PATRICK JOSEPH BESONG: December 2008 Archives
I was watching an old episode of M*A*S*H today while I had nothing much to do. If you've ever seen the show (a TV classic indeed), there is a signpost that points in various directions different locations and how many miles away they are. That almost feels like a metaphor for what I feel right now professionally. There is a lot to learn, and I could easily dart off in several directions. My inclination is usually to do a little of each and see where one tends to lead me, but that seems to get harder with time. I know in order to get anywhere you really need to focus. Ancient Chinese proverb says that a man who chases two rabbits will catch neither. But, which way from here?
I have been trying to learn Actionscript 3.0, which is quite a departure from the old version, akin to learning Java after knowing Javascript. Some similar ideas, but completely different languages. It has been pretty difficult, but I've managed to work completely in AS 3.0 for the past year. Unfortunately I don't feel like I'm anywhere close to being good at it. My plan there is to create a wiki or some method of creating "recipes" of code for being able to do different things. So that's one thing.
There are other aspects of Flash that I really want to get a handle on. I recently got a book called How To Cheat in Flash, by Chris Georgenes that has some excellent tips on quickly creating neat effects with Flash animation. There are lots of techniques in there that I'd like to try out soon.
I could also go off on creating applications in RealBasic. On the G4 I have at home I've been working on an application that does captioning for QT movies. RealBasic is quite a challenge too, but I've learned quite a bit on my own and with the help of a strong forum community on their site. I had to think long and hard before plunking down a few hundred dollars for my own copy, but I think it was worth it to keep my efforts separate from what I do with my work copy.
I've tried learning XTools for the Mac, but don't have a good working knowledge of Objective-C and haven't been able to make the leap into developing Mac-only apps with it. I do intend to work on creating a video compression tool if I can so people who use our ITS Streaming Server can easily compress their own videos via drag and drop possibly. I will probably come back to XTools eventually. I know learning Perl was pretty hard for me at first, but I stuck with it and was able to create some really useful stuff with it after a while. Some things are just hard.
I've recently toyed with Visual Basic Studio (we have a Dell at home too) and I was actually kind of surprised at how I was able to pick it up enough to do some basic scripting since it's similar to RealBasic. I was also pleasantly surprised at the level of support it has for creating QT applications with a developer download from the Apple site. I may be able to do a Windows version of the video compression app as well. That would sure be helpful to a lot of streaming server users at PSU.
Another direction I could easily go off into is the web-based simulation thing which I've blogged about from time to time. I believe I could create the basic framework for one that people could use to create their own just by creating the scene assets and filling out a FileMaker Pro record form. This could easily have implications for games as well and I recently spoke with Chris Stubbs about the Forensics demo he saw on campus and how I thought this could be a good fit for something like that. I need to get a working demo with video clips together to see how it will pan out.
So, that's just a few directions I could head right now. Apart from just keeping up with the s/w I already use on a daily basis and the latest versions of those, I think I have plenty to do right now. I know I should probably knock a few of the signs off the signpost, but I'll leave them there for now and just head in the direction of a few of them to see where it will lead me. I wonder where I'll be in a year from now?
The New Media Consortium recently published its study on the future of technology in higher education. For the most part it was pretty much as I would have guessed. A couple things stuck out for me, though...
"Online gaming and simulation software are cited by 54% of higher-education respondents and 59% of the corporate respondents as an innovation likely to be adopted among universities over the next five years."
And they go on to say...
"Teaching will become more outcomes-based and student-centered. Instead of focusing on memorisation of material by their students, instructors will focus on the application of knowledge to particular problems."
This struck a chord for me. I really think that online simulations are an area, like gaming, that has yet to be exploited by educators. They can cover a variety of disciplines, from teaching medical students the process of intubating a patient, to business management students learning to deal with change in the workplace, to police cadets learning to make safe traffic stops, simulations give students a more outcomes-based approach to learning important problem solving skills that they just can't get from books. Simulations give students the opportunity to observe the situation and apply their knowledge. Facial expressions, body language, props, and the spoken word can all be clues to help the student make a decision. Feedback can be built into each situation to tell the student which clues should have tipped them off and what the best decision might be at each turn. A coach could also be called on at any time prior to making the decision who might give the student a hint by maybe suggesting something they may not be taking into account.
