🚀 go-pugleaf

In <40474@ut-emx.uucp>, clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kathy Strong) writes:

>>...  But there are a number of arguments for the "low tech"
>>solution of a separate video monitor.  I have conducted informal studies that
>>indicate students often prefer 2 separate monitors.  It let's them
>>distinguish
>>between the computer and the video (which can be important when teaching
>>about
>>a video, such as in a cinematography program using Citizen Kane as an
>>example).
>
>Hmm, I don't quite follow your argument here. What exactly would be on the
>computer (the overlay) that a student might confuse with the video? typically
>we use overlays for things like <<Rewind}  <Step Back} {Step Fwd> {Fast Fwd>>
>buttons, or a Help button... surely no one would confuse those items
>or mistake them for something Orson Welles put in..?

What I meant was conceptual distinction.  That is, the student can say "this is
the computer over here" and "this is the movie over here", "I look at this
screen for information about the movie and the other screen to just watch the
movie."  Admittedly, this is a minor point, but it's one that's been pointed
out to me by students actually using the system.  The students appreciate
having the transcript and other other information on one screen and the video
on the other so they can choose which one to pay attention to at any time.

As far as the "which screen should I be looking at now" question goes, our
natural assumption is that this would be a problem, but my experience
(contrary to my expectations) has shown that it's not.  Proper design of the
interface probably makes a difference.  If anyone has any emprical evidence to
counter this, I would very much like to hear it.  (So I can use it as an
argument to get fancier hardware!)

Jim Taylor
Microcomputer Support for Curriculum  |
Brigham Young University              |  Bitnet: taylorj@byuvax.bitnet
101 HRCB, Provo, UT  84602            |  Internet: taylorj@yvax.byu.edu