, mainly in a learning > group. The latter most often come in the form of a structured annotation > (the owner of the video a.k.a. instructor can provide the annotation > structure) where the instructor asks the students to go through the video > and identify certain structures as an assignment; but they can be textual, > too. The usage is for videos other than lecture recordings mainly. > > So we share Brian's distinction and provide for different modalities (if > that's the modality Judy was referring to) The reason we differentiated > private and public is about the concerns Judy mentions: While these notes > would be wonderful components of an enriched lecture together with slide > index, audio, heatmaps etc., there is privacy to consider. So most students > wouldn't be happy to find their notes being used (even anonymised) for such > purposes. > > In a nutshell, Matterhorn will have the features to help with both > scenarios (a bit) - and I seem to remember from Oxford there is work > underway in Osnabruck we have to coordinate with as well. > > O > > >-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > >Von: [email protected] [mailto:community- > >[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Judy Stern > >Gesendet: Freitag, 17. Februar 2012 00:10 > >An: Opencast Community > >Betreff: Re: [Opencast] Question re: "Learning Analytics & Matterhorn" > > > >Much of what Chris reports echoes (at least vaguely) what we've found > through user > >research (surveys and interviews) at Berkeley: students aren't terribly > interested in > >annotating webcasts (as they currently know them), especially if such > annotations > >are to be shared with others (part of this clearly stems from > competitiveness.) > >Otoh, students are extremely interested in anything that supports their > use of > >webcast as a study tool (bookmarking, private annotations, ability to > search for > >text...anything that makes the video less opaque). And, when we observed > students > >using webcast, some were even doing the manual generation of the study > sheet that > >Chris' system creates as a pdf. (One such student described how she used > the > >study sheet while working out on an elliptical machine.) > > > >This also jives with what's been "reported" about the limitations of > "social learning" > >in the context of studying [1]: > >> Many students, in fact, prefer sticking to their own notes on courses, > rather than > >trusting friends. Focus groups conducted on behalf of GradeGuru, a > note-sharing > >site, found that many undergraduates don't see much value in passing > their notes to > >others or consulting the jottings of their classmates. > >> > >> "Studying is still largely an independent endeavor," says Jonathan D. > Becker, an > >assistant professor of educational leadership at Virginia Commonwealth > University, > >who led the recent focus groups as a consultant to GradeGuru. "College > students > >study in groups to some degree, but from what students say they don't > find them > >terribly beneficial." > > > >At the risk of stating the obvious, repeating what's already been said, > and probably > >oversimplifying), I'd say this discussion is highlighting the distinction > between 1) > >using lecture capture "as is" (simply record the lecture and make it > available to > >students who, left to their own devices, will happily use it as an > additional study > >tool) and 2) the use of lecture capture to do innovative things in > teaching. (Hmmm, > >yes, probably what Brian was saying: "review & study vs. integrated into > class > >coursework") > > > > > >As Chris suggests, many instructors and students (the ones his work has > >supported, the ones we've served and surveyed here at Berkeley) are in > the former ( > >"as is"/study tool) category. The instructors are not going to make much > use of > >annotation features if it requires extra work. Respectively, many of > their students will > >make use of "note-taking" functionality, because it supports their normal > study > >habits, but won't make much use of social learning features. Of course, > this could > >be changing, but it doesn't seem to be changing terribly quickly...while > some of the > >data we collected at Berkeley is over 5 years old, we heard some of the > same > >sentiments in interviews just last year. (I'm not sure if I completely > understand what > >you're describing about the use of student notes for video enrichment, > Chris, but it > >sounds pretty powerful in terms of even further enhancing the usefulness > of > >webcasts to aid in studying without putting additional burden on > >instructors/students; I won der, though, if there are privacy and > intellectual property > >issues to overcome, not to mention information overload.) > > > >Otoh, for instructors who are wanting/needing to teach in less > traditional ("lecture- > >based") ways, the ability to annotate lectures (or segments of lectures) > may be > >exceedingly powerful (the recent buzz around "flipping" the classroom > plays in here, > >too). And if they design their course in ways that make it advantageous > (defined in > >many different ways) for students to annotate, students will likely use > these > >features, too. I think Brian comes from a long tradition of projects of > this latter kind > >(pedagogical innovation). Such change doesn't occur simply by providing a > good > >set of tools (much more typically has to be done in terms of > instructional design, > >e.g. "constraints designed by an instructor"), but good tools are > critical. > > > >Reflecting on Andy's question (re. "annotations and long form note > taking could > >and should live side-by-side within Matterhorn") it feels that modularity > (allowing for > >the ability to pick and choose depending on context) is pretty important. > > > >Judy > > > >[1] http://chronicle.com/article/New-Social-Software-Tries-to/125542/ > > > >On Feb 16, 2012, at 11:25 AM, Christopher Brooks wrote: > > > >> Hi Andy, > >> > >>>> With respect to annotations I have to admit I have some very > >>>> specific feelings on the topic. Based on a prototype we