Simulations can take a lot of work to put together to be sure. The planning stage is most important. This would require a content expert working with an instructional designer to map out the role play and create an outline of the whole simulation. The main teaching points should be identified first and each scenario can then be built around the best way to teach each point in a realistic manner. This will eventually take the shape of a flow diagram, each box in the diagram representing an individual scene. Each scene might be categorized as either informational or decisional. Informational scenes of course would only be giving the student more building blocks on which they will base their next decision. A decisional scene may have more information, but will also pose a question with several possible answers. Each answer may send the student to a different scene in the flow diagram. Each answer may also be worth a set number of points. Each scene might also have a photograph or a video to let the student know what's going on. Students could get stuck in a loop of the flow diagram until they finally make the correct decision that allows them to proceed. Finally, when the student has made his way to the end of the simulation, they can be presented with feedback on how they did, both in general or scene by scene.
Getting a good working flow diagram is probably the hardest part. The "engine" if you will, could be a Flash module that may only be two or three frames long. It will include an invisible counter that increments and would be the basis for which scene is loaded next. For instance, if the student picks choice number two, that choice may be destined to send them to scene eight. Once the counter is incremented to eight, all the data for scene eight will be loaded into the Flash module. Using a naming convention on the data for each scene would make it easy to load the data for that particular scene. The Flash module would have (depending on whether it was informational or decisional) a component for a video or photograph, a text area that can be dynamically populated, another for the question, radio button components to load the choices, and a Submit button.
The flow diagram will also supply the videographer (or photographer) with a handy shot list that could be put onto index cards. Each scene would have a description of what the video would be like, what would happen, and what the actors would say. So you could save a lot of time planning the video. It would not have to be shot in order.
The flow diagram would also provide the data that a data entry person would use to input the information for each scene into a FileMaker Pro database, each record being a scene.You might have a scene title, body text, question, name of the movie, name of the JPEG background, the question, each possible answer, the destination scene that each answer would direct the student to if chosen, points associated with each answer, feedback associated with each answer, and what a coach might suggest the student to make note of.
Once the data for each scene is entered and the videos and photographs are shot, the database would then be exported as an XML file and read into the Flash module. And it would just run, feeding itself new scenes at each click of the Submit button. A small development team consisting of an instructional designer, a Flash developer, a videographer, and a few actors would be all that is needed to create some really engaging simulations. Once the main Flash module is created, you might not even need the Flash developer unless there are changes to the format. You could easily use the same Flash module to run other simulations and even games with entirely different content, so development time could be shortened quite a bit after the first iteration. The time savings between being able to reuse the Flash module "engine" and the efficiencies of creating a shot list from the flow diagram might just make creating simulations an interesting addition to our arsenal of engagement.
Ron Strouse and TNS are hoping to offer a new service to Penn State in the video conferencing arena. The Polycom Video Media Center VMC 1000 is a system that will record video conferences on both ends of the connection as well as any content such as PowerPoint that may be shown during the conference. Polycom has been working closely with us to develop this service. We tested another system a couple of years ago, the IPVCR, but it was nowhere near what the Polycom product offers. Just by dialing in, the video conference presenter can use a remote control to select the Record button on the screen to begin recording the session. It can also be paused at any time then resumed. So, if during a long conference there is a scheduled break, the recording can be temporarily stopped. Once the conference is recorded, the presenter may use the Web-based interface to edit the video (cutting off any dead time prior to or after the content is delivered, for example), permissions can be set so that access can be limited to individuals, groups, or classes. Statistical reports can be generated to monitor usage. We tested the videos on both Mac and Windows and it seems to work well. It may take a plugin download, however, but it's very minor. Tests so far have been very encouraging and feedback has been excellent from viewers, especially for the fact that the presentations were made available to begin with. This is a self-contained system and will not require us to interface with our QT streaming server at all. It can easily expand, so demand should be able to be met by adding boxes to the system. It works well with PSU's LDAP system as well. This system may be run by the CLC and admin'd by either TNS or another person with minimal effort at least at first. Then demand will determine how it will be supported in the future. For more info, here is a link to the Polycom site.
