Use of Screen Capture To Produce Media for Organic Chemistry

Mar 27, 2014 - A first-semester org. chem. course was developed as a hybrid course. The students met face-to-face for one class each week (50 min) and...
1 downloads 11 Views 183KB Size
Download PDF
Article pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc

Use of Screen Capture To Produce Media for Organic Chemistry John G. D’Angelo* Department of Chemistry, Alfred University, Alfred, New York 14802, United States S Supporting Information *

ABSTRACT: Although many students learn best in different ways, the widest range of students can be reached when multiple modes of input are employed, especially if the student is simultaneously completing a set of handwritten notes. Computers, meanwhile, have led to countless changes in society, and education has not been exempt from these changes. Students rarely, if ever, are without some sort of electronic device. Be it a smart phone, laptop computer, or tablet, the modern student is nearly perpetually “connected” to the Web. Screen capture has been used to produce high-quality videos for students in organic chemistry classes as an attempt to (i) exploit the students’ perpetually connected state for educational purposes by making not just course materials but also course meetings available online after class; (ii) provide course materials such as assignment keys and demonstrations that go beyond the boundaries of paper-based materials in a way that employs multiple modes of input; and (iii) accommodate legitimate student absences more rigorously. To date, such materials have been implemented in the mainstream organic chemistry course and its corresponding lab, as well as the basic nonmajor, one-semester, organic chemistry class. A description of this implementation is offered here. KEYWORDS: General Public, Upper-Division Undergraduate, Second-Year Undergraduate, First-Year Undergraduate/General, Organic Chemistry, Computer-Based Learning, Distance Learning/Self-Instruction

■

common as it is often a common component of the flipped classroom,3,4 as well as hybrid courses5 and distance learning.6 It has also seen use in nonscience areas such as library instruction, demonstrating literature search techniques7 and improving informational literacy, an important liberal education goal. Along with all of this have come claims8 of dramatic changes in how educators teach and how students learn. All but gone are the days of posting assignment or exam keys and grades outside of a professor’s office, replaced by posting these materials on the Web, either on a department or professor’s Web page or through some commercial course management system such as Blackboard. It is also now easier (and less wasteful of resources such as paper) to provide copies of materials from previous years to students by posting them on the Web as an electronic copy. Communication, too, has increased in ways that some of us take for granted and, almost certainly, some of us despise. Either way, the fact remains that students can ask a question and (un)reasonably expect to receive an answer at almost any time on almost any day, something that was not feasible as recently as the early 1990s. Even more recently, the development of Web 2.0 has nothing less than revolutionized how the world communicates, and these tools are becoming increasingly popular in the classroom9 and the scientific community10 every year. There have even been arguments made in favor of using Web 2.0 as a scholarly publication venue,10 especially early in students’ careers.11 It seems illogical to continue using the traditional paper-based approach alone for disseminating material with all of these powerful new tools available and the apparent direction of society. As a result, many in the educational community have begun to explore ways to take advantage of this modern

INTRODUCTION By the early 1990s, computers were effective, helpful tools that did little more than increase our efficiencies and, at times, entertain us. That is, they were not yet a ubiquitous mode of instant global communication and connectivity. By the end of that decade, they were nearly indispensable tools for any modern worker and student. It is no coincidence that this veritable explosion in the utility of computers coincided with the arrival of the Internet in the public arena and the reduction in cost of mass storage devices. This has been furthered by the expansion in availability of high-speed Internet into nearly every home and certainly every dorm room and academic building, at least on the university level. The even more recent advent of smart phones and tablets has given rise to no dearth of chemistry “apps”, a number of which have been reviewed.1 As a result of this somewhat rapid development of the Internet and computers, their potentials as teaching tools have likely only begun to be tapped. Of particular interest to this author is the ability for all students to easily access instructional videos, a resource that in the early 1990s would have been both timeand cost-prohibitive to be realized using computers because of large file sizes and inconvenient download times. Video-based instruction is a powerful, relatively new tool that has the potential to bring instruction to students in a more personal way than ever before. Recently, the Khan Academy Web site2 has made freely available many videos on a wide range of topics spanning sciences such as biology, physics, and organic chemistry; mathematics; and even history and art history. In many of these videos, the narrator works through example problems using some sort of writing tablet and screen capture software. Even the Rosetta Stone Language software takes advantage of a video-like teaching, combining visual and audio cues in their method of language instruction. Video-based instruction, including lecture capture, is in fact becoming more © 2014 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.

