Video for dummies

Creating your own video for teaching is much easier than you might think.  Whilst a mere 10 years ago you would need a good camcorder and microphone or even the extensive professional kit, as shown in this week's picture, today's video can be achieved with a smartphone, a tripod and an external mic.

FILMING A CASE STUDY - PICTURE BY FIERY RED

Although smartphone video technology has advanced in recent years the key rules for making acceptable video have not changed.

• Background - choose a background that supports your message, does not distract and does not have obvious flaws such as people walking by and staring at the camera.  Greenscreen offers many possibilities but needs a lot of post-production effort.
• Lighting - typical smartphones take care of this automatically but do avoid stark lighting.  If you do have additional lights, bounce them off the ceiling to give a diffused effect.
• Sound quality - an external mic is best but do make sure that it has the power to amplify the voice and cut out the background noise.  Even the quietest scene will pick up traffic, the hum of computers and lights and loud voices in the vicinity.
• Focus - this is the one thing that cannot be fixed in the editing suite.  Learn how your smartphone can focus on a subject (normally by holding a finger on the screen at the position you want to focus on) and then keep the camera still.

Now all you need is some killer material to capture....  

Playing games

Higher Education has been slow to embrace a technique and concept used extensively by corporate educators, many employers, social media and sport - gamification. (click on the link to provide a full explanation in the context of the undergraduate degree).

PICTURE COURTESY OF COOLDESIGN AT FREEDIGITALPHOTOS.NET

Key concepts in gamification are:

• The sense of competition - we love to win;
• Risk and Uncertainty - the unknown - not everything can be controlled by an algorithm;
• Opportunity to put lessons to use (feedback plus repetition)
• Complexity - just like real life, and
• Reward - Normally the warm glow of a job well done...but virtual badges and icons seem to work reasonably well too.

Oh, and another vital couple of ingredients:

• Imagination from the tutor and the students, and
• Risk (again) - but this time on the part of the tutor, it's so much easier to conform to traditional lecture and seminar formats.

So, what's stopping you?

Podcasts - some Do's and some definitely Don'ts

Those benefitting from the success of Apple Inc must be in a similar (but wealthier) mood to those of Hoover in the last century.

PICTURES FROM SURARCHI AND FRANKIE242 AT FREEDIGITALPHOTOS.NET

The PODCAST has become synonymous with the provision of a digital audio or video file (VODCAST) made available on the Internet for downloading or streaming to a computer or mobile device.  It was just the same for Hoover - a name for many vacuum cleaners made by many alternative manufacturers.

But to achieve a watchable and useful podcast/vodcast we must bear some key points in mind.

1. Keep it short - as long as it needs to be but no longer.  Nothing to do with the attention threshold of the average student but the power of the message.  Just ask PechaKucha fans whether they can get their message across best in a set of 20, 20-second slides or a 2-hour lecture.
2. Use pictures, diagrams or charts rather than words.  Your voice provides the words.
3. Speak faster than you normally would.  You'll need to rehearse this aspect but it does sound surprisingly natural when played back.
4. Focus on ONE thing - this helps you to do number 5.
5. Keep it short.

That's about it.

Basic software packages to record and edit your PODCAST/VODCAST abound - so there's no need to get put off by the technology.

Go on, give it a go and see how that 2-hour lecture can actually boil down to 10 or 15 minutes of powerful input.  Then put your feet up and wonder what you can do with the rest of the time you have saved...

Disruption in HE #2

Some of the world's most successful companies: Amazon, Netflix, PayPal, Easyjet and AirBnB, to name but a few, have disrupted their respective industries by unbundling the packaged product on offer from larger incumbents and initially competing on the basis of one part of the package.

Disruptors can have an easier time where incumbent and monolithic companies fail to recognise the mood music of the market and rely on their hard-won legacy.  It's not that these innovators and disruptors are producing new goods and services - before Amazon there were shops, before Netflix, the cinema, before PayPal, banks...

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY

Readers of this blog will know, already, that I am really talking about Universities.

