Case Study Multimedia in Fashion

 

Using DMU Replay for studio and workshops in Fashion

A  sample video clip showing demonstration and recording in the studio

Summary
This year a new set up of the equipment in some of the studios has really made the learning experience more inclusive for students.

DMU Replay has been used quite extensively already and in novel ways in Fashion.  Last year the recording and other equipment worked well but this new set-up provides more options, particularly with detail.

The studio equipment previously included the use of visualiser installed on the ceiling above the sewing machines.    This worked well in projecting onto the screen, but there were little niggles and it was sometimes difficult to record exactly what was needed. This year the cameras, microphones and set up of equipment has been rearranged, making  classes and follow-up more effective for both students and tutors.

 

Project Lead
Heini Taskula
School of Fashion
Faculty of Arts, Design & Humanities
BA Fashion
Email: DMU Fashion
Objectives and Approach
Pedagogical Context

The studio is set up with Heini’s machine at the front near the whiteboard. Typically students would be working, one at each machine, in rows facing the front. Students need to be able to see clearly what are sometimes very detailed techniques and to be able to listen to Heini’s spoken descriptions of what she is doing. As the workshop is flat rather than tiered, some students may be seated several rows away.

  Heini in the studio with sewing machines

What is made possible with the equipment?

With the newly fitted equipment, the Whiteboard displays very clearly what Heini is doing and the microphone helps students to walk through the task with the tutor. At the same time Heini uses DMU Replay to record the whole session, so that it can be made available for students to watch back at any time.

Equipment and setup

The Equipment includes a headset with microphone, enabling the tutor to focus less on pinning on a portable microphone.  This also picks up the voice clearly, rather than any machine noise.

The camera is pointed at the sewing machine; it is suspended in position using a wire support (installed especially).  The camera image is displayed on the large whiteboard.

Replay is set to record the microphone. The secondary source is set as the camera. This just makes it a little more flexible for editing the recordings – although the videos are not normally edited at all but show the live capture of the demonstration.

The recordings are then made available for students in Blackboard.

Tips for Practice: Heini advises that because the camera is so finely focused you need to make sure as you are working that you don’t accidentally let your hand hide what you are doing – on occasions it’s necessary to pause and manoeuvre the camera a little.  The camera can also get quite hot at times.

 

Outcomes
Positive reactions

With the newly installed set up students are able to replay the instructions and watch the application of techniques whenever it suits them, while keeping apace with their peers.  Reactions have been extremely positive, particularly from students in their second and third years as they are able to compare with previous arrangements.

“It’s all really effective and clear. It’s not just if you miss a session, but if you miss part, the whole thing is very clear and you can look back at it whenever you want. Now you can sit at the back and it makes no difference – you can hear clearly and watch detail on the screen, so that you really feel you know exactly what you’re doing”.    Ashleigh Coldwell, BA Fashion Design 2nd year student.

 

 

 

Future Developments
Last year we used a standard visualiser which worked okay but this new set up really provides more options, particularly with detail. Pattern cutting, design and contour fashion are all continually exploring the best ways to arrange and make use of the studio equipment. The positive student reaction to this new arrangement of cameras, microphone and recorders and whiteboard, which enables learning to extend beyond formal studio time, will be useful as tutors look for ways to best suit needs in other studios.

It can be useful to get advice from different sources of support such as ITMS, particularly for the set-up of equipment, or the Centre for Enhancing Learning through Technology for the use of DMU Replay.

 

Links and additional information
For more ad-hoc arrangements staff may borrow from a range of cameras, microphone and tripods from the AVLoans service.For support on DMU Replay see the CELT online hub
CELT Case Studies
If you would like to have your ELT for teaching and learning captured and disseminated in a similar case study, please contact your Faculty ELT Project Officer

This case study was prepared by:
Heather

 

Oct 152015
 

Dr Rob Weale (CELT) has been awarded Certified Membership of the Association for Learning Technology (CMALT).

CMALT is a peer-based professional accreditation scheme developed by the Association for Learning Technology to enable people whose work involves learning technology to; demonstrate that they are taking a committed and serious approach to their professional development; and to have their experience and capabilities certified by peers.

The accreditation is awarded based on peer-review of a structured portfolio of work which includes detailed evidence of practice and reflection on this practice in four core areas: operational issues; learning, teaching and assessment; the wider context; and communication. Plus two open sections: a specialist option; and future plans.