Published: March 27, 2014 678

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300649u | J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 678−683

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

technology in our instruction with the primary goal of furthering a student’s immersion into and understanding of the material. One tool that seems optimal to meet this goal is lecture capture. This, along with programs like Skype, iChat, and Goto Meeting, has made the recording and delivery of webinars and video conferences possible, opening up the scientific and educational communities and really the world in ways that were previously only dreamed of. This also has the potential to dramatically cut down the costs of meetings and guest seminars. For example, 10 years ago, a guest seminar by a researcher from even across the country, much less a foreign country, presented at a small liberal arts university in the United States would be absolutely cost-prohibitive, while now, it is a couple of mouse clicks away. Despite these clear benefits, however, programs such as Skype would see little use in a course lecture aside from perhaps offering “virtual office hours” or a live webcast of a lecture for an infirm student. Recently, I have become interested in lecture capture in our organic chemistry courses. Recording a lecture for subsequent use is not a new resource that professors offer to their students, though the quality and usefulness of recorded lectures can certainly be improved by Panopto and programs like it. Some previous incarnations of this involve the use of a video camera with what are now cumbersome voice edits and making these final videos available on VHS at a university library.12 Others have resorted to posting annotated slides that amount to lecture notes for students.13 Even today, some professors at this institution have their classes videorecorded using digital camcorders for students who have legitimate time conflicts. The recorded lectures are then made available to the students via computer. The lecture capture program chosen here is Panopto. For sure, the use of programs like Panopto is not new, especially for distance learning.14 Lecture capture has been shown to result in higher test grades, and it was also found that nonnative English language speakers benefited more in a firstsemester biochemistry course in podiatric medicine.15 Other medical school programs16,17 have also employed lecture capture, and it was found that videos were used especially for exam prep16 and when students were on away rotation or nightfloat.17 Another interesting use of videos is the recording of dangerous laboratory demonstrations so students could discuss concepts in a discovery chemistry lab setting in a safe manner.18 It is my opinion, however, that this particular use must be approached with moderation because this should not be extended to all laboratory experiences, a potential target as more universities and colleges tighten their wallets. Regarding computer-assisted lecture capture, there are a handful of programs that are extremely useful in a course lecture: ECHO 360 (formerly Lectopia) Record narration function on PowerPoint AIM-one recorder QUMU Illuminate Panopto Camtasia iShowU The Alfred University Information and Technology Services team has chosen Panopto for several reasons, especially including Cost