The thing is that others, and not always Universities, are providing learning and even getting paid for it.  They are disruptors because they focus on one aspect of the University experience - rather than trying to replicate the whole thing, the campus, the gowns, the qualifications...Instead, they focus on timely, self-paced, flexible and accessible learning.  The disruptors undercut prices (not difficult), use teaching staff in a gig economy way, enable delivery in areas and use technologies that traditional Universities do not.

Wake up and smell the virtual coffee?

Brexit busting Universities

Following Coventry and Lancaster Universities' decision to establish branch campuses (campi?)  in Poland and Germany respectively, other universities are seriously considering the move that could secure continued EU access, attractive visa arrangements for international students and added revenues for Ryanair.

Photo by Andrew Palmer on Unsplash

From my extensive knowledge of European destinations and my hallowed status as a multi- badge winning contributor on Tripadvisor I'd like to share some suggestions for institutions to help them select appropriate EU locations for their new campuses.

EU locations should, of course, have key features that underline the rationale for the initiative:

• Ease of access for flying faculty and administrators.  This rules a lot of locations out where the closest U.K. airport to their campus has been abandoned by everyone but Flybe and DHL.
• Availability of English speaking locals to serve as tutors, support staff but definitely not faculty - else issues might affect things like AACSB accreditation where cash cow business courses are offered.
• Long distances from good institutions in the host country.
• Willingness of some local students to forget that their county offers them free higher education.
• Proximity to either beaches or ski slopes to host meaningful conferences and seminars that are bound to attract scholars from around the globe.

Helpful?

No such thing as a Free MOOC

Massive Open On-Line Courses (MOOCs) offered by some of the world's most prestigious Universities (and some of the others too) hold out the possibility of mass education and reaching those that traditional education provision has not yet reached.

The Openness of MOOCs makes them FREE - so the study is free as long as you do not pay for the certificate of completion at the end of the course (NOT an award, you understand).  And yet, the mode of delivery - the internet, still makes MOOCs inaccessible for many.

Cable.co.uk published a downloadable spreadsheet of 2018 broadband prices at:
https://www.cable.co.uk/broadband/deals/worldwide-price-comparison/

The data shows that around 80% of nations pay over $15 per MB.  This includes Niger at $263 and Somalia at $250.  Afghanistan pays $35and the UAE $16.50.
A combination of geography, economic priorities and diplomatic exclusion from submarine cable access are responsible for the high costs.
Amongst the cheapest are Singapore ($0.03) and Ukraine ($0.04) with China and India at $0.42 and $0.60 respectively.  Once again, geography and economic priorities help to explain costs.

So for MOOCs in many parts of the world, especially the developing, landlocked, disputed and friendless parts, access is anything but FREE.

Want students to research? Send them to China!

During a recent trip to Shanghai the significance of  having the not so ubiquitous Google blocked made me think about student research techniques over the years. I'm certainly no Luddite, you understand, but for all my embracing of Technology Enhanced Learning I can see the downside.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND

As a Bradford undergraduate in 1975 I recall an excellent foundation module in research methods for business studies.  Out of a class of 50 only two students attended, me and one other (a mature student who had been a journalist and so knew the value of good research). The key reason for the low turnout was that the module was not assessed, providing formative feedback only.

Great! That meant individual attention from Prof. Gerry and Dr. Roger, the tutors! Take that suckers!

Anyway.  Back to the research.  Back to a manual trawl through the library card index system, the microfilm and dusty tome copies of journals and then selecting a small number of published papers for purchase as the library did not subscribe to all relevant journals.  I recall that the search took weeks, the discussion to authorise the purchase a further period and then the arrival of the printed paper after another couple of weeks.  Touchingly, the paper came with a handwritten note from the author (an Oxford academic) wishing me well with the project I was designing.

My project took all term, the report received feedback and I had learned new skills.  The report proudly carried two key references of quality. What endured from that episode was not the outcome of the research itself  but the process of research. It required me to engage my mind at an early stage, to focus and to organise my time carefully in order that I did not spend my entire life in the literature search phase.

Today, many colleagues anticipate that students with access to Google will be able to garner literary resources far more swiftly.  But speed comes with a cost. Did they stop to think and focus BEFORE opening their laptop? Did they actually read the paper or rely on Google Scholar's algorithms to judge its relevance?