Award holders are entitled to use the post-nominal letter – CMALT

Rob has made his CMALT Portfolio publicly available in an online format in the hope that it may act as a catalyst for others to pursue a similarly reflective approach towards their work with technology for teaching and learning; and that it may offer support and guidance to those who are actively pursuing or considering in pursuing a CMALT.

Rob Weale – CMALT Portfolio

 

Mar 172014
 

JISC Digital Festival – Birmingham ICC March 11th & 12th 2014

Two days of – interesting conversations, engaging presentations, freebies, networking overload, tea (sooo much tea), familiar faces, new faces, new connections, energized ideas.

The JISC Digital Festival was packed full of interesting stuff about Enhancing Learning through Technology. It had things that would appeal to IT technicians, librarians, learning technologists, teachers, researchers and academics – which meant some fascinating discussions were taking place that weaved in, out, through and around a multiverse of digital practices in education.

What follows is an overview of some of the highlights of the festival as I experienced it – with a focus on the sessions that I attended.


Opening Keynote

Featured a talk from Diana Oblinger – who explored what education might be like if we used the best that technology has to offer.

Points of note:
The notion that higher order learning comes from complex challenges – and these can be digitally delivered through activities such as gamification and scenario-based approaches

There is a growing need (and perhaps an expectation from students) for a more ‘personalised’ and ‘individualised’ learning experience – for example, developing individualized learning pathways, and using automated ‘early warning’ systems to alert students if they are ‘falling behind’, why they are falling behind, and how to rectify this.

An interesting idea was presented concerning competency-based models of learning – which has ramifications for the ‘employability’ agenda. Wherein students, alongside their degree/course/field specific learning could develop a competency portfolio that was a mechanism for demonstrating the ‘transferrable’ skills that they were gaining.

Day 1 – Session highlights

Designing strategically aligned digital credentialing systems with open badges to engage and meet the needs of digital learners

This session concerned the development and use of open badges. It offered some introductory information about the digital badging concept and then proceeded to workshop the production of a digital badge using a ‘new’ JISC Open Badge design sheet (released date – sometime in March 2014) that assists in the initial design process of developing a Badge-based digital credentialing system.

Flipped classroom, or just flippin' technology? Where are we now with technology, student experience and organisational change?

The content of this session was underpinned by the Changing the Learning Landscape project.

Key topics of interest were:

To be aware of ‘ red herrings’ and ‘bandwagons’ – the recent ‘excitement’ over MOOCS was given as an example of this. To be wary of reacting to flavor of the month technologies, or competitive forces such as "our competitors have just installed technology X, so we must have it in order to keep up with them". One way of avoiding such red herrings is to critically assess how the ‘tech’ can be effectively embedded in the curriculum – 'adding value' to the student learning experience.

There was also an interesting discussion around how VLE’s in many institutions appear to be used ‘for the most part’ as information repositories – rather than as resources for structuring learning materials in a ‘curriculum’ sensitive manner.

Promoting feedback dialogue using technology: why, how and lessons learned

This session, which was based on research looking at promoting feedback dialogue, discussed how in many cases feedback to students from their teachers was monologic – that is one-way from tutor to student, and that students may not be adequately 'engaging' with feedback in a manner which informs their acdemic practice. It was argued that a more effective feedback model is dialogic (where there is a two-way ‘dialogue’ between tutor and student). Part of this dialogue is also about encouraging the student to engage in deeper reflection on the feedback given to them.

Two dialogic feedback models were presented:

The university as a hackerspace: Can interventions in teaching and learning drive university strategy?

In this session Joss Winn gave an overview of the Student as Producer concept that has been adopted at Lincoln as a core component of the Undergraduate Teaching and Learning Strategy.

He then went on to introduce the concept of the university as a Hackerspace – and outlined this vision through his ‘experiment’ in creating a cross-university Masters by research based on Hackerspace principles. Joss discussed some interesting ideas around taking an anti-disciplinary approach, in which persons from all disciplines are welcome but the disciplines themselves are not ‘modularised’ or 'partitioned' – it is an open and democratic space. For me it was refreshing and exciting to see such experimental spirit being openly accommodated by a HE institution in the development of a new ‘course?’… And to see that there are still spaces within HE where ‘radical approaches’ are being allowed to ‘do their thing’…as it were.

Day 2 – Session highlights

Understanding students' expectations and experiences of the digital environment

This discussion/workshop session took its point of departure from Phase 1 of the Digital Student Project, which conducted a review into the student experience, and expectations of the digital environment at university.

