Final+Course+Reflection+-+5363

media type="custom" key="11093268" align="right"EDLD 5363: Video and Multimedia //Please visit the YouTube link to this project://
 * //Public Service Announcement - School Bonds Q and A// **

My expectation for Video and Multimedia was simple: I wanted to try everything. The course certainly provided me with an opportunity to do so. In my first course, I was asked how I most effectively learn to use new applications. My response was that I like to simply start using the software in a project-oriented capacity. I still hold to the 'try it and see' school of skill attainment with technology; so, I cannot explain why I hesitated trying out the video and audio applications I have available at work and home. I knew teacher and student computers provided my students and I with software to create video and audio, but the school district had not made using such productivity tools a priority through consistent professional development or through regular integration of such tools in the district curriculum (Armstrong & Warlick, 2004, p. 26). The ‘trial-by-fire’ of this course forced me work to my strength: taking a plunge and starting to press keys. I had an opportunity to manipulate multiple audio tracks using Audacity and to edit and export video using both Windows Movie Maker and Windows Live Movie Maker. I continued to develop my level of proficiency with Windows PhotoStory.

As the group began the production of the project video, I continued to be frustrated by public schools’ lack of access to the most up to date applications. The reasons for these deficits are perfectly valid: budgetary constraints, security concerns, and the like; however, it does not take away the sting of knowing that there is an application out there, in my case Windows Live Movie Maker, that is perfect for teaching and learning in my classroom but is unavailable to my students at school. I began my Week 2 video editing project using Windows Live Movie Maker, which is installed on my Dell netbook. I built a basic storyboard that I saved on a flash drive in hopes of completing some more polishing during my lunch the following day. Alas, it was not to be: my school laptop, which runs Windows XP, has Windows Movie Maker, which is alike in title to Windows Live but not in content. A little-known fact among those who are new to video editing: Windows Live Movie Maker is a complete redesign of Windows Movie Maker software available with Windows XP and earlier. For schoolteachers who are working with newer Microsoft operating systems in one location than another, this is a vital distinction. Sadly, WLMM is not compatible with Windows XP; however, the process has reminded me that experience is the best teacher when it comes to technology. Students get as much out of process as they do out of product, and movie making with Movie Maker will be no exception.

On the whole I achieved all of my personal goals for the project. I developed enough expertise during Week 2 to not only prepare myself for the intense combination of skills for the final project assembly, but to feel confident taking these applications into the classroom to support student productivity. However, in the final project I encountered a rare moment of disappointment in the assignment submission. While my PSA group came up with a final product in which we all feel satisfied, each of us no doubt sees areas for improvement. From my perspective, I believe that the final video would have benefitted greatly from the use of music in the master audio track. In my own development of video in Week 2 of the course, I found the integration of music and voice-over in Audacity to be a straightforward process, with simple tools to adjust the relationship of voice to music volume. I had access to some music for which we had permission, and indicated that to my team; however, the team chose to work with live audio, voice-over, and audio effects. It was, though, a minor disappointment: given the time constraints and the number of opinions and ideas that were in play, our collaboration proved quite effective.

From a purely academic perspective, I came away with a great deal of brand new information. This project introduced me to a dizzying array of applications, and opened up for me completely new ways of presenting content to and receiving work product from students. The “sink or swim” presentation of the applications in the course, while undoubtedly intimidating for some of my colleagues, appealed to my more hands-on approach to learning new applications. I experience my highest level of engagement and investment when given a project outcome and the freedom to achieve that outcome using whatever methods I find most effective. It was, however, the collaborative component of this course that offered me much more in the way of new learning than I thought possible. It was the one outcome I was not expecting. I had the profound pleasure to work with an amazing group of professionals during this project. Collaboration has not been my area of particular strength or comfort in the past, and I quailed at the idea of a majority of my course grade being dependent on the result of not only a collaborative effort, but a long-distance one. I simply cannot be more delighted to be proven wrong. The experience showed me how fulfilling, enlightening, and educational a group project can be when a group of true collaborators work towards a common goal. My team members and I come from school districts of varying size throughout the state and have professional backgrounds that range from elementary science and math to secondary technology education to district administration. This diversity of experiences brings depth and perspective to our work, but also presents challenges to collaboration. The professionalism of my colleagues overcame those obstacles in fine style. We used a variety of collaboration tools during our process, including Google Docs and a Google Site. We found that, although the real-time editing functions of Google Docs had their uses, the multi-level platform of the Google site was more in line with the variety of uses needed for project completion. Through the site, we compiled video footage and audio tracks, archived transcripts of online conferencing, collaborated on assignment and proposal documentation, and tracked tasks and timeline status.

Being able to work collaboratively, exchanging ideas and experiences to produce a result with which all parties can be proud, cornerstones the ideal school environment (Smyile, 1995, as cited in Mouza, 2002-2003, p. 274). I would like to see more collaboration between teachers in my district, so that schools are constantly moving forward with new ideas as opposed to constantly reinventing old ones. Cooperative learning is a generally accepted best practice for student learning, and as a part of that, I focus on teaching students how to use their unique strengths to the betterment of the group. Collaboration for this project reminded me in tangible ways how frustrating that process can be. I returned to my classroom with new strategies for how to make a point compellingly without overwhelming or alienating their group members and for how to accept when your idea or insight is not the one adopted by the group at large.

Please feel free to take a look at our process at the **[|EDLD 5363 PSA Video Project Google Site]**. Thank you so very much to my team for time well spent and a job very well done.

References:
Armstrong, S., & Warlick, D. (2004, September). The New Literacy: The 3R's Evolve into the 4E's. //Technology and Learning//, pp. 20-28. Mouza, C. (2002-2003, Winter). Learning to teach with new technology: Implications for professional development. //Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35//(2), 272-289.