Panopto was created by a university, giving its creators what was considered to be an insider’s edge in terms of development Outstanding customer support The ability to live-broadcast a session The functionality of Panopto to automatically upload files to iTunesU and Blackboard Advantages of Panopto (and screen capture in general) over PowerPoint are summarized in Table 1 of the Supporting Information. Unlike PowerPoint, which only records the show while the show is running, Panopto records everything that is displayed on the screen. This means that, when Panopto is used, a discussion of a PDF or Web Page could be recorded with ease. Videos produced with Panopto are exactly like any other video in that they are easily paused, rewound, and fastforwarded. Reasons for wanting to do either are obvious for instructional videos. This is very cumbersome with PowerPoint recorded shows, and, when PowerPoint was employed, my students reported loss of sound when doing so. Such viewing is seamless with the videos that are produced with Panopto, which also, at least after conversion (when necessary), can be used on nearly any electronic device. PowerPoint recorded shows on the other hand are a bit more restrictive on where they can be viewed. The PowerPoint product is also impossible to edit after the fact, unlike Panopto videos, and the annotations are in sync with the audio in Panopto videos. Although there were concerns at the outset that the regular recording of class lectures would reduce the in-class attendance, this has not been observed to date. Others have quoted less confident results in this regard.16 One potential cause for the absence of a reduction in class attendance in the classes described here is the threat I made that if attendance were poor, there would be a quiz every day. Curiously, the attendance at the out of class review sessions has actually increased since the recording of these exam review sessions started. It is unclear if this change in attendance is at all related to the recording policy as it is in conflict with what has been observed by others,19 where it was found that, in order to restore attendance to prerecording states, interactive activities had to be incorporated into the tutorials. For the past few years, live lectures have been recorded in the basic (nonmajor) organic chemistry course and the mainstream organic chemistry I and II classes. Initially (for one semester), the recorded PowerPoint show function was used, generating annotated, narrated shows from the lecture. This, however, proved quite cumbersome as the videos were unable to be paused and are not easily reversed because they are actually PowerPoint shows, not true videos. Also, any annotations drawn during lecture did not appear in real time when the video was viewed, instead immediately appearing when each annotated slide began. For topics such as reaction mechanisms, this is clearly a significant disadvantage. They also had the restriction that the user needed to have some sort of PowerPoint viewing software if not PowerPoint itself. As a result, other ways to produce these videos were explored. Screen capture was ultimately selected because it appeared to resolve all of the difficulties experienced with PowerPoint as well as provide several other benefits, most especially that the videos could be edited. This final point was taken as essential for the production of materials beyond the live classroom lecture. 679

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300649u | J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 678−683

Journal of Chemical Education

■

Article

APPLICATIONS OF SCREEN CAPTURE IN ORGANIC CHEMISTRY COURSES

fails, this posting of a link has served as a viable alternative. Always using the link for consistency’s sake seems unattractive because the students cannot download the video to a local drive from this link. The format of the review typically employed in these classes is question and answer. The screen-capture function of Panopto permits users to seamlessly pass between a PDF file containing the question (i.e., a homework assignment or practice exam) and a blank PowerPoint presentation on which answers are drawn using a writing tablet. The blank PowerPoint presentation could also just as easily be prepared in advance to contain examples to work through. In cases where Web content may be part of the review, this could easily be accommodated using screen capture as well.

In Lecture

In every regular class day, Panopto was used to generate a screen-capture video of the entire lecture. These video captures are further enhanced by the use of a writing tablet that allows the instructor to annotate the PowerPoint slides as if they were transparencies. In some cases (especially reviews) a blank PowerPoint slide can be used just like a chalkboard, handwriting in all of the material, but in a way that creates a digital archive. Typically, the audio is synced to the video within two seconds by Panopto. To date, no students have ever complained that the video and audio were too out of sync to make the videos useful. These videos have been used by some students to clarify points they missed during class, when absent, or to review for exams. Sample comments on the lecture videos include these: I am pretty sure without the videos I will not be doing as well as I am in this class. I think this recording lecture system should be an obligation for all lecture courses, it is useful.Helps to hear it explained again, not just words on a page. Inevitably, emergencies or scholarly travel come up during the course of an academic year for both instructors and students alike. With enough lead time, which is possible in the case of scholarly events (i.e., conferences, invited seminars, interviews, or career fairs), an instructor can produce a lecture using Panopto and make the final product available to students as he or she sees fit. Also, in particular for schools in the north, severe weather may occasionally cause emergency cancellations of classes in the winter. Furthermore, when students miss class, whether it is student athletes traveling to athletic events, students attending career fairs or interviews, or health services ordering them to stay out of class, students occasionally must be absent for legitimate reasons. Particularly at small schools that cannot offer multiple sections of the same class, students will occasionally have time conflicts among their classes that force them to “virtually attend” a class by effectively taking it by distance learning. I have used Panopto to distribute class lectures in all of the above-mentioned scenarios. As a result, students have been less prone to falling behind and have been able to overcome otherwise severe conflicts that would delay their completion of a degree.