One of the core themes concerned how we (that is educators and learning technologists) in HE can/should/must help shape the students ‘transformational’ use of digital technology. In other words – students may have digital ‘know how’ but they don’t necessarily know how this applies to their academic practice.

It was noted that there can be an imbalance between student expectations of what the digital environment at university will encompass and their actual ‘digital needs’ with respect to supporting and enhancing their academic practice and their learning. The challenge of this scenario is in responding to what students want based on their experiences outside of University, balanced against what they need to succeed at university and in the digital world beyond.

The workshop section used an interesting scenario-based approach to gather data, having us imagine the university of 2020, and speculating in what ways an institution might fail to reach this balance between expectation and needs; and conversely might succeed in reaching this balance.

Whatever happened to the MOOC?

This session took the MOOC concept as the starting point for a much broader discussion about Open Education, retaining the ‘networked learning’ aspect of the MOOC space and applying this concept more broadly. With seven speakers the tempo was quick fire, but not frantic – indeed there was a refreshing ‘to the point’ succinctness in the presentations.

Key bits:

It’s not about the ‘content’; it’s about enabling learners to learn in a networked world

There is a paradigm shift in open learning from a ‘one to many’ model to a ‘many to many’ model

This many to many model lead to some interesting chat around how, in such community and networked open learning spaces the participants are at times teaching the teachers through what they contribute, or the mechanisms by which they contribute content, or how they organize content in a digitally facilitated manner.

Was great to see my one time colleague Viv Rolfe presenting at this session, still strenuously advocating Open Education.

Digital storytelling for public engagement

This presentation covered with the basic concepts of digital storytelling – comparing and contrasting two particular digital stories and the approaches used, and offering advice concerning best practice in the creation of digital stories.

What I found particularly interesting was how an economy of content (2 mins of spoken words accompanied by a series of still images) could be an effective communicator of ‘a message’. But also that in such economy of content and the basic technical knowledge required to create the digital story, the production of such a resource was not ‘onerous’.  I.e. the value of the output seemed to be significantly more than the effort required to create the output.

Final keynote – Preparing new generations for the digital future – how the world (and business) will change over the next 20 years

Futurologist – Ray Hammond ruminated on the six major trends that he believes will shape society and business life over the next two decades and how this relates to education – through the lens of digtial technology.

He made some intriguing suggestions concerning the difficulties in thinking about how we might proactively shape the future in relation to emerging and exponentially advancing technologies when we do not have an effective ‘language’ to describe, define and ruminate on the potentials of the new technologies – i.e. the pace of development/evolution of language is not keeping up with the pace of technological change. He used the example of the term ‘horseless carriage’ which used to be used to signify a 'car', and suggested that the terms ‘mobile phone’ or ‘smart phone’ were at the same historical point of linguistic development as the term ‘horseless carriage’. Such 'newly emerged' words/terms and what they signify are inadequate in articulating the potentials of what they are defining.

His ruminations also brought home some stark ‘possibilities’ about the significant and radical changes to the ‘way things are’, based on the rapid advance of technology in relation to key global trends, that may well be ‘just around the corner’. And the fundamental role that education and those involved in education will have to play in preparing our learners to effectively engage with a rapidly and radically changing future.

Overall, for me, the conference was a great success. I came away from it with a renewed vigour to continue to do my part in advancing the use of technology for enhancing teaching and learning.

Check out the Digital Dream Wall that gradually emerged from a blank white canvas over the 2 days.

dreamwall

(artwork thanks to the artists at CreativeConnection.co.uk)

I think this is an apt visual representation of what the conference achieved. Facilitating not only a sharing of thoughts, ideas, concerns, experiences, abilities, and techniques. But providing the space in which new networks of ongoing communication and collaboration are established – through which, all of these things can begin to ‘synthesize’ into a strong and progressive lattice of shared understanding, knowledge and ability that will continue to have a positive impact on all learning sectors, as we continue our digital journey.

I look forward to what JISC DigiFest 2015 has to offer.

Posted by Rob Weale

Jan 032014
 

sharing practice poster(web)

This sharing practice session was part of an initiative to increase the opportunities for staff to share their experiences of teaching and pedagogies for enhancing learning through technology. CELT also supports sharing of practice including through case studies contributed to the online CELT Hub, a monthly Skillshare session, and occasional symposiums.

