Screen Casting in Libraries

Published on December 2016 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 36 | Comments: 0 | Views: 247
of 11
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content

Screencasting: A New Way to Deliver Staff Development Social networking, open cloud sources, screencasting are all new words in the world of librarianship. These new Web 2.0 tools can help librarians better prepare their patrons to be information literate. One path to increase patron information literacy is to have an informed faculty. If the faculty knows about the resources, they use them and encourage their students to use them. These new tools can help librarians enlighten a new generation of students and engage their busy faculty in the use of library resources. The purpose of this article is to discover information about one of these new tools: screencasting. The article was initiated by a perceived need by the author at a technical college library and will explore the journey to using this technology. This article is organized into four sections: need and objective; literature review; software and examples review; and implementation. Need and Objective: The purpose of this article is to inform the readers about the use of screencasting to broaden their faculty¶s knowledge about the various library resources. Ogeechee Technical College Library is a small, rural library located within a technical college of 70 full-time instructors and 3000 students. The librarian was employed at the college in 2008 and began providing staff development sessions to familiarize the faculty with the resources available through the library. The attendance at these sessions was poor with only 21% of the faculty participating. The librarian began to wonder if a new approach was needed. The college at the time was going through COC accreditation, quarter to semester conversion, and a large enrollment increase. The librarian sent out a survey to the instructor to substantiate the perceived need. The return rate from the 70 full time instructors was 70%. The survey was a short form

sent to full-time faculty members through campus email. The first question addressed the best time for them to have some library training on the electronic resources available in the library. The second question asked them to determine how familiar they were with the various library resources. The final question asked them to indicate how interested they would be in learning how to use the various electronic resources available through the library. The following are results of the September 30th survey sent to OTC Faculty: Which would better serve your needs? Choose one. Provide hands-on training in library during the quarter Provide hands-on training in library between quarter break Provide on-line course you could do at your convenience 58% 22% 29%

How familiar are you with the following library resources? Very Familiar Library On-Line Catalog GALILEO Britannica Online NetLibrary/Ebrary Credo Reference GALE Nursing Center 15% 28% 12% 16% 4% 4% Moderately Not Familiar 55% 56% 49% 41% 33% 10% Familiar 30% 16% 39% 43% 63% 86%

How interested are you in learning about the following library resources? Very Moderately Not Interested 10% 14% 14% 12% 16% 51%

Interested Interested Library On-Line Catalog GALILEO Britannica Online NetLibrary/Ebrary Credo Reference GALE Nursing Center 28% 35% 24% 35% 28% 22% 62% 51% 62% 53% 56% 27%

As seen from the survey, most of the faculty would utilize staff development training if it was at a time convenient for them. Most of them were moderately familiar or interested in the different resources except GALE. The nursing faculty, however, was very interested (95%) in learning how to use GALE. The GALE databases are new to the college and have only been introduced since the beginning of Fall Quarter. These results were not surprising and were consistent with a study done by Jacksonville State University (B a r n e t t - E l l i s & G r i f f i n , 2 0 0 3 ) in which they found that the library needed to increase faculty awareness of resources. From this information, the librarian began reading articles and webpages for the best programs to do screencasting and to find examples of it being used in a library. She began by posting a query on the ListServ with her immediate peer group- the Georgia Technical Colleges

Librarians. No one responded that they were using screencasting or providing any type of online staff development. Literature Review Using screencasting for online tutorials is a relatively new technology. Screencasting is ³where a video file of the running of a program is used to help people understand the functions of the desired program´ (C u r r a n, P o l lo c k , M c G a r r i g l e , & F e r g u s o n, p.1574, 2009). In other words, it is basically a short video recording of actions being performed on a computer screen. Popular computer science magazines began discussing screencasting first. The term was coined by John Udell in 2004. He ran a contest for his readers to name this new technology and chose the term sent in by two readers (C u r r a n, P o l lo c k , M c G a r r i g l e , & F e r g u s o n, 2 0 0 9 ). Screencasting has been available since 1993 with ScreenCam by Lotus but had not been used by the ³common´ people until Udell did a screencast showing how to use it. Udell is best known for his work at the InfoWorld Test Center and now considers himself an ³evagalist´ at Microsoft. He found this technology to be very useful in teaching technology skills (Udell, 2005). Most articles and books about it have only been published since 2005. For this literature review, the author reviewed articles on the origin of screencasting and its uses by various librarians throughout the nation. The author of this article began looking at new technologies to enhance staff development. Within library science literature, screencasting was viewed as a necessary tool by many instructional librarians (B r o w n- S i c a , S o b e l, & P a n, 2 0 0 9 ) . However, most of those librarians were using it to provide IM/Chat screens for patrons calling about a particular problem. Some of them used screencasting for online information literacy tutorials. Notess