Group Work

For a few years now, active learning group work assignments have been incorporated in all of my organic classes, and it is in large part due to the university’s acquisition and implementation of Panopto. The acquisition of Panopto was critical because it has allowed for the production of what effectively amounts to a live lecture that students view to prepare themselves for completing the group work assignment. Students could alternatively or additionally use text readings to prepare. With the growing comfort level of modern students in learning via some sort of computer-based medium,8 having access to instructional videos in addition to the text appeared to be a more effective teaching tactic than a standalone reading assignment. Students are also encouraged to complete the readings as well and decide which works best for them. Initial topics for these group work videos were chosen based on timing of the material. There is always at least one free day between the last in-class lecture and the group work day, providing students with ample time to ask questions. The videos typically are not as long as a lecture, and some are less than 10 min, depending on the particular topic. The students were initially expected to complete the group work assignment on their own time, and then the same assignment again as a group in class. The grades were then averaged, unless the preclass attempt is the better performance, in which case only that grade counted. This was done because, in the past, weaker students clearly “free-loaded” off the stronger students and did not contribute to the group effort. Starting in the Fall semester, because it was observed that students were using smart phones to photograph the assignment before turning it in, or coming to the group work day with two copies of the assignment, the in-class version of the assignment contained small differences and counted as a separate grade. Because the preclass attempt was also collected and graded, putative freeloading students still receive a penalty under this scheme. The sentiment among the students regarding the group work videos was somewhat mixed. Sample comments on the group work videos include these: I was lost one time when I failed to watch the entire thing.It is a little too much info for group work.Helpful but would like new examples like the group work. Usually one with repeats if a section is not understood.

Review Sessions

Because of time constraints, many instructors find it most beneficial to our students to hold some exam reviews in the evening, out of class. While this relieves the stress of having a limited amount of time in which to hold the review and loss of class time, it creates the conflict of not all students being available to attend. As a result, Panopto has been used to record all reviews just like lectures. These reviews are then made available in the same way that lectures are with one slight alteration. Because it takes several minutes for the Panopto server to compile the video, it has been most convenient to post a link to the video that Panopto generates, rather than download and then upload the video as is done for the lecture videos. Although this is certainly not preferred, sometimes, when uploading large videos to our Blackboard server from offcampus, the server times out and cancels the upload. When there is insufficient time to wait for Panopto to compile the video after a late evening review or when the off-site upload

Video Keys

In addition to producing a traditional text-based key for an assignment, Panopto was used a couple of times to generate a short (∼5 min) video-based key for either the assignment or a particularly difficult question in the assignment. This was done because it would provide multiple modes of input to the 680

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300649u | J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 678−683

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

have chemical drawing programs installed. This benefit is especially advantageous when students do this using their own computer.

student using the key, something a traditional text-based key fails to do. This sort of key is particularly useful in especially reaction mechanism or spectroscopy−structure identification questions in organic chemistry and in long, multistep calculation questions in general chemistry if or when such videos are incorporated into that course sequence as well. This last possibility is particularly noteworthy because it will begin to build a culture where these videos are a common mode of instruction and learning. This will inevitably make them more effective tools in the more advanced courses. It will also allow for more access to evaluation of the videos by the students, which will unquestionably lead to a dramatic increase in the quality of the product.

Distance Learning

Panopto has also been used to produce videos for the basic organic chemistry course when offered by distance learning during summer sessions. The course was separated into 21 separate units (modules) that were further broken down into a total of 71 videos, with several units having 1 video and the largest unit having 8 videos. A summary of these topics is found in Table 3 of the Supporting Information and reflects the order of topics when the course is taught via traditional pedagogy. There were quizzes after each video and a checkpoint at the end of each unit. For the next video and unit to become available, the students had to achieve a minimum grade on the previous assignment. There were also four exams and a term paper on a topic of the student’s choice, pending instructor approval.

