digital digs

student podcasting

I've just finished listening to some student podcasts for my Writing in the Digital Age course. This is a course where the primary purpose is to explore communication in media networks and with emerging technologies, so the class asks students to try out a number of different tools. For nearly all the students in the class, this is the first time they've tried podcasting. Despite their Facebook/texting lives, they are largely social media virgins. When I speak with other faculty about podcasting, the primary concern they have is with overcoming technological obstacles. They have never recorded podcasts and so they are often concerned that their students would encounter problems that they would not be able to resolve. Of course, technical support for such problems usually exists on a campus in one form or another, but I understand the resistance to asking students to do something that you do not know how to do yourself.

But here's the interesting thing I've discovered having done this now for a couple years. I ask students to record podcasts for my online class. I offer up a video-screencast I created showing how to use GarageBand to podcast. It's nothing special. In fact, I'm sure there are now many better ones out there on the Apple website and elsewhere. The point is that the students figure out how to record these podcasts one way or another. They make three during the semester (each about 3-5 minutes in length) and by the end of the semester they have no problems at all in technical terms. Is this surprising? It shouldn't be. Look at YouTube and the millions of amateur videos made by college-age folks without any instruction. Sure, the quality of the video or audio is rarely professional-grade, and we might make any number of comments about the content of the videos, but certainly they demonstrate the basic technical ability to create an audio or video recording and upload it.

The real challenge in podcasting, as in blogging, is figuring out how to be interesting. My students' podcasts combine discussions of course readings, reflections on assignments, analyses of current events related to course, and the integration of personal experiences with technologies, media networks, and so on. Sometimes they are monologues. Often they work in pairs or small groups having roundtable discussions. I point them to other podcasts or talk radio as examples of how this works. In the first round, some students will read something they've written. Then they discover how hard it is to read something and sound interesting (something conference presenters could learn). Others discover it also is not so easy to just record extemporaneously without any plan. Eventually they find their way toward some happy medium. And some of them turn out to be quite good.

More importantly, they start to figure out the difference between an audio podcast and a wiki page or a written blog entry. And this is really the primary goal of the course: to recognize how technological and material contexts shape rhetorical practices.

mobility matters

Is it any surprise that education struggles to adapt to the implications of mobile networks? After all, we work in an environment where many of our colleagues complain if desks are moved out of their "proper" alignment in rows. Just as moving desks into a big circle or rearranging them in small groups creates different communicational dynamics, different netowrks. Ok, it's a very loose analogy, but it's at least a point of reference from the context of everyday teaching.

Mobility matters.

So what's my point? iTunes U and podcasting have a range of uses unto themselves. And as is often pointed out, you don't need an iPod to use them. The result though of this logic is that we don't require students to purchase iPods (though many have them) and that faculty don't need them either. I realize the logistical and budgetary issues here, especially in a developing situation like this one where the technologies are in such a state of flux. However, I want to make an argument for the importance of mobility in this context.

Mobility is about more than convenience. It's more than listening to lectures on the treadmill or bus. It's also about time- and space-shifting pedagogy for your convenience. Can you imagine any potential value in your own courses to being able to offer instruction at a particular time and place outside of the classroom? For example:

• a tour of a particular place
• instructions/reminders for a process (e.g. guidelines for a lab experiment)
• technical support
• gloss on a reading (e.g. read chapter two and then listen to this)

It's not about doing the same old, same old but on foot. It's about imaging whole new practices, like these examples of just-in-time teaching.

Of course that's still just thinking about one-to-many communications. It's analogous to keeping the chairs in rows. Like shifting chairs in the classroom, iTunes U is really about shifting communicational dynamics. Take this potential for just-in-time communication and multiply it by the group-forming networks of Reed's law. Now it's not only the teacher who offers these communications, it's the extensive potential network of students with their overlapping interests and demands.

Right now we're just on the cusp of this. The near future will undoubtedly offer us mobile media devices with wireless download ability and playing from the network when the connection speeds make this reasonable. Sure, right now you need to anticipate your needs and download media to your iPod before you head out. But even in this context, the ability to draw on a network of students and faculty offers many possibilities.