(2005) stated that screencasting is being used by academic libraries for online tutorials, technology departments to show software upgrades, and by software companies to show how to use their programs. One library that had an extensive use was Washington State University Library. Four librarians worked on developing a range of Web-based tutorials. They addressed the issue of faculty not finding the time to give to library orientation lessons and to faculty¶s belief that students come with information literacy skills (L i n d s a y, C u m m i n g s , J o h n s o n , & S c a l e s , 2 0 0 6 , p.430). The librarians used Qarbon Viewlets, HTML-based modules, and interactive readings to create their tutorials. Their research indicated that the tutorials were successful and unsuccessful. They were successful in that students were using and praising the library resources more. However, they were not very proficient at using the resources. Most of the body of literature focused on the different software programs being used and not on using it for faculty staff development. In the article by B r o w n- S i c a , S o be l , & P a n (2009), they allude to the fact that it would be a useful tool for professional development for library staff and faculty. However, the article was also researching the use of the products and not actually discussing implementation. The most current and abundant literature about screencasting is found in blogs and other online information. The largest project to date that has been implemented was the ANTS: The Animated Online Tutorial Sharing Project. The librarians at California State University San Marcos (CSUSM) have created screencast for online and distance learning students. They used TechSmith Camtasia or Adobe Captivate to produce the tutorials. Software and Examples Reviews

After reviewing the literature and visiting several websites suggested in the articles, the author decided it was time to examine examples from experts in the field and to examine the different software packages. From the literature reviews and websites, several names were prominent in the literature. Therefore, the author spent some time on their blogs, on their websites, and examining their examples. The name that was most prevalent was John Udell. He appears to be the one who started more people using screencasting by using it in his blog. He states, ³If people aren¶t getting it, maybe it¶s time to stop blaming them and start telling stories they can¶t forget or misunderstand´ (Udell, 2005, p.34). Also within this group is Greg Notess who has done a variety of workshops and conferences on the advantages of using screencasting. He has suggested many uses for librarians: ³create online tutorials for using a library catalog, searching databases, installing software, or demonstrating a specific software application«can help distance learners, showing the exact steps they need to take«efficient if used in conjunction with e-mail or telephone instructions´ (Notess, p. , 2005). Paul Betty, the Distance Librarian at Regis University, is an advocate of screencasting and has developed many tutorials for his library. He promotes screencasting as a great way to promote library resources. He recommends Cativate, Camtasia, Viewlet Builder, Wink, Camstudio as good products for screencasting. Another person whose name is mentioned frequently in the literature is Ian Ozsvald. He has created over 170 screencasts since 2005. He founded ProCasts, a professional screencasting company, in 2008 and has produced The Screencasting Handbook. From the literature and these experts, several software packages were recommended by each of them. Rethlefsen (2009) did an in-depth review of most of these free and purchasable screencast software packages that were recommended by the experts. The free software packages she investigated are: Screentoaster, Screen-cast-o-matic, Cam Studio, Capture Fox, and

Jing. Based on her five criteria, she rated Cam Studio as the most favorable one. For each of the software packages she gave the reasons for each category rating and how it would be used in a library setting. The purchasable software she investigated is: Jing Pro, HyperCam2, Adobe Captivate 4, Camtasia Studio 6. For its usability and pricing, Camtasia Studio 6 was definitely the favored choice. The author continuously iterated that the user must evaluate the need and use of the product to make a decision on the best package to use. This review by Rethlefsen (2009) is consistent with most of the other reviews. Reviews were found by Notess (2010), Aune (2008), Hay (2008), Betty (2008), Ozsvald (2010), and Udell (2005) indicate that those packages were the most common being used. Below is a chart developed to compare the various software packages as reviewed by the authors listed above. Free Software Software Title ScreenToaster Platform Online Pros Ability to add subtitles at bottom Cons Windows XP and Vista didn't capture entire desktop; no simultaneous audio capture; use hotkeys to pause or stop Framed by Google Ads; based on Java which has problems on some machines; image not as sharp no post recording video or audio editing; video annotation is not user friendly;

Screen-O-Matic

Online

Cam Studio

Download

Jing

Download

Java-based program recorder with free hosting; saves as QuickTime, Windows Media Player, Flash; record 15 minutes Audio is recordable from microphone or speakers; uses AVI or SWF formats; has audio and video capture and exporting options has hosting with screencast.com; saves

no post audio or video editing; inserts

Wink

Download

as shockwave flash file; allows direct posting to YouTube, Facebook, Flickr Records motion and sound

watermark at beginning of video; records only 5 minutes recoding and output settings for audio and video are limited

Purchasable Software Software Jing Pro Price $14.95/year Pros can create MPEG-4 videos; upload to YouTube; removal of Jing branding can pause to make onthe-fly annotations Cons Records only 5 minutes; requires Microsoft.Net Framework will only record one window; only export one format, AVI; no post recording editing expensive; not as user friendly; each slide edited individually; export to only one file type, SWF Has a learning curve; has some issues with some notebook computers

HyperCam 2

$39.95

Adobe Captivate 4

$799.00

lots of features, extensive tech support; provides online quizzes Contains an editor, integrates with screencast.com for hosting; standout feature is its audio editing capabilities

Camtasia Studio 6

$299.00

After examining the literature and blogs from expert users, it appeared that the packages to be further examined were: Screen-o-matic, Cam Studio, and Jing. These packages appeared to full-fill the needed requirements of simple-to-use and free. So, the journey continues.