Laboratory Preparative Videos

Panopto has also been used to capture demonstrations instructing students how to use various computer programs and databases. This is similar to work done by others for library resources.7 Specifically, Panopto has been used to record demonstrations of how to use the following: a free chemical drawing program; Endnote; Scifinder Scholar; Sciencedirect; SDBS and the Sigma-Aldrich Web site to find physical data; an MSDS; and cost of chemical. A list of these topics and a rationale for their inclusion is found in Table 2 of the Supporting Information. Throughout each of these courses (basic organic chemistry and organic chemistry I and II); other advanced courses in the chemistry curriculum, along with their associated laboratories and various other science; and engineering courses, the students are expected to in some way make continuous use of these tools. Although previously, the use of these tools had been demonstrated to the students in a large computer lab, this demonstration is now only done via these videos. Though a full-blown assessment is lacking, the students enrolled in the course appeared to have no greater struggles than past students after only receiving this video instruction instead of the traditional live instruction. One of the large benefits that this transition has afforded the course is that of opening up time for additional experiments during the period that was previously used to provide this instruction to the students. This will hopefully allow us to incorporate into the laboratory curriculum more interesting inquiry-based laboratory exercises as we develop them around our current resources. The time saved has also opened up opportunities beyond the organic chemistry courses. First, the instruction provided by the videos is transferable to the other science courses many of the students will eventually take, especially the Sciencedirect and Scifinder Scholar Web sites. Students are reminded that they can save these videos to refer back to in future courses when the need to use these skills again inevitably presents itself. In short, they can contribute to the informational literacy of students. One scenario in which this will perhaps have its greatest impact on our curriculum is in our previously reported seminar program.20 With these videos in place and available to students, the students in the seminar course can refer back to the videos from their previous organic chemistry class, rather than use multiple periods to demonstrate and practice these tools again. This may allow the invitation of additional outside speakers or perhaps incorporate other important instruction into this course such as résumé workshops and mock interviews. Also, it allows the students to both practice the skill and watch the video at the same time, something that often is not possible with limited resources, especially in the case of Scifinder Scholar and computer lab workstations that may not

Video Editing and Processing

Panopto is installed on individual computers with the parent software installed on site, on a dedicated Dell T110 server that is connected to SAN via iSCSI. The local software can be installed on a Mac or Windows platform. There is a $9K annual licensing and maintenance fee associated with the product as of early 2013. Panopto has a variety of different settings for video and sound qualities that have had negligible influences on the quality of the final products. When recording videos, it has been useful to have a paper copy of the slides nearby to note where errors were made, facilitating editing later. After the recording is stopped, the video is uploaded to the dedicated Panopto server where it is processed and converted into a single file. Functions in the current version of Panopto allow for export of just the screen capture, a camera capture, or a combination of both. Soon after the server e-mails the author indicating the compiling is done, the file is ready for download in any of the aforementioned formats. These files were then converted into m4v format using Handbrake before importing into iMovie, though this is no longer necessary. All the necessary edits are then performed, and the edited product is then exported as a final video in a format that is supported both on a computer and on mobile devices. When necessary, still pictures and even digital videos were imported into iMovie directly from a digital camera or camcorder and voiceovers added prior to exporting. One particular video that may actually be more effective than a traditional lecture is the video that prepares students for the stereochemistry assignment. A video for this topic is beneficial because the videos compiled by Panopto can be spliced with videos recorded using a digital camcorder or even still pictures from a digital camera and exported as one video during the editing phase in iMovie. It was also found to be very helpful to demonstrate to the students how to manipulate the model kits using this tactic. A sample of this topic is provided in the Supporting Information. Even in a small classroom, students not near the instructor will struggle to clearly see what an instructor is doing with a model kit to explain stereoisomerism, Newman projections, or chair conformational changes. Newman projections and conformations (including chair conformations) also have videos now. By placing these demonstrations into videos, and encouraging students to manipulate their own model kits while they watch the videos, 681