Stepping into podcasting and iTunes U without a mobile component will certainly allow you to do a lot of new and interesting things, but it's mobility that offers the greater challenge to our pedagogical imaginations.

first iTunes project: some notes

It's been some time since I've had a chance to post here. I've been busy on my course blogs and with other things (like editing the union newsletter, which is one of the things I should be doing now).  However, I wanted to get some thoughts down about our first iTunes project.

The students in the Computers and English grad class created enhanced podcasts. Overall they did quite well. A couple of issues arose.

1. The instructions suggested that they use a minimum of 10 images over 5 minutes. Many of the students used far more. In fact, several "broke" Garage Band's ability to format the files for sharing. Essentially the students remediated a video aesthetic rather than the PowerPoint slide aesthetic. What they were trying to do would have worked better in iMovie (which is our next project).
2. I told the students it would be OK if they used some copyrighted music. I did this based on the following rationale:
   
   • Students have some special rights to copyrighted work when used for classroom purposes.
   • The iTunes U site is limited in access only to students in the course (and of course tech support at Cortland and Apple)
   • I figured they would use little portions of songs
   Well, some of the students used more than a "little portion." I take responsibility myself for not being more clear. I'm not sure whether or not the pieces were a violation, but I decided to take them down.

I'm going to pursue the issue further. The question here is partly the College's copyright policy, but more specifically it is the policy laid out in our contract with Apple. I am certainly no expert in copyright, but I am even less sure of the specifics of our contract and how they might create a different and more stringent policy.

Cortland's iTunes U era begins in earnest!

I just finished uploading the first pieces to my iTunes U sites. On Tuesday in my next classes, I'll be able to unveil the site to my students. I did encounter one small glitch, which I was able to circumvent, but I figure we'll have that fixed before then.

But here's some of the good news:

1. As I figured, iTunes U is very easy to use. It's easy to edit your course page and add tabs (categories in which you can upload material). It looks like just another iTunes Music Store page.
2. You can set permissions individually for each tab. They can be set so students can download only or upload only (as a drop box for assignments), but there is also a "Shared" permission, which allows student users to upload AND download. This one interests me the most as I want to use iTunes U as a way to distribute media files across the classroom.
3. For Cortland, students and faculty access iTunes U through their Banner accounts. However once you are in and subscribe to a course podcast, you don't need to re-authenticate to update. That makes things a little easier.

I've also volunteered to do course casting, which I'm going to do with the grad course that I am team-teaching with my colleague, Karen Stearns. In thinking about that I've also figured out something else I'd like to do. I'd like to get some screen capture software that I could sync with the audio. I do a fair amount of demonstration in class. It would be great if I could capture my screen movements and my audio, put them together, and include them as well.

I'll see how it goes, but this first step is exciting.

the mood of the flat world: an ulmer-inspired assignment

This semester my students are undertaking an Ulmer-inspired assignment in which they will produce an enhanced podcast that captures "the mood of the flat world." They've read Friedman, so they have an idea of what the flat world might be; their job is to capture a mood they associate with it. The enhanced podcast is an excellent genre for exploring Ulmer's "image reason" in its conductive linking of image and sound. For this assignment, students will use their own photos, other images they can access, music, and other sounds. We've discussed copyright, but since the pieces won't be distributed beyond the classroom, they can use whatever material they want. They are required to produce some original text that they will record as audio.

Here is my version of my own assignment.

the godless recall 9/11

Last weekend professional writing had it's fall trip to Raquette Lake. We had a great time, as usual. We also had our regular Saturday night reading. This time, however, I recorded the reading. Here's my performance, and I hope more will follow (assuming others will give me the OK).

The Godless Recall 9/11

Cortland's iTunes U experiment: week one

Here's my update on Cortland's iTunes U experiment.

enhanced podcasts, iTunes U, and higher ed

I just completed my first enhanced podcast using PowerPoint, ProfCast, and the internal mic on my laptop. I haven't included it here for two reasons.

1. The quality of the internal mic is ok but not great
2. The podcast is for a first-year course introducing students to the concept of culture...not all that interesting for you guys.

But I do have a few observations (which those of you who have done this probably already know).

