Adventures in Technology Enhanced Learning @ UoP

Tag: communication (Page 1 of 2)

Guest Blogger: Tom Langston – How ChatGPT Revolutionized My Writing Process – The AI version

(Co-writer: ChatGPT)

This version was generated after feeding in my attempt at writing this blog post and asking ChatGPT to ‘shorten this text into a blog post’.

I recently discovered the incredible potential of ChatGPT, and it completely revolutionized the way I approached my writing. As a student pursuing a Professional Doctorate in Education, I often struggled with crafting cohesive and focused assignments. My writing style was scattered and verbose, making it difficult for readers to follow my train of thought. Enter ChatGPT, a powerful AI language model that became my secret weapon in developing a well-structured research proposal.

Initially, I sought human help from my project supervisor, Stephen Webb, who pointed out that my writing relied too heavily on vague terms like “this” and “it.” While I understood the meaning behind my words, Stephen reminded me that readers might not share the same clarity. Armed with his feedback, I set out to improve my proposal.

When I completed the next draft, I thought I was finished. However, the word count was far too high, so I turned to ChatGPT for assistance in condensing my writing. It did the job, but the result lacked my personal touch and voice as a writer. I realized I would have to manually trim down the content to achieve the desired outcome.

During this editing process, I discovered the true power of ChatGPT. I started using it to check sentences that I struggled to articulate clearly. When I asked for grammar assistance, ChatGPT not only provided corrections but also suggested ways to enhance sentence structure and improve readability. This iterative process allowed me to refine my writing, discarding extraneous thoughts and rearranging sentences for better flow. It became evident that if a particular text no longer fit within the new leaner version, despite my attachment to it, it had to be eliminated. This experience epitomized the essence of editing.

As I continued to utilize ChatGPT, I encountered questions of ethics. While it proved immensely useful in reducing my word count, I couldn’t help but feel uneasy about presenting the AI-generated content as my own. The ethical implications of using AI in writing remain a divisive topic, with differing perspectives on its appropriateness and boundaries. To navigate this issue, some suggest referencing AI tools in an appendix, detailing their specific use and purpose in the writing process. However, this raises questions about the extent to which we should acknowledge AI contributions and how that compares to other forms of assistance, such as spell checkers or language tools like Grammarly.

One important consideration is whether AI tools are always correct. While they excel at constructing language, they may strip away the author’s voice and inadvertently introduce errors. In my experience, Grammarly sometimes made corrections to the text generated by ChatGPT, highlighting the need for human judgment in refining the output.

In conclusion, ChatGPT became a game-changer for me, transforming my writing process in ways I had never imagined. I believe it should be embraced as a valuable resource for students to tighten their drafts before seeking extensive academic support. By incorporating AI tools, we can alleviate the burden on educators, who can then focus on reviewing more polished submissions requiring minimal intervention. However, it is crucial to strike a balance and ensure that AI enhances our own voices rather than overshadowing them. AI is undoubtedly here to stay, and by harnessing its power thoughtfully, we can elevate our writing while preserving our unique identities as authors.

Thoughts from the Proofreader:

I was asked to proofread Tom’s blog post here and have a look at ChatGPT’s version too. Comparing the two, I definitely found Tom’s writing much more personable – I could imagine him speaking as I read through it. ChatGPT’s version presented the information efficiently and effectively, and I found nothing to correct. However, in its response to the prompt, it had taken away everything that made Tom sound like Tom!

This experience also really made me realise how many misconceptions I have about AI tools. I’d assumed that ChatGPT would have a very grammatical approach to its interpretation of language – rather like I’ve been told I have! However, when Tom asked it about the difference between ‘that allowed’ and ‘allowing’, ChatGPT talked with authority about implications and potential meanings. This answer was a long way from my interpretation, which attributed the difference to the grammar of relative clauses (X refers to one thing, Y refers to another). As Tom demonstrated with his irony example, it’s worth being cautious with how far we trust its responses. And I think we can be confident that human input will still be needed for a few years (or at least months) yet. 

Credit Image: Photo by Bram Naus on Unsplash

Guest Blogger: Tom Langston – Last Night ChatGPT Saved My Life…

The classic line from Indeep’s 1982 post-disco hit “Last Night a DJ Saved My Life” serves as the basis of my title. As ChatGPT did – not literally, but figuratively – save my life.

I am currently studying for the university’s Professional Doctorate in Education and, since February, have been completing my final taught assignment entitled “Research Proposal”.