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300649u | J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 678−683

Journal of Chemical Education

■

Article

COMPLICATIONS There are, of course, a number of complications that have been encountered thus far. First, and most obvious, is that although most students own a computer, not all students do. This creates at least a few complications: 1. Their ability to complete the electronic resources assignment will potentially be impeded. 2. It makes necessary the installation of several programs on University machines that in some cases may not otherwise be installed, creating a demand for assistance from the university ITS staff. 3. Universities that do not provide software such as Endnote may create a situation where the students must purchase sometimes very expensive computer software. 4. Limitations on connection resources for Scifinder Scholar. This fourth complication is a particularly severe bottleneck if large numbers of students wait until immediately before the due date of the assignment to complete it and would likely cause the assignments to be impractical at institutions where the enrollment in organic chemistry exceeds 50 students. This assignment would then more logically be imported into an advanced laboratory or topics class, or it may be helpful to have students sign up for Scifinder time. A second complication encountered is the divide between students who own a Macintosh computer and students who own a Windows computer. This puts the mandate on the professor and TA to record or produce videos that demonstrate programs such as Endnote or a chemical drawing program on both platforms. Because these videos can be reused with minimal additional work, this has thus far been considered a time investment though some videos are still being developed for the MAC systems. Third, many universities are simply unable to afford some of the search tools such as Scifinder Scholar. They also may be unable to afford the usually exorbitant fees for journal access. These last two issues appear to be irrelevant, however, to the point of video-based and assisted instruction. Although Panopto has thus far met institutional needs, a small number of difficulties have been encountered. In late 2010, an update to the Mac OS brought about a compatibility issue that caused the mp4 files that Panopto produces to be incompatible with iMovie and QuickTime. An upgrade to videoediting software, Final Cut Express, also did not resolve the issue. After some searching, ITS discovered that this is a known issue with Panopto and the then-recent round of updates to the Snow Leopard operating system. Indeed, machines without these updates continued to be able to both view and edit our raw Panopto files, with the more current machines suffering from this incompatibility. This had been resolved by subsequent updates but had quite annoyingly resurfaced with the upgrade to Panopto: Focus. Some difficulties viewing the files have also been reported on the Windows OS by our students. Using the free media program VLC appears to work on both Mac and PC platforms when viewing the videos. As an effective workaround, the ITS department suggested the video conversion program Handbrake. Using Handbrake, the mp4 files from Panopto were converted into m4v files with no significant loss in video quality. This file conversion allows the files to be viewed through iTunes or QuickTime on the Mac platform; does not

students’ learning and comfort level inevitably increases. Sample videos of a few varieties are available for download in the Supporting Information. Assessment