1. ProfCast is not going to pick up any animations or slide transitions in your PowerPoint presentation, so don't bother with any of those.
2. In iTunes or on an iPod your slides will not really be legible (in iTunes you can get a larger image of the slides but you can't follow along with the presentation that way...i.e., the slides won't shift). You can watch an MP-4 file in QuickTime, which is how it would work if it were embedded on a web page. The point is that if you are making enhanced podcasts primarily for use on a iPod, you should recognize that the slides will really only function to help a user identify the various chapters of your presentation.
3. I converted the .m4b file (which is the variety of Mpeg-4 ProfCast produces for an enhanced podcast) to an .mp4 video file. This format can be watched as a video on the video iPod, which means that your slides will be legible. However, there are some significant drawbacks. First, you lose the chaptering feature of the enhanced podcast. Second, the file size is quite larger. Mine went from 9.9 MB to 35.9 MB, so more than 3.5 times the size (it may be possible to compress it further; I haven't played around with that). It is important to note that for viewing on a web site there's no difference between the two; both play in QuickTime. The only reason to convert to MP4 video, at least for me, is to make it playable on the iPod video. However, for me that's a key point as we will be requiring our students to purchase such devices for our learning community next semester. That said, it is possible that I will have to generate two feeds.
4. This is easy to do. It is not atypical for students to be required to make PowerPoint presentations in a class. If a student can create a PowerPoint, than he or she can create an enhanced podcast. The few extra steps of recording the presentation and uploading (which can be done in ProfCast or Garage Band 3) are not difficult.

The makers of ProfCast contend that students primary interests in enhanced podcasts are listed in this order:

1. Good audio
2. Visual representation (a thumbnail to aid in navigating between chapters)
3. Full slide representation
4. Animated slides
5. Video

ProfCast manages to do the first three (though full slide representation doesn't really come through in the way these files playback in iTunes or on an iPod). I suppose I can accept this claim (it conveniently supports the features of their product). And I am quite interested in how students view this technology and how they might use it. However, I also recognize other priorities (like my own).

Students, like many others, may imagine this technology in connection with coursecasting. In that sense, these priorities make sense. The coursecast is really just a supplement (that word always gives me the Derridean twitches) to the "real" lecture given in the class. The point is that students are supposed to go to the lectures and then use the coursecast as notes.

But I am more interested in these technologies as a primary mode of communication. Sure I might record some classes, just to try that, but I also want to produce materials for use in online and hybrid course contexts. In those contexts, a more immersive media experience might be important. I know watching the video of my podcast on my iPod was more engaging than just listening to it with the slides not really providing a strong visual message.

Of course, if I am going to create video, then I might do it in a more full-on way (i.e., I could get out my video camera at least). True enough. But then I am getting into a whole new level of production labor. Here I can easily make slides, record a lecture, produce an enhanced podcast, and then convert it to video.

the scale of academic podcasting

The meeting with the Apple folks went well yesterday. As you might imagine, iTunes U appears quite simple to use. After all, it is really not much more than a means for distributing media files. The challenge, as always, lies in the production of media. In pedagogic terms that means the following:

• having something to say: this generally isn't a problem for academics, particularly in the context of a course.
• having a pedagogic strategy: that is, an understanding of how this piece of media contributes to the overall learning experience of the course.
• producing the content: which is clearly different, though related, to the first two. It means having the ability (or support staff with the ability) to produce image, audio, video, and other media.

Apple wisely has a hands off approach to much of this, leaving it to individual institutions and faculty to determine how to use the technology. However, it is clear that the easiest path into this business is recording and podcasting lectures, as I've already discussed. Obviously, the professor already has something to say; the production issue is quite simple and can possibly be delegated to a work study student; and if the pedagogy aspect is a little weak, at least something can be said for students having the ability to review lectures.

Now my idea is to produce enhanced podcasts (mpeg-4 files) with slides and audio, as well as video, and perhaps to also podcast more interactive flash media, even though the last would have to be experienced on a computer rather than an iPod. The second part is to have informal audio and video communication. Students can post individual audio/video. We can record a skypecast or an iChat or something similar if we are doing synchronous communication. We can record in-class discussion as far as that goes. While you might not want to listen to every class, a student, for example, might want to revisit a class workshop on his or her short story or poem or whatever. The final part is to have students share more formal productions, likely group efforts.

However, I am beginning to see (which should have been obvious) that the ultimate value of iTunes University, particularly from a student experience, is the scale of its implementation in the curriculum. One course, regardless of how well-produced, will be a curiousity at best, and often an annoyance, especially if students feel forced to purchase an iPod for one class (which we would never do, but they might feel that way anyway). An iPod is never necessary for accessing the content, but it does substantially contribute to the overall experience. And my understanding is that a big part of what students like about iTunes U comes from the integration of the iPod.

