Educational Use of Screencasting

How effective do you envision them to be, to different groups of educational professionals?

I imagine that most groups of educational professionals will appreciate the clear, direct instructions given via screencasts. For the tech savvy person, a one time viewing of a screencast will get him on his way. For a tech novice, the ability to watch the process multiple times is available. The ability to choose whether to watch all the way through, pause, or replay allows the viewer to tailor the training to his or her needs. I can imagine teachers using screencasts to leave student assignments if planning an absence, or to demonstrate a process that may be tricky. Screencasts can be posted to their web sites for reinforcement of classroom instruction or to convey information to students who have been absent. When students begin to have their own CLC email accounts and can use the tool, I can see them demonstrating knowledge of a process by screencasting the steps. I believe that educational professionals will find numerous ways to use this tool and embrace the possibilities that it affords.

Do you believe video and textual training tools to be different, do different people respond to either or both?

Text and video training tools are different. A text-training tool leaves a lot to the imagination, while video tools fill in the gaps with the images that are shared. Video training is multisensory and that is a benefit to more learners than learning from text. I would think that anyone would be able to follow a video tutorial while most user manuals are considered doorstops. People usually prefer to try to muddle through and figure things out on their own rather than to suffer through the reading of dry instructional content.

Other than the basic elements of design, what specific design elements do you think should be adhered to when designing these short-training tools for educators or students?

• I believe that the context or purpose for the instruction should be made clear.
• The window should capture only the document/application being discussed–eliminating any unnecessary computer desktop clutter (cognitive overload).
• The person creating the screencast should identify him/herself in order to answer any questions or so corrections/suggestions for the screencast can be shared.
• Students may be better screencast instructors for other students because they share generational communications skills and an innate understanding of technology.
  
• Each step of an application's use should be given its own screencast so that learners can view only the segments they need.
• The instructor needs to use a microphone in order to have clear audio.
• I believe it is better to use slow and deliberate motion with the mouse versus hurried jerky motions.
• Scrolling is fine, but it shouldn’t be an abrupt up and down motion, just scroll one way or the other in a smooth motion.
• The trainer should sound interested in the subject.
• I find it comforting that there are little issues in the screencasts, it makes the viewer realize that technology is tricky for everyone and that the trainer is human.
  

My opinion of screencasting for school use is that it will allow more lightbulbs to go on for reluctant learners because of the non-judgmental nature of the training. There are a number of people who give up trying to learn from instructors who are tired of repeating themselves and who become impatient and sarcastic with their students.

Bottom Line: Screencasting is a cool tool for school.