“As online learning continues to grow each year, so do the number of new media and Web 2.0 technologies faculty have at their disposal, yet the majority of online courses remain heavily text-based. Online learning often mirrors the traditional classroom, with a focus on read and write (and at times discuss) — sometimes with good reason. First, we all find ourselves relying on our previous experience when trying something new. Second, many methods used in traditional classroom environments can be effective in an online learning environment. And third, over the past few years teaching online has become an increasingly complicated process, requiring both a specialized pedagogy and a technological aptitude possessed by few faculty. Given this, when confronted with the task of designing an online course (especially one taught previously in a face-to-face classroom environment), it is completely natural for faculty to replicate many, if not all, of the classroom activities in the online environment. We believe this is why so many online courses consist of little more than readings, online lectures in the form of PowerPoint presentations, and some online asynchronous discussions sprinkled throughout the semester.
Perhaps one of the most often used, but seldom talked about, vestiges of the past carried over from traditional face-to-face courses into the online environment is the digital dropbox — or more specifically, the practice of having students submit their work privately. The digital dropbox is essentially a tool incorporated into most learning management systems that enables faculty to designate a virtual inbox where students can privately submit their assignments and later retrieve them (presumably with a grade and some type of feedback). While there might be a specific time when it pedagogically makes sense to have students turn in their work to a digital dropbox viewable only by the instructor and the student, we have found that mostof the time it makes little sense to do so. In this article we argue for use of a public performance model and explain why.”
I got an email the other day from a colleague asking which was better — Jing or Camtasia? Then later that day, a faculty member stopped by and wanted to talk about whether she should upgrade from Jing to Camtasia. While I am more used to the question of Camtasia or Captivate, I figured I should probably get my thoughts down on this whole Jing vs. Camtasia question.
The fact that people are even asking this question shows how Jing has grown in popularity over the past year or two (see the Emerging Top 100 for how it has moved up over the past few years) and makes my heart warm. Why you ask? Well, I am a huge fan of Jing. Sure, I have been using Camtasia for years but I find myself the last year or two using Jing more day-to-day than Camtasia. So you might think that I would recommend Jing over Camtasia. Not so fast.
While I think Jing is a must-have tool for any educator, in many ways I find that Jing is the gate-way drug that leads most serious users to eventually purchase Camtasia. Why? Well there are certain things that Jing just can’t do that Camtasia can. But don’t get me wrong; the things Jing does, it does so well that often users like me (who have both) still find themselves using Jing more often than Camtasia. Let me explain.
Jing and Camtasia are two different applications from TechSmith. These two apps are typically used to create screencasts (though they each can be used for much more). And while there are many other applications you could use to create screencasts, Jing and Camtasia are my two favorite applications.
Jing (+ screencast.com)
Jing is a cross-platform “free” application (though you can upgrade to a pro account for extra features) that you can download at www.jingproject.com. The free version enables you to record up to 5 minute long screencasts. You can then save the screencasts to your computer or upload them to screencast.com to distribute. However, these screencasts (which are in a .flv format if you are using the free version) aren’t meant to be edited so you have to get it right the first time or re-record it. You can upgrade to a pro version of Jing for about $15 a year. With this, you essentially get three things:
1. A better video format (.mp4) that can be edited in an external application (though it is often easier to simply re-record than edit);
2. The ability to ftp your screencasts to your own server;
3. The ability to toggle back and forth to a Webcam during your screencasts.
So the bottom line is that if you are new to screencasting, or if your screencasts can be limited to 5 minutes, or if you don’t need to edit your screencasts then Jing might be all you need. For instance, in my day-to-day job of supporting faculty, Jing is perfect to create individual “How-to” screencasts for individual faculty. Jing is also perfect to do things like narrate mini-lectures (think less than 5 minute PowerPoint presentations). But if you want a more polished screencast that is longer than 5 minutes that will give you the option to zoom in and add call outs then you might want to invest in Camtasia.
While less compelling, it is important to note that Jing is also great at taking screenshots and annotating them.
For more on how to use Jing, watch the following screencast:
Camtasia
Camtasia on the other hand is kind of like Jing on steroids but it comes at price ($300+). But for that price, you get the ability to create screencasts that are longer than 5 minutes. You can also easily edit these screencasts (if you are using Camtasia Studio on a PC), add additional media, call outs, and effects, the ability to zoom in and out, and finally the ability to export the screencasts in a number of different formats. In addition, Camtasia integrates seamlessly with PowerPoint (to narrate PowerPoint presentations) as well as gives you the ability to add flash-based quizzes to your screencasts.