piloted > >>>> with lecture capture I don't believe timeline annotations will be > >>>> used by students. Instead, a more free flowing note taking method is > >>>> something they want. We halted our investigations here, but the > >>>> last survey we ran showed students were really interested in having > >>>> built in note taking facilities, and a second pilot showed that > >>>> these notes tended to be quite rich in semantics. I think > >>>> note-taking, as opposed to annotations, would be an excellent > >>>> predictor of student outcomes. > >>> > >>> When you have the time, could you unpack the comments above further? > >>> Are your feelings regarding annotations vs. note-taking based solely > >>> on the prototype or do you have supporting research? if you have > >>> research, would you mind sharing? Am I correct to assume that you > >>> believe annotations and long form note taking could and should live > >>> side-by-side within Matterhorn? > >> > >> We ran several different pilots in a class before choosing a > >> note-taking method that we figured had a larger chance of success, > >> then we ran it in a study across multiple courses. I think Brian > >> introduces a nice narrative for how instructors might use annotation > >> tools, but in my experience instructors rarely reviewed their lecture > >> videos and wouldn't be willing to (at least not across all courses) > >> make annotations of their lectures. > >> > >> Our longer format note-taking provided some features that annotations > >> didn't, so the two systems weren't rigorously compared against one > >> another. In our app, notes were associated with "scenes" of the video > >> (segments using OCR). This allowed a user to print a pdf representing > >> "powerpoint overview" of their notes for offline studying. We also > >> introduced collaborative features in that all notes were shared with > >> other students (though they were not wikiable). > >> > >> If I were to go back to this, I think the biggest immediate wins would > >> be just letting students take freeform notes and timestamp enteries in > >> the notebook with the position of the video so that they could click a > >> note and see related content. Further, I think keeping a PDF export > >> would be valuable based on the usage from students. As a research > >> consideration, I would look at how courses build notes in a wiki-like > >> fashion while watching videos. Wikis of temporal artifacts (like > >> lecture videos) are pretty much unexplored I think, so novel > >> interaction mechanisms may be lurking just beneath the surface. > >> > >> Jumping back to annotations, I think Brians comments are really good. > >> I know of a system used here in medical education that allows > >> instructors to annotate their lecture videos with links, questions, > >> etc. I think this is a great step forward, but it puts more demands > >> on the instructors than just "lecture capture", and thus requires more > >> significant buy in. > >> > >> What I would like to see instead is to have segments of video enriched > >> for search/discovery from student notes. Students provide compelling > >> semantics that could be used to help understand the context of a given > >> video segment. This segment can then be used in recommendation > >> systems, content management systems, etc. to pull students into the > >> video from their other course content (imagine a course syllabus where > >> topics are dynamically mapped to segments in the video that they are > >> relevant to just from mining the OCR, speech, and note data; in this > >> way the syllabus evolves and fills out as the lectures are completed > >> without further intervention from the instructor). > >> > >> We did a thought experiment to consider how lecture capture might be > >> used to completely replace an lcms, and what that might look like. For > >> brick and mortar universities, the lecture is often *the artifact* of > >> learning. Lectures are under fire more and more over the years by > >> educational researchers, but they remain popular because they are > >> historical, scale well to larger groups, and are time efficient (for > >> instructors anyways). What if instead of trying to use ed tech to > >> replace the lecture, we focused solely on augmenting the lecture with > >> links, discussions, comments, notes, etc. Then the entire course > >> becomes grounded in the hourly meeting of the cohort, but maintains > >> the ability to grow asynchronously in different directions. > >> > >> We didn't go far with it; I think it would require a significant > >> integration of tools instead of a mashup of tools that content > >> management systems currently provide, so repurposing tools would be > >> difficult to do in a tractable amount of time. > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Chris > >> -- > >> Christopher Brooks, BSc, MSc > >> ARIES Laboratory, University of Saskatchewan > >> > >> Web: http://www.cs.usask.ca/~cab938 > >> Phone: 1.306.966.1442 > >> Mail: Advanced Research in Intelligent Educational Systems Laboratory > >> Department of Computer Science > >> University of Saskatchewan > >> 176 Thorvaldson Building > >> 110 Science Place > >> Saskatoon, SK > >> S7N 5C9 > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Community mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/community > >> > >> > >> To unsubscribe please email > >> [email protected] > >> _______________________________________________ > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Community mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/community > > > > > >To unsubscribe please email > >[email protected] > >_______________________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > Community mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/community > > > To unsubscribe please email > [email protected] > _______________________________________________ >
_______________________________________________ Community mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/community To unsubscribe please email [email protected] _______________________________________________