The main pedagogic theme of the session was scenario-based learning, with the ‘bring your own device’ agenda and story-telling also important topics of discussion. For this session presenters from the Faculty of Art, Design and Humanities were Kathleen Bell and Simon Perril who talked about student digital literacies and how technology is incorporated into the pedagogy and curriculum of Creative Writing and Mark Bradshaw, who talked about and demonstrated how he uses a response system to engage students in large lectures. From Health and Life Sciences, Annette Crisp talked about how students engage with the innovative scenario-based animations she has created, and Rob Weale provided insights into creating and managing scenario-based learning across Nursing.

Creative Writing: development of digital literacies

Creative Writing at DMU embeds digital literacies throughout the three-year undergraduate programme. It is important for writers to develop a range of technological skills and know-how so that they can better engage with the practice and theories of writing and story-telling that encompass an appreciation of the Web, hyperlinks and gaming. Although it might be expected that most students already have a high level of digital literacies, this is not always the case. Kathleen Bell and Simon Perril talked about a number of Craft Challenges that embed the use of technology.

Level 4 students are introduced to twitter as a writing tool. They are asked to look through the Tweets of various writers who use twitter and to identify those tweets they consider most interesting and most important. The pedagogy behind the exercise allows students to understand the type of writing that stands out amongst the crowd. Understanding twitter as a tool for writers is important to enable students to understand the potential for identity making and to enable them to practice conciseness in their writing.

Additionally level 4 students are required to write blog posts to enhance their writing skill while also learning about the technical and social aspects of the practice. The students write article reviews of relevant events, which are peer reviewed before posting onto their website, allowing authoring to a space that is public facing. This also adds to the profile of Creative Writing.

Level 5 students can focus on various concepts including hypertext and audio/visual layering.  The latter requires students to use and learn photo-story software, which allows layering of visual, text and audio to build on the craft of creative story writing. We saw many created examples which demonstrated how text can be used to create suspense, by its sequence of appearance.

The other method, hypertext, originated from Raymond Queneau and refers to the process of the reader choosing their own story and their own ending by selecting hyperlinks to the next chapter or page.

Final year students are encouraged to build and maintain their own web presence. Creating a space where the public can see their blogs, authoring, and reviews of articles that perspective employers can see.

 

Annette Crisp building Avatars for criminology

Annette Crisp from HLS talked about innovative scenario based learning resources that she has created and how the students use them. In criminology reading about a horrific crime such as murder or rape incident may not fully engage the learner in all perspectives of the situation. Therefore the pedagogic purpose of the avatar-based stories is to encourage students to engage with the more visual representations, which also include background music and text combined to dramatic effect. Students are then able to think about the crime being committed and whether there is a sequence of events that demonstrated serial crimes.

The main software tools used to create the avatars are iClone for creating the 3D animation and Crazytalk by Realillusion, which is an app for create facial animation and voice. The scenario-based films of the avatars are placed into an articulate presentation. This provides an excellent platform for learning. The articulate software allows the students to read the slides to get acquainted with background information, then view the filmed scenarios. This process allows the student to engage with sections of the film and then to move back and forth in the presentation until all information is understood.

In addition to the criminology avatars Annette has produced some very engaging high- profile figures, such as Albeit Einstein and Margaret Thatcher, who she uses to draw attention to the importance of completing the national student survey.  This is a really innovative and humorous way to capture student attention.

 

InfuseLearning feedback Mark Bradshaw

Mark Bradshaw from Fashion and Textiles shared his experience of using a programme called InfuseLearning.  The initial goal was to capitalise on the trend of students ‘Bringing their own Device’(BOYD) to encourage student engagement, particularly in large lectures. Infuselearning allows tutors to create a quiz before the lecture which students can then respond to at specific points throughout the class.  They can use a computer or any type of mobile device.  The use of InfuseLearning is free and requires registration only on the Website.

One pedagogic aim of using InfuseLearning is to identify whether students have understood the topic area before leaving the classroom. Mark often found students nodded that they understood, but when the following week came with information that built upon the previous week students were unsure what to do.

During the sharing practice session we tested this software. This was a very useful way of understanding what the program does, what can be achieved, and how to do it. Having created a test for this purpose, Mark signed into the InfuseLearning program online and created a classroom number. The participants in the event signed into the program with iPads, mobiles, and laptops, and completed this test. When all individuals had submitted, the results could be viewed on screen for everyone to see.

The feedback from students has been very positive. If the students use their name to register then it is displayed on the screen. Whereas Mark had expected students to feel negative about this they seem to love this feature. Furthermore, students have got into the habit of bringing their laptops and own devices to the classroom.