So where does this leave us? Well, I believe based on my experience that it is less a question of either or but rather a question of when do you use each one. I think most if not all Instructional Technologists need to have both tools in their toolbox. For day-to-day just-in-time support (whether for screen captures or for screencasts that can be less than 5 minutes long), Jing is quick, easy, and indispensable. However, there often comes a time when one needs to create longer, more polished screencasts that need to incorporate various media, and be edited. For these times, Camtasia is a must!
Do you agree or disagree? Did I cover all the main points? What did I miss?
I am a huge fan of SlideShare (www.slideshare.net) and other presentation hosting tools. If for no other reason, these tools allow me — I no longer print out copies of my slides to handout (which by the way I have argued elsewhere is never a good idea because we should instead be thinking about how we can hand out short, ideally, one page handouts). But these tools offer many other benefits:
–Makes one’s work available to a larger audience
–Gives one easy place to direct people to (e.g., go to www.slideshare.net/plowenthal to see my presentations…)
–Allows one the ability to track how many times their presentations have been viewed, added as a favorite, tweeted
–Allows one the ability to embed presentations across multiple web sites and learning management systems
–The ability to find others with similar interests
–Share one’s work with other educators
–Find open education resources for one’s class
And the list goes on. But I just noticed that you can also create playlists. So here is an example of a SlideShare playlist.
Center for Digital Storytelling (CDS) http://www.storycenter.org/index1.html “The Center for Digital Storytelling (CDS) is an international non-profit training, project development, and research organization dedicated to assisting people in using digital media to tell meaningful stories from their lives. Our focus is on building partnerships with community, educational, and business institutions to develop large-scale initiatives in health, social services, education, historic and cultural preservation, community development, human rights, and environmental justice arenas, using methods and principles adapted from our original Digital Storytelling Workshop.” [Quoted from the CDS Web site]
Story Circles http://storycircles.org/ A Web site where people can upload and share their digital stories.
Examples of Digital Stories in the CDS Tradition “Samsara” by Patrick Lowenthal
“Grand Canyon” by daniel weinshenker
Articles on Digital Storytelling and Education Lowenthal, P. R. (2009). Digital storytelling—An emerging institutional technology? In J. Hartley & K. McWilliam (Eds.), Story circle: Digital storytelling around the world (pp. 252-259). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. http://www.patricklowenthal.com/publications/DigitalStorytelling_%20preprint.pdf
Abstract
Storytelling, a timeless instructional strategy, is taking on a new life in the form of digital storytelling. During the past 12 years, Digital Storytelling, pioneered by the Center for the Digital Storytelling, has grown from an idea to a movement. The Digital Storytelling Festival has been growing in popularity since 1995 and there is now even a formal Digital Storytelling Association. However, despite the popularity of digital storytelling as a tool for expression, only recently have educators begun experimenting with this emerging instructional technology. This paper investigates trends, issues, and opportunities of using digital storytelling to improve teaching and learning.
Abstract
The Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework is a comprehensive guide to the research and practice of online learning. One of the most challenging aspects of establishing a CoI in online courses is finding the best way to attend to each element of the CoI framework in a primarily text-based environment. In our online courses, we have examined the use of digital storytelling as a way to break down the barriers that can get in the way of achieving a healthy and productive CoI. In this paper, we describe how we use digital storytelling to establish our social presence as instructors.
Academic Certificate http://www.storycenter.org/certificate.html The Center for Digital Storytelling in partnership with the University of Colorado Denver offer an Academic Certificate in Digital Storytelling.
At the University of Colorado Denver, we use two Learning Management Systems (LMS): eCollege and Blackboard. There is a long history why we use two different systems and for better or for worse it doesn’t look like this is going to change any time soon.
Therefore, we have begun thinking about when we will upgrade from version 8 of Blackboard to version 9. Version 9 has a ton of new features that people seem to love. But we have realized over the years at CU Online that stability in many ways is a better characteristic of a LMS than any specific feature.
We only have 1-2 times each year to upgrade Blackboard. And a great deal of thought and planning needs to be done well in advance before upgrading our LMS. Thus, we wanted to get an idea of what others — specifically those who upgraded from version 8 to version 9 — think of version 9.
I created a basic Google Docs survey that I sent out to Blackboard Admin listserv. The survey included the following questions:
1a. If you are using Blackboard 9.0, are you happy with it compared to Blackboard 8.0?
1b. If you would like (though it isn’t needed), please explain why you like or dislike it in comparison to Blackboard 8.0
2a. Assuming you are currently using Blackboard 9.0, based on your experience, which of the following would you recommend (keeping in mind that you aren’t aware of our circumstances)?
2b. If you would like (though it isn’t needed), please explain your previous answer.