So while I will continue to value for myself and my classes the idea of producing quality media and uncovering various new ways to use these tools for learning, it is more important for the institutional success of the program to get a lot of courses on board at whatever level they are willing to invest, with recording and podcasting lectures a virtual no-brainer.

For good or for bad, that entry-level model will not work in Professional Writing because we don't do much formal lecturing. Our courses often work on the class discussion or workshop format. And I obviously wouldn't change that, nor do I think it is necessary. I firmly believe new media supports a constructivist pedagogic approach. While, as I wrote earlier, I believe the effort of producing a/v, at least initially, will make it a challenge to adopt, in Professional Writing we have an alternative motive. We recognize that these communicational practices are becoming integral to the cultural and workplace discourses in which our students will pursue their careers. So for us, using these technologies is not simply a means to some other pedagogic end; learning to compose rhetorically effective new media is a primary goal of our curriculum.

As such, though I need to confer further with my two PWR colleagues on this matter, I hope to annouce soon that we will integrate iTunes/iPods across our curriculum, that we can say to our majors that at least half of their courses in our major will include podcast content. Obviously I think it will be an attractive, marketing-type feature of our program. However I also firmly believe that working with emerging media is integral to our discipline. I wouldn't pursue it otherwise.

preparing for itunes university

The folks from Apple will be on campus on Monday meeting with those of us who are spearheading Cortland's involvement with iTunes University. It doesn't seem like discussion on the web has shifted much since I last addressed this issue.

Those who are skeptical or more strongly opposed to the idea

• reject iTunes U as some kind of profit-generating/advertising/marketing scheme
• are concerned the service encourages students to skip class
• believe that recorded lectures are not as valuable as live lectures
• believe that it makes the mistake of equating course content with teaching/learning

Those who are excited

• cite tbe convenience for students
• note the benefits of being able to review lectures, catch lectures they missed for legitimate reasons, and/or access courses in which they are not enrolled
• recognize the importance of connecting with the technopractices of their students

I suppose both sides have "points." The whole "corporations are evil" thing is a little trite for my tastes, at least for this post. As for the other business, both pro and con, it all seems to center on some form of coursecasting or another. That is, the presumption is that the podcasts would be recordings of regularly presented lectures.

Coursecasting, then seems to be the primary interest here. In this context, faculty may look to produce relatively polished media and/or integrate published media. These are products that would likely serve as a substitute for traditional course content, either lectures or readings. They would also be fairly labor-intensive to produce. Inasmuch as one imagines students with video iPods, there is some convenience, but that would have to be balanced against the labor of their production and the change in practices it would require of faculty. It is for this reason that coursecasting seems a more attractive (and likely) product: it doesn't require faculty to do anything different than what they are already doing.

The second obvious avenue for podcasting is in courses where video or audio might already be used and/or where there addition clearly adds value. These would obviously include courses in video and audio production and new media. They might also include foreign language classes, student teaching, phys. ed. (where they are studying body movements), and I'm sure there are others. My courses are included in here as my students are learning to produce and communicate through new media.

In my estimation, the conversation about these two possibilities do little to alter the traditional teacher-student relationship. Overwhelming the flow of media is from teacher to student. There is a modicum of student-to-student sharing, analogous with workshopping rough drafts of papers. And there is student-to-teacher communication for the purpose of evaluation.

However, I am also interested in the idea of the informal media where the flow of information shifts. This shift relies on informality because formal media is too labor intensive for regular communication. That is, if formally produced media are analogous to the lecture or the student essay, then informal media would be the equivalent of a blog post or comment or wiki entry. I am curious to see if this will happen. For example, we read an essay or watch some media, then I post an audio file or a talking head video making some comment or raising a question, just as I might normally do in text. The students then reply in audio or video, equally informally. So here are questions I expect to find some answers to next year:

• Will they do that?
• Will they find it interesting or an inconvenience?
• Will the switch in media make their responses more or less considered?
• Will students (and faculty) compose and revise in text and then record A/V or will they speak of the cuff? (or will they oscillate between the two modes depending on mood, rhetorical purpose, audience?)