I read this article on the ‘Future of Educational Video’ off StreamingMedia.com in which the author (Paul Riismandel) wonders what makes for acceptable quality when students create digital content. He draws a nice parallel with writing when he says:
“…holding average students to broadcast quality standards is as absurd as expecting them to write like Maya Angelou or Stephen King. I expect a broadcast journalism student to crank out video worthy of local TV news, just as I would expect a creative writing student to write well enough for a literary magazine. But it’s absurd to expect either of them to change places.”
Lest you think the author doesn’t care about quality, he later writes:
“Quality does matter. A student should never have to strain to understand her teacher’s podcast, and a professor should never have to squint to see what’s in a student’s video. Quality means that the audio or video never detracts from the actual content it contains. Unless the ability to produce video is the point of the assignment, the medium otherwise should be transparent, letting the ideas shine through.”
I couldn’t agree more. I hate the idea that faculty and students would hold back from creating digital video or audio stories simply because they worry that the quality isn’t of a professional level. The transparent media production he talks about is easily achievable and doesn’t require fancy equipment or high-end studios. A little on lighting. A little on framing. And a little on recording audio. I think that would do it.
Maybe showing instructors how this is possible would be a good workshop?
Entries (RSS)