Seeing whether you have an area or answer incorrect has not worried the students in any of the formative Quizzes Mark has carried out with the students. However, it does identify whether a specific area or topic covered in a taught session is not understood by the students. This acknowledgement is represented by a complete column of red/ incorrect dots. Being aware of this as a tutor one can develop further material to assist the students’ understanding.

This was an extremely useful piece of technology in that it is fun and has a social aspect also. The students can also complete the questions in pairs as this can be less daunting and also addresses concerns about some students not having the technologies needed for this. Another point is that tutor must be logged in when the quiz is being taken, therefore it is not suitable to ask questions that can be completed afterwards. It could be useful as part of a distance learning session.

 

The High Street – A virtual learning environment

Rob Weale described key aspects of the collaborative developmental process behind the creation of High Street, and gave examples of how it is being used for teaching and learning across Nursing and Midwifery.

High Street is a virtual, fictional community created to support and enhance teaching and learning for students on the BSc Nursing and Midwifery programme at DMU. Built in a Blackboard community shell it provides a space in which teaching staff can create, develop and explore the use of 'real-world' scenarios as teaching and learning enhancement tools, as such embedding a pedagogic approach that is based around scenario-based learning.

Rob is also currenly exploring the potential for developing a virtual hospital ward, as part of High Street.

 

Heather. 

 

Aug 212013
 

I recently took delivery of a new piece of technology from the IT department here at DMU. It’s a telephone… or is it?

Last year DMU started the roll-out of Microsoft Lync to all of its staff members; the vision is that staff will make use of the software to video conference with each other, we will make use of Voice Over IP and we can also manage our time and meetings more effectively due to the integration with Outlook.

From a business justification perspective, all of the points above stand up by way of helping us to be more efficient and save costs but it is the other benefit that this project has ‘accidentally’ delivered that I want to talk about here.

The Centre for Enhancing Learning through Technology (CELT) works independently from the IT support department as part of the Library and Learning Services Directorate at DMU. However projects that the IT team delivers will often have a knock-on effect on CELT’s work and can sometimes deliver unexpected teaching, learning and assessment related benefits.

In order to take full advantage of MS Lync, the IT team has equipped each staff member with a new telephone – I was quite excited to take delivery of mine as my previous device would have been more at home in a museum than on my desk but aside the obvious benefits of clearer sound, being notified when I had missed a call and being able to see when my next meeting is scheduled on the telephone’s screen I also noticed that there are now some new cables on my desk.

The cable I’m really excited about (if I can get excited about a piece of black wire) is the USB cable that now plugs into my PC and the new ‘phone.

This cable not only facilitates the communication between the MS Lync desktop application and the telephone but my PC also now ‘sees’ the new telephone and its discreet devices as devices that the PC can access, control and interface with.

And here’s the point – by providing each staff member with a new telephone and the USB interface, the IT department has given everyone a good quality microphone and speaker that their computer can see and use.

Over the last couple of years, as one of the Enhancing Learning through Technology Project Officers at DMU, I have worked with a number of staff in areas such as creating screencast based resources, providing audio or audio/visual feedback and using screencast technology to provide resources and feedback using a variety of media for Distance Learners and attending students.

One area that has always been a sticking point is the provision of an appropriate microphone and speaker(s) to enable a teaching team to adopt such practice en masse.

Traditionally, I have always advised staff members to look for a mid-range wireless USB headset with microphone as this can double up as a device to be used in the office for recording audio feedback or if staff wish to record their session then the wireless USB headset can also be worn whilst teaching in order to capture audio as part of a lecture capture solution without having to loan or purchase a separate lapel mic’. However, such headsets can cost around £50 each and this cost can be prohibitive.

I have also come across instances whereby teaching staff will be in possession of a microphone but it will be an older 3.5mm jack plug style microphone. This would be ok when maybe using the Windows sound recorder to produce audio files but when interfacing with software such as Expression for the production of screencast type content, a USB microphone is required as in my experience Expression does not interface with more traditional equipment plugged into a jack plug and other applications struggle to pick up the older style microphones at a decent volume (even with a bit of tweaking of the levels).

So this brings me back to my nice new shiny telephone and the fact that when it was first plugged into my work PC it installed a few drivers, talked to MS Lync and did everything that the IT team expected it to; but now, when I open the ‘recording devices’ menu on my PC I see I have a new USB microphone available to use that Expression can also see (or is that hear) as well as other software such as Panopto and the Windows sound recorder.

The ‘phone actually has two microphones, the one in the handset and the one that is built into the body for use in loud-speaker mode, it doesn’t matter which I use when using the ‘phone to record audio on my PC, both deliver very good quality audio and the PC doesn’t need to switch between the handset and loud-speaker microphone which makes using the telephone as a USB microphone really easy – it’s just the same as plugging a USB microphone into a computer and talking to it.

The provision of these telephones at DMU has opened up a lot of potential for staff wanting to experiment with audio and audio/visual resources and feedback as everyone now has a good quality microphone on their desk that will talk to software that is free to use or other centrally supported software and they also have a speaker through which recorded content can be played for checking prior to uploading to the VLE, a real bonus for a project that was focused solely on providing a more corporate style communication tool for staff.

One member of academic staff at DMU is ahead of the game in this respect as his location was equipped early in the MS Lync project. Cormac Norton, School of Nursing, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences has already adopted the use of his new telephone as a USB microphone to add voice to PowerPoint slides – a case study that looks at Cormac’s technique in detail can be accessed on the CELT Hub here.

This experience also highlights the need for people such as myself, who support the use of technology from a teaching, learning and assessment perspective to be aware of the technology that is centrally provided and how technology that might not have been designed or implemented with teaching, learning and assessment in mind can be exploited in order to make a difference.

I’m sure if we all looked hard enough we’d be able to squeeze just a bit more out of the kit that we are supplied to work with every day.


Ian Pettit.

Feb 262013
 

In my work as an educational technologist I am more and more frequently receiving queries and requests from academic teaching staff who want to make a video of their lecture so it can be available to their students on their module page in Blackboard. A request to which I respond with the following (or thereabouts) for them to consider:

Before embarking on the creation of a video of your lecture or presentation to be used as a learning object, it is important that you consider if there is a ‘pedagogic’ necessity to create this type of resource?

Is the knowledge content of the lecture such that a video of you presenting it makes it more likely that students will be able to understand it/apply it or do whatever it is that they are required to do with it in order to achieve the learning outcomes?

Does your visible presentation style (how you comport yourself as you present your lecture) increase the potential for students to achieve the required learning outcomes for this particular session?

In general – is this method of re-presenting your lecture imperative to the learning requirements and outcomes for the session? Are the students going to learn more from engaging with this learning object if they can see you in it?

If your answer is NO to the above, then you may well be better creating an 'audio' recording of your talk and supporting this with slides/images from your presentation.

I have come across many examples of lecture videos wherein it would have been so much better not to be able to see the presenter, where a slideshow with voice-over would have been a more effective approach. The fundamental issue here is not one of visual quality – it’s not such a big deal if the video camera has been setup with a bit of a lean to it, or there are some tatty posters hanging on the walls behind the presenter – sure, these factors can lend an air of ‘quality’ to the presentation – but ‘all that glitters is not [pedagogic] gold’. What is key is the ‘content’ that is being presented, and how it is articulated for the most effective pedagogic ends via this particular medium of presentation.

Sometimes it is better to be heard…and not seen.

This post touches on some broader issues concerning the notions of ‘technology driven education’ vs. ‘education driven technology’.

The increased desire for academic teaching staff in HE to engage with technology for teaching and learning is in principal good news, as enhancing learning through technology (ELT) offers some exciting spaces in which education can undergo innovation and evolution and allow us to explore and establish new educational models. However, the demand for creating technology enhanced learning ‘things’ is not always based on a robust pedagogic imperative but can tend towards that of using technology for technology’s sake. There is a danger that if we do not confront the use of technology in education with a critical pedagogic eye at the point of local inception (that is when we as individual educators decide that we want to use a specific technology or technologies for teaching and enhancing student learning) we may simply establish practices in which our pedagogic energies (the time we invest in the development of educational things) are invested in the production of technology-driven learning objects that have no real educational value, and that do not fully exploit the innovative developmental potentials that ELT can offer.

For more information and guidelines on various methods for capturing and re-presenting lecture content, visit:
http://celt.our.dmu.ac.uk/support-using-technology/develop-content/#leccap

To find out how to capture your voice and presentation slides as you present your lecture in real-time, visit:
http://celt.our.dmu.ac.uk/using-microsoft-expression-encoder-4-service-pack-2/

To find out how to add a voice-over to PowerPoint presentations, visit:
http://celt.our.dmu.ac.uk/support-using-technology/develop-content/add-voice-to-powerpoint-presentations/