Screencast-o-matic Instructional Tool Review

Screencast-o-matic is a videocapture program that records what you are doing on your screen and allows for a voice over to be added.  

Screencasts are widely used for demonstrations, presentations, and tutorials.  While not explicitly designed for classroom use, they are, among other uses, intended to show how to do something. I’ve encountered them in Old Dominion asynchronous classes before – such as the statistics class where seeing a problem being worked and explained was very useful. Since then I’ve seen ODU PhD colleagues discuss using Screencast-o-matic for their teaching assignments, so it was my first stop in comparison shopping.

Screencast-o-matic’s free version has the key features of recording the screen activity and narration and allowing for the video to be hosted or exported.  It also traces the cursor movement to allow viewers to easily see what is being clicked on.  The pro version (for $15 a year!) allows editing of the video and effects to be added.  It also offers hosting, passwording, exportability to Google drive, and two hours of recording (compared to 15 minutes for free).

Screencast-o-matic’s own site is http://screencast-o-matic.com/; however, I downloaded my copy from http://download.cnet.com/Screencast-O-Matic/3000-13633_4-75734109.html.  This is my go to site for software reviews and safe downloads.  

I spoke briefly with Wright State University’s instructional designers about what WSU uses.  They support two programs:  Tegrity which is embedded in our Desire2Learn LMS and Camtasia which is supplied to those designated as OL instructors.  They both have the advantage of being institutionally supported. Tegrity, however, does not allow exporting and Camtasia is, while the instructional designers consider it excellent, expensive for individuals ($300) and perhaps comes with too many affordances (distractions!). Their recommendation for small scale projects needing free and easy software is jing – a stripped down version of Camtasia. It, however, does not allow uploads to elsewhere, but simply provides you with a link.  

Screencast-o-matic, even the free version, allows uploading to Youtube and exporting in a variety of formats. Since I am starting from scratch and don’t need a smaller version of something I’m already familiar with, I preferred Screencast-o-matic. 

The free version is extremely easy to use.  It’s intuitive and elegant in design.  Once a screencast is complete the technology is virtually transparent.  To a student viewer, it’s a Youtube (or other type) of video that is watched, paused, replayed. Nothing new needs to be learned. For the creator, very little more is needed other than the type of preparation one would make to teach f2f expecting to demonstrate on a projected screen.  Having clicked record, you use your computer as usual, pulling up applications as needed.  So long as one moves through without long pauses, an effective classroom style presentation can be made. The only new skill is really more habit awareness  --  any mouse movement will be tracked with a yellow circle so fidgets show up.  Other technical aspects such as saving, processing, and exporting are simple clicks.  As far as I can tell, it is not a big bandwidth hog.  

It’s of value for many types of discipline and for mini-lessons and lectures, but in English it can be used as a means of demonstrating composing, editing, and revising.  Even seeing instructors correct typos can be a teachable moment! Showing how to build and experiment with text is something we don’t see often enough and performing it cold in a live classroom may be risky.  A recorded demonstration with narration of how and why I made changes to a sentence or paragraph would be useful.  Teaching paragraph coherence and seeing the sentences move around could be better than seeing two static versions. 

Basic tutorials and how to modules can free up instructional time and be maintained from semester to semester.  They are on demand, repeatable, and can be paused.   I would advocate for them in OL and f2f classes as a library and resource.  I’d have them available to all my students – juniors and seniors need refreshers too!

It’s sufficiently straightforward that I would advocate for using it as a student tool.  Since it’s free, I’d ask students all to download it and use it for the class.  A favorite assignment of mine is for students to write their own personalized writing manual.  It’s somewhat based on ELL language logs, but it asks them to create a list of stylistic tics they may have, things they always have to look up, and asks them to write at least two or three explanations of a grammar / mechanics issue they have – in a way that clicks for them.  They research it and teach it to themselves.  I see a Screencast-o-matic student-created tutorial as being a useful metacognition / reflective tool.

Additionally, I see it being used by students as a peer review tool.  OL peer review can be tricky – a writer who is not yet skilled may struggle to express what is wrong with a text. The usual reading aloud and discussing protocol is problematic OL.  I’ve long made peer reviews into a written out of class assignment for my students. This is in part to get them used to writing reviews, but it also allows for more reflection as well as giving the recipient a document to refer back to instead of trying to take notes / remember in an f2f review.  The students write a page review and supply a track changes copy of the paper along with comments (not edits).  I think Screencast-o-matic can combine the best of live and written peer reviews.  I envision the reviewer commenting on the paper with track changes and pausing to make oral comments or even demonstrate a suggested revision.  Students can see and hear feedback. The fact that is a recording means no changes are made in the recipient’s copy and ownership over the text and changes are still theirs.

The video review mentions a few other ideas for metacognitive student activities such as read loud protocols, diagnostic activities and so on.

Screencast-o-matic also help us meets several OWI principles.

OWI Principle 2: An online writing course should focus on writing and not on technology orientation or teaching students how to use learning and other technologies.

This software is easy to use and allows for tutorials to be created such that other tech orientation is minimized.

OWI Principle 3: Appropriate composition teaching/learning strategies should be developed for the unique features of the online instructional environment.

OWI Principle 4: Appropriate onsite composition theories, pedagogies, and strategies should be migrated and adapted to the online instructional environment.

Screencasts allow for the adaptation and even enhancement of peer review, editing, and the process of writing through demonstrations of process.  It also allows for more than migration since it is an on-line tool itself, it is inherently fitted to OL uses.  

OWI Principle 5: Online writing teachers should retain reasonable control over their own content and/or techniques for conveying, teaching, and assessing their students’ writing in their OWCs.

This software is not tied to an institution.  It’s useful if you expect to be mobile – are early in your career for example, or adjunct, or simply have concerns about intellectual property or continued access to a proprietary LMS.  

It additionally assists in meeting principles 11 and 13.

OWI Principle 11: Online writing teachers and their institutions should develop personalized and interpersonal online communities to foster student success.

OWI Principle 13: OWI students should be provided support components through online/digital media as a primary resource; they should have access to onsite support components as a secondary set of resources.

Overall, I highly recommend Screencast-o-matic for its ease of use, transparent technology, appropriate affordances, and creative possibilities in both f2f and OL classes.