Implementation Three software packages were chosen to review for implementation: Screen-o-matic, Cam Studio, and Jing. Screen-o-Matic: www.screencast-o-matic.com. A short YouTube video showing how to use Screen-O-Matic. Screencast-O-Matic.com launch for Windows. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhPMt0lKUuM. The program is online so there is no installation. Go to the website. Launch the program and it immediately begins to record. The program was very easy to use. The screen capture area, however, was not large enough to capture the whole screen. The area had to constantly be manipulated to capture the area being discussed. The sound quality was good. It showed a small yellow circle whenever the mouse was utilized. It was very easy to upload to Screen-O-Matic so that a library could be created with a user name and password. It was also very easy to upload to a YouTube account. Cam Studio: http://camstudio.org Cam Studio was more confusing. There were several websites that allowed you to download the software. Each one loaded the same product onto the computer. At first, the sound did not record. The screen capture had flashing corners around the area it was capturing which was distracting. It would only save it as an avi file. The sound quality was fair. Jing: http://www.techsmith.com/jing/ Jing had tutorials located on the website which made it easier to use. The screen capture area was larger than Screen-O-Matic. With the free version, it will not load to YouTube. With either version, the video can only be five minutes long. The free version only records in .swf format whereas the pro version will save in MP4 format which will

allow editing of the video. Jing would be very useful for reference librarians in instant messaging chats. These three free versions could easily be used by librarians in a short session of recording. The important item to remember when using these products is to practice before beginning to record since they do not allow editing. The use of screencasting is an important tool that can be used by librarians to develop online staff development sessions for their faculty. With the free and inexpensive software packages that are available, it would be easy to implement this process. The use of screencasting will improve the availability of library resources to faculty. From the research and use of the different programs, screencast staff development was easily developed for the Ogeechee Technical College Faculty. The rest of the journey continues when evaluation of the use of the staff development begins«

References Aune, S. (2008, February 21). 12 screencasting tools for creating video tutorials. Mashable, Retrieved from ht t p : / / ma s h a b l e . c o m/ 2 0 0 8 / 0 2 / 2 1 / s c r e e n c a s t i n g - v i d e o t u r o t ia l s . Barnett-Ellis, P., & Griffin, L. (2003). Faculty use of electronic library resources. Academic Exchange Quarterly, Fall. Retrieved from h t t p : / / f i n d a r t i c l e s . c o m / p / a r t ic l e s / m i - h b 3 3 2 5 / i s _ 3 _ 7 / a i _ n2 9 0 5 1 7 6 1 . Betty, P. (2008). Creation, management, and assessment of library screencasts: the Regis libraries animated tutorials project. Journal of Library Administration, 48(3), 295 ± 315. Brown-Sica, M., Sobel, K., & Pan, D. (2009). Learning for all: teaching students, faculty, and staff with screencasting. Public Services Quarterly, 5, 81-97. Curran, K., Pollock, D., McGarrigle, R., & Ferguson, Colleen. (2009). The world of podcasting, screencasting, bloggin, and videoblogging. Encyclopedia of multimedia technonlogy and networking. Hersey, PA: Information Science Reference. Hay, A. (2008, August 19). Screencasting:how to start, tools and guidelines. Smashing Magazine, Retrieved from h t t p : / / s m a s h i n g m a g a z i n e . c o m/ 2 0 0 8 / 0 8 / 1 9 / s c r e e nc a s t i n g - ho w - t o start. Lindsay, E.B., Cummings, L., Johnson, C., & Scales, B.J. (2006). If you build it, will they learn? assessing online information literacy tutorials. College & Research Libraries, Sept 2006, 429-445. Notess, G. (2005). Casting the net: podcasting and screencasting. Online, 29(6), 43-45. Notess, G. (2010, October 2). Libcasting [Web log message]. Retrieved from h t t p : / / w w w . no t e s s . c o m/ s c r e e n c a s t i n g / s o ft w a r e . Osvald, Ian (2010). The Screencasting Handbook. Procast: U.K. Rethlefsen, L. (2009). Screencast like a pro. Library Journal, April 15, 2009, 62-64. Retrieved from w w w . l i b r a r y j o u r n a l . c o m. Rethlefsen, L. (2009). Product pipeline. Netconnect. Winter 2009, S12-S14. Udell, J. (2005). Secrets of screencasting. Info World. 27(20), 34. Udell, J. (2005). Fast-Forward Learning. Info World. 27 (12), 32.

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close