Currently, the fact that there is only one lecture section in each of the organic classes combined with the number of students currently enrolled in these individual courses conspires against a trustworthy evaluation of the effectiveness of these videos at improving student learning; a trustworthy assessment method is still lacking. Part of the reason why is the class size: there are consistently no more than ∼35 students in the mainstream organic classes. This results in a difficulty in acquiring a significant number of data points in any one cohort of students. With the variability in students from year to year we have collectively observed at our institution, it is preferable to not attempt to compare years to one another, though this was unavoidable. Furthermore, as I was the only instructor for the courses in any given year, it did not seem possible to separate the influence of my growth on the student learning outcome from the videos’ putative influence. (At the inception of the use of these videos, I had only been teaching for four years.) It seems unlikely, however, that there has been a negative influence by either on student performance. Without a second concurrent section to compare grades to, a quantitative assessment of these videos appears impossible. With the current enrollments, having two sections is not financially feasible, and furthermore, it would potentially prevent a true distribution of strength of student, further confounding the assessment. Recently, an ungraded pretest−posttest was administered; therefore, future studies will be possible using this common exam as a benchmark. To date, the extent of the assessment carried is in the form of surveys and student comments. These data, for CHEM 315 (Organic Chemistry I) for the two Fall (C and D) semesters; for CHEM 316 (Organic Chemistry II) for the Spring D semester; and for CHEM 310 (Basic Organic Chemistry) for the Spring D semester are present in Tables 4 and 5 in the Supporting Information. Surveys were done at mid-semester and end-semester points. Sample surveys and tables containing results are found in the Supporting Information. In the year D data, the videos were scored on a 1−5 scale with 1 being useless and 5 being useful, while in the year E data, the questions were worded differently and scored on a scale of 1 (never) to 5 (almost always). It is interesting that the second generation videos used for Fall E−Fall F were rated somewhat lower than the first generation videos, despite adding more examples and increasing clarity (at least from my point of view). It is not known at this time why this has occurred. The lecture videos, at least for missed classes, kept relatively high marks. Based on some comments on the survey, shorter group work videos appear to be preferred. Third generation videos have been recorded over with the intent of flipping the classroom. Grade Analysis

Unfortunately, an analysis of the grades (Table 6 of the Supporting Information) does not reveal any significant change in the grades of the students. Although it is encouraging that there was no apparent reduction in student performance, it would be preferable that there would be more clear evidence of improved learning. This has led to the conclusion that these videos alone are not enough and that a complete transformation to a flipped classroom may be necessary to realize these goals. 682

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300649u | J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 678−683

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

and Panopto. Members of the Chemistry Department are whole-heartedly thanked for their support in the development of the pedagogy described herein.

appear to have problems with the Windows platform; and restores compatibility with iMovie. Unfortunately, this did not allow for compatibility with Final Cut Express, and a workaround to use this superior videoediting program to create higher quality videos is still sought. Newly purchased Mac computers do not require this conversion for viewing nor editing.

■

■

FINAL THOUGHTS AND FUTURE WORK In summary, described herein is the use of the screen-capture program Panopto to create course materials for organic chemistry courses. These videos have been helpful in making the classes more interactive and making the material more accessible to the students at all times. The group work assignments in particular have added to the overall collegiality of the class. Also, a number of students have used the lecture videos often to resolve difficulties during class and to make up classes missed. The use of these videos in other chemistry classes, especially general chemistry, to foster a culture of video use is planned for upcoming semesters. These videos have been completely re-engineered for flipping the classroom. As of this writing, the students are attending office hours more than any other semester. This change to the flipped classroom was made for at least a few reasons. Most noteworthy, however, is to help guide the students toward what has been called the distinctiveness in higher education recently discussed by Coppola.21 Multimedia in teaching, either as in MOOCs or any of the methods described here and all references herein, has tremendous potential. I firmly believe that it is our obligation as instructors and mentors to guide the students toward appropriate uses of these tools. Certainly, there will be bumps in the road. However bumpy the road may get, this does not mean it is a road not worth traveling. Like it or not, this technology is here to stay, and admittedly, that is not enough of a reason to travel this road. In the coming years, more work will be done with this mode of instruction to further demonstrate to students appropriate use of this technology that places unlimited information seconds away from their access.

■

ASSOCIATED CONTENT

S Supporting Information *

Tables comparing Panopto and PowerPoint; computer programs whose use is demonstrated in videos for the courses; summary of topics for a distance learning course; evaluations of videos by students; grade summary; videos of a sample lecture recorded with Panopto; sample unedited video; edited group work preparative video. This material is available via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.

