I have to say, I prefer paper



This is a short discussion of Christopher Isherwood's 1964 novel A Single Man. The video was made to gain experience with screen casting technology.


If I am being honest, I really, really disliked the experience of making this video. It was extremely frustrating trying to figure out how everything worked together and hunt down tutorials only to realize I couldn’t actually get it to do what I wanted without either A) using completely different programs, or B) paying a lot of money for several different full versions. I also did not really feel like it added to my own learning experience, as most of my time was spent re-recording over and over again every time I made a mistake.


I could see screen casting being a useful and relevant technology to use for online courses, as it allows for spoken presentations in a class style that otherwise would not. However, in a normal classroom setting I don’t see myself ever using this except as a way to accommodate individual students’ specific needs with regards to public speaking or class attendance. In the end, I much prefer a written report and in-person discussion.

Comments

  1. Hello Ethan,

    Thank you for sharing your honest thoughts about using the screencasting tool. I had similar frustrations in completing my own assignment. I am glad that a tool like screencasting is available, and, as you mention, can see tasks wherein it would be helpful. However, I did not think that this assignment fit the tool.

    With that said, your preference for text and words came out through your project. Your narration was well written, and I want to read the book after hearing your thoughts. However, I would have gotten just as much out of the project if it had been solely audio or a written report. The incorporated images did not add or subtract from the project and felt forced. Believe me when I say that I think this has more to do with the tool and not your effort or ability.

    With that said, I think about the example project given to us. I think the images incorporated in that project were effective and did add to the spoken portion of the project. Though this is one example of the tool working well for a project like this, I wonder how much more effort it may have taken the creator than if he had used a different tool. This makes me think about our discussion of efficiency in class. I wonder if this is a tool that would be most effective for educators to convey information, and not for students to complete assignments.

    Thank you for sharing your project! Again, it was very well written and has encouraged me to read the book!

    Rose

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Rose,

      Critical Friends already at work! I think you nailed my issues with the assignment when you brought up efficiency. The sample project shows that you can make some really cool things with this method, but the learning curve seemed to be quite steep. This is doubly so after my experience with Adobe Spark, which was much more enjoyable to work with.

      Delete
  2. Ethan,

    Though I said I liked the project for the purposes of my book, and I found the software easy to use, I appreciate your honesty and see the serious drawbacks of this format. I usually find it difficult to follow presentations with high-audio content and high-text content on slides, so I appreciate that your presentation didn't do that. However, for me, it lost a lot in the beginning because I don't often retain things just by hearing them, so the supposedly beautiful opening of the book fell flat for me the first time. That's more a limitation of the software than anything else; as you note, I think an in-person discussion, or however you wanted to present this book, would be a better choice that would have created the desired effect. I can't say I see myself using this tool either over a simple Google Slides presentation, honestly. As you said, it was rather constricting for this purpose.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Writer's Workshop

Mentor texts. . .