Get the Picture: Enhancing Digital “Teachnology”

Education

Vicki S. Williams, Ph.D.

Barry O. Williams, Ph.D.

Judith L. Zaenglein, Ph.D.

The Initial Audience

• 400 level video production course - no prerequesites except permission

• May be from Training & Development program or InfSy or PubAdm or Education

• May or may not be computer literate

The Instructional Problem

Students were:

• required to shoot and edit training video

• familiar with camcorder

• not familiar with editing process or equipment

• quick to say that analog/linear editing equipment is not intuitive

Measure of Dissatisfaction

• Student comments collected formally at midterm and end of course

• Student emails and phone calls to instructor

• Time spent in postproduction work

• Quality of preproduction products better than postproduction product

Proposed Solution

Complaints focused on equipment learning curve

Majority of project time spent in editing suites

Design better than product

Digital video editing

Digital video editing

Digital video editing

Faculty Discussions

Other opportunities would be created for T&D students and pre-service teaching students in:

Computers for Educators

Multimedia for Educators

Training & Development

• Course was revised Summer -Fall ‘99

• Field tested Spring 2000

• Comments at midterm infinitely more positive.

QuickTime™ and aCinepak decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

What Next?

• Summer 2000

• EDUC462.1 Computers for Educators taught by Barry Williams

• EDUC450 Multimedia for Educators taught by Judy Zaenglein

The Process

• Imbedded Professional Development• Teacher Involvement• Pull out Days• External Facilitation

Constraints

• Lab had to be upgraded re: additional memory, USB adapter cards, and portable storage.

• Many instructors vying for lab time.

• Software basic, consumer grade not yielding smooth motion

Benefits

•Student comments are positive now

•Quality of postproduction product is improving

•Students have marketable job skills