■

REFERENCES

(1) Libman, D.; Huang, L. Chemistry on the Go: Review of Chemistry Apps on Smartphones. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 320−325. (2) Khan Academy. http://www.khanacademy.org/ (accessed Mar 2014). (3) Flipping the Classroom, Duke Magazine. http://dukemagazine. duke.edu/article/flipping-classroom (accessed Mar 2014). (4) Arnaud, C. H. Flipping Chemistry Classrooms. Chem. Eng. News 2013, 91, 41−43. (5) Ealy, J. B. Development and Implementation of a First-Semester Hybrid Organic Chemistry Course: Yielding Advantages for Educators and Students. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 303−307. (6) Phipps, L. R. Creating and Teaching a Web-Based, UniversityLevel Introductory Chemistry Course that Incorporates Laboratory Exercises and Active Learning Pedagogies. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 568−573. (7) Boden, C.; Neilson, C. J.; Seaton, J. X. Efficacy of Screen-Capture Tutorials in Literature Search Training: A Pilot Study of a Research Method. Med. Ref. Services Q. 2013, 32, 314−327. (8) Tapscott, D. Grown up Digital: How the Net Generation is Changing your World; McGraw Hill: New York, 2008. (9) Classroom 2.0. http://www.classroom20.com/ (accessed Mar 2014). (10) Procter, R.; Williams, R.; Stewart, J.; Poschen, M.; Snee, H.; Voss, A.; Asgari-Targhi, M. Adoption and use of Web 2.0 in Scholarly Communications. Phil. Trans. R. Soc., A 2010, 368, 4039−4056. (11) Williams, A. J.; Tkachenko, V.; Batchelor, C.; Sharpe, D.; Steele, J. Engaging Students in Publishing on the Internet Early in their Careers. 245th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society April 2013, New Orleans, LA. (12) Whitnell, R. M.; Fernandes, E. A.; Almassizadeh, F.; Love, J. J. C.; Dugan, B. M.; Sawrey, B. A.; Wilson, K. R. Multimedia Chemistry Lectures. J. Chem. Educ. 1994, 71, 721−725. (13) Cox, J. R. Screen Capture on the Fly. Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 2006, 34, 12−16. (14) Capps, K. Chemistry Outlook: An Activity of the Committee on Chemistry in the Two-Year Colleges. Division of Chemical Education, American Chemical Society, 2010. http://www.2yc3.org/Newsletters/ 2010/2010iv.pdf (accessed Mar 2014). (15) Shaw, G. P.; Molnar, D. Non-native English Language Speakers Benefit Most from the Use of Lecture Capture in Medical School. Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 2011, 39, 416−420. (16) DiBacco, P. M.; Hetherington, V. J.; Putman, D. Enhancing Learning through Technology at the Kent State University College of Podiatric Medicine. J. Am. Podiatr. Med. Assos. 2012, 102, 491−498. (17) Kircher, M. F.; Hines-Peralta, A.; Boiselle, P. M.; Donohoe, K.; Siewert, B. Implementation of Screen-Capture Video Recordings of Resident Conferences in an Academic Radiology Department. Acad. Radiol. 2010, 17, 255−263. (18) Laroche, L. H.; Wulfsberg, G.; Young, B. Discovery Videos: A Safe, Tested, Time-Efficient Way to Incorporate Discovery-Laboratory Experiments into the Classroom. J. Chem. Educ. 2003, 80, 962−966. (19) Hudson, R.; Luska, K. L. Recording Tutorials to Increase Student Use and Incorporating Demonstrations to Engage Live Participants. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 527−530. (20) Eklund, A. G.; McGowan, G. J. An Effective Four-Semester, Junior-Senior Approach to a Chemistry Seminar Curriculum. J. Chem. Educ. 2007, 84, 1299−1300. (21) Coppola, B. P. The Distinctiveness of Higher Education. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 955−956.

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Corresponding Author

*E-mail: [email protected]. Notes

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

■

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author gratefully acknowledges the entire ITS team at Alfred University and especially Meghanne Freivald, Anton Flint, and Gary Roberts. Members of the Education Department, especially David Terry and Anne Monroe-Baillargeon, are thanked for valuable conversations about distance learning 683

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300649u | J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 678−683