rapport with you ’. It was this that made the video preferable to the many other offerings available on YouTube , covering skills like close reading , or providing analysis of texts such as Daisy Miller ( as this video did ). One surprise of this project was view count on these videos . While ‘ Tips for a Successful In-Class Presentation ’ and ‘ Tips for Preparing for a Seen Examination ’ have 53 and 69 views respectively ( in line with the size of the cohort and the expectation that some students would not watch the videos , while others would watch multiple times ), ‘ Daisy Miller Seminar Preparation ’ has 1,533 views to date . The video is clearly reaching people far beyond our own students .
Students appreciated that the videos were provided on a public platform like YouTube , because it requires no log in . Students reported that the online platform usually used , the Keele Learning Environment ( KLE ), is difficult to access on mobile phones ( between 25 % and 33 % of students watched these videos on their phones ), and more generally felt that information is difficult to find on the KLE . In contrast , these videos were very easy to find on YouTube ; they were tagged with ‘ Keele ’ and the module code , but also could be found simply by searching for their tutor ’ s name . More widely , this suggests to us that we need to rethink the ways in which we distribute information to our students ; in the past we have relied solely on the KLE ( or information given verbally during class ), but it was made clear during these interviews that much of this information never reaches our students . It is frustrating for tutors to realise that students do not read the information we provide them with , but knowing this , videos might be a way of addressing the problem , as it became clear to us that students simply prefer audio / visual presentation of information over the written form .
The seminar preparation video was further assessed by an anonymous survey distributed during class . 33 students responded ( 61 % of the cohort ). 84 % of respondents found the video ‘ clear ’, 78 % found it ‘ specific ’, 60 % found it ‘ engaging ’, and 51 % found it ‘ personal ’. In the focus group , students suggested ways of making the video content more engaging , including increasing interactivity by posing questions to students throughout the video . Camtasia allows creators to embed quizzes within videos ( with results emailed directly to the creator ) which is another avenue to explore in the future . The video covered a fair amount of ground , and thus we wanted to further assess how useful students found each component of the video : lecture summary , seminar preparation , and guidance for an upcoming assignment . 70 % of students reported that the video was useful as a summary of the lecture ( which accounted for the first four minutes of content ). 79 % felt it was useful as preparation for the seminar activities . Only 42 % felt the content was useful as guidance for their assignment . It is important to note that this aspect of the video was not addressed directly in the video , but in the description box on YouTube we suggested that the ‘ application of David Lodge ' s comments on James ' s narrative style to a short extract should serve as a model for the Reflective Diary assessment ’. However , in the focus group it became apparent that the students who watched the videos did not read the additional comments provided in the video description . It is important , therefore , to make sure that all important information appears within the video itself .
Findings
We have measured the success of this case study in the impact it had on a ) staff time and resources , b ) student feedback , and c ) student achievement .
Each video took several hours of staff time to create : scripting , filming , editing , and enhancing ( with animations and behaviours applied in Camtasia ). However , our overall perception is that time was saved in the long run in the dramatic reduction of questions regarding the presentations and the exam . In previous years both pieces of assessment had caused significant anxiety amongst the students , resulting in a barrage of emails throughout the semester . Reducing our need to answer the same question in 54 separate emails seems quite valuable , indeed . Being able to direct students who did query us about the assessment to a central resource that we felt confident they were actually likely to engage with ( as compared to the written material provided in the handbook and on the KLE ) was also a timesaver .
Article # 2 19