Asynchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom to the Remote Students Desktop

1
Asynchronous Streaming Video from the Classroom
to the Remote Students Desktop

• Eric Flower and Stacey Sawa
• University of Hawaii-West Oahu

flower_at_hawaii.edu ssawa_at_hawaii.edu StreamingVideoO
nTheNet.com
SITE 2008, Las Vegas
2
Table of Contents

• Purpose
• Streaming video process
• Methodology
• Results
• Methodological problems
• Secondary benefits of asynchronous streaming
  video
• Future trends

3
Purpose of the Study

• To make some determination on the effectiveness
  of asynchronous streaming of classroom-based
  instruction when compared to the traditional
  classroom setting

?

4
Video Was Delivered Directlyto the Students
Desktop

• We did not broadcast to studios or computer labs
  where students would have to gather to
  participate in a site-to-site modeldelivery was
  directly to the students desktop at home or in
  an office

5
Streaming Video Process
Capture with RealProducer
Distribute with RealServer, view with
RealPlayer/ RealOne
Encode with RealProducer
6
Hardware/Production System
Videocapture
Videotape backup
Videomonitor
Mixer
Audio capture
Splitter
Audio monitor
Encoding PC
7
Distribution System
Scheduled Chat sessions
UH ITS StreamingServer
RealPlayer/RealOne Clients
8
Equipment Cart
9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
Study Design

• This study used a quasi-experimental design with
  students in the face-to-face classroom section as
  the control group and students in the online
  asynchronous streaming video section of the
  course as the treatment group
• A t-test for unequal variances was used to
  compare the means of the control and treatment
  group results

12
Hypothesis

• It was hypothesized that the results of this
  study would show no significant difference
  between the student grades of the control
  (classroom students) and treatment group
  (students viewing asynchronous video), or, that
  the grades of the participants in the treatment
  group would be significantly higher than those of
  the control group

13
Methodology

• Using the streaming video system we designed and
  built, we taught Computer Skills for
  Administrators during the spring of 2005, 2006,
  2007
• Course is an elective with no pre-requisites
  offered in the Professional Studies Division
• There were 27 students in the classroom and 29
  students viewing asynchronous streaming video of
  classroom activities

14
Methodology, 2

• Both groups had the same class presentations,
  readings, and assignments, wrote the same
  reports, took the same tests, and worked on
  similar projects
• Both groups could watch the archived class video
  files that were posted the next day

15
Grade Score Components

• Testing throughout the semester 45
• Final exam 20
• Class participation/Quality circle
  participation 10
• Group presentation/Group presentation
  contribution 15
• Critical review of Visions How Science Will
  Revolutionize the 21st Century by Michio Kaku
  10

16
Mean Scores
17
Mean Scores, 2

• Analysis of the course grade scores for each
  group (classroom vs. streaming online) showed a
  strong similarity of the means
• The mean course grade score for the classroom
  students was 86.2 while the mean course grade
  score for the asynchronous streaming video online
  students was 85.9.

18
t-test Results

• Using the t-test for unequal variances, the
  p-value was 0.86
• This provides a strong statistical conclusion
  that the means were not different

19
Results

• Statistical analysis of the student grades showed
  no significant difference in the course grade
  scores
• Low cost narrow bandwidth asynchronous streaming
  of classroom-based instruction appears to have
  been as effective as the traditional classroom
  environment in this instance

20
Methodological/Data Problems

• Groups are not random
• Groups are self-selected by enrollment in a
  classroom or online section
• Neighbor Island students have no choice they
  must enroll in an online section
• Population may not be representative of all
  college students

21
Methodological/Data Problems, 2

• Levels of knowledge and experience brought to the
  course by students
• Not blind instructor knows who is in each
  group

22
Secondary Benefits

• Students reviewed or intensively studied classes
  or portions of classes they did not understand
  when the material was originally presented
• Instructor could review class files to correct
  errors in presentations or to add supplementary
  material to a web-based errata file

23
Secondary Benefits, 2

• Instructor could review class files for teaching
  effectiveness and make improvements where
  necessary
• Class files could be reviewed for teaching
  effectiveness when making decisions relating to
  contract renewal, tenure, post-tenure review, and
  professional development

24
Secondary Benefits, 3

• Scheduling and enrollment implications of
  offering courses or training in asynchronous
  streaming video format with chat, e-mail,
  discussion board, and/or videoconferencing
  components for instructor/student interaction
  could be enormous

25
Secondary Benefits, 4

• Asynchronous streaming video could be a boon to
  geographical areas with weak network
  infrastructures archived files could be
  distributed on compact discs eliminating delivery
  problems associated with poor network connections
  and offer access to entirely new groups of
  students

26
Future Trends

• Podcasting
• Cell phones and handheld devices

27
Future Trends, 2
28
Future Trends, 3

• Potential problems
• Loss of control of intellectual property
• Everything you broadcast can be saved, whether
  you like it or not
• Everything you broadcast can be retransmitted to
  anybody, whether you like it or not
• Potential for public ridicule
• Everything you broadcast can be edited and
  submitted to a public forum like YouTube, whether
  you like it or not

29
Final Remarks

• Increasing expectation of a rich-multimedia
  experience
• Rapid adoption of portable playback devices
• How will you address these trends?

30
Thanks for viewing!

• Eric Flower and Stacey Sawa
• University of Hawaii-West Oahu