Putting the professor on camera to improve learning

When he’s not figuring out how to make a hot, electrified gas power the world, Gregory Moses, engineering physics professor, sits by himself in his office and talks into video cameras. Sometimes, he also talks to puppets.

With the aid of tripods, lights, a boom microphone and a “Be Quiet” sign, Moses turns his office in the Engineering Research Building into a television studio, where he records lectures on computer basics and nuclear engineering. Using software he and his colleagues developed, he transforms these ordinary talks into multimedia presentations that his students – even those who are blind or deaf – can watch or listen, rewind and review wherever there’s an Internet connection.

Moses says the multimedia shows turn the lecture-homework model upside down, ultimately improving student-learning outcomes. By viewing the lectures on their own time outside of class, students and professors free up time that they now can spend together in interactive lab settings where concepts become practice.

“We’ve taken a scenario where faculty stand on a stage 50 feet away from the nearest student and replaced it with a computer lab where students and professors do hands-on work,” explains Moses.

Moses and others started to build this new environment for learning in the 1990s, when there was a technology push to include video applications with computer networking. With a six-year grant from the National Science Foundation, along with other funds, the group designed the software, bought video equipment, and developed methods to implement and assess the effectiveness of this multimedia teaching method.

The software, called eTEACH, is an authoring tool that makes use of streaming video and web-based materials. Developed by Moses, computer science and mathematics professor John Strikwerda and researcher Mike Litzkow, the software is just part of their effort to reform the large-lecture environment.

In fall 2000, Moses and his group tested the software and their videotaping abilities with 300 engineering sophomores and juniors enrolled in a computer course. Since then, more courses and features have been added. Instead of attending two lectures each week, the students go online to view the lectures, which consist of streaming video, slide presentations and an outline that automatically checks off the sections watched. Depending on the Internet connection, students can view the lectures in their entirety or just view the slides or listen to the audio.

With buttons similar to those found on a VCR, students can pause, fast-forward or rewind the lecture. Moses says, “They’re useful for when you’re watching and zone out – you can go back and listen again.”

Halfway through the lecture, a quiz pops up. Although not graded, the self-assessments help the students identify areas they understand less and provide practice for the weekly online quizzes that are graded. A student who is confused about a concept can follow built-in “lecture pathways” that take the viewer from concept to concept, including material covered in earlier lectures. Plus, there are links to helpful web sites.

Not only do these online presentations offer features that live lectures can’t, they also are accessible by people with disabilities, says Moses. “Everything is closed-captioned and compliant with a screen reader, allowing a blind person to navigate through video and slides in real time,” he says.

While the lectures are now attended outside of class, more problem solving – typically reserved for homework – is completed in small, interactive groups during lab sessions. Students gather weekly at computer workstations where they work with each other, as well as directly with faculty, to solve comprehensive engineering problems.

Moses likens the scene to a second-grade classroom, where tables are arranged in clusters and teachers circulate throughout the room.

“Active learning is the direction we’ve got to be moving in,” says the engineering professor, asking, “‘What’s better: Sitting in front of the television with your kids and watching basketball, or going outside and actually playing it with them?” His answer: “There’s some value to both, but I think doing it together is more beneficial.”

Although not all assessments of how much students have benefited from these online lectures and interactive labs are complete, Moses says he’s certain student-learning outcomes have improved based on exam grades. “These were classes previously hated, but now they’re not,” he says referring to recent student evaluations.

After the first semester using eTEACH ended, evaluations showed that 47 percent of students watched all online presentations and 75 percent watched at least 10. More than 65 percent of students reviewed previous presentations, especially right before exams.

With these early outcomes, Moses says other departments on campus have used the eTEACH software for distance education and that it’s part of UW-Whitewater’s online master’s of business administration degree program. Any non-profit institution, notes Moses, can download the software royalty-free at the eTeach Web site.

Part of a movement to evaluate teaching methods and better understand student learning, Moses says that educators, especially those drawn to technology, may be more likely to design their own curricula using the eTEACH model.

But, he admits, sometimes there is one big barrier: “Some faculty have an aversion to watching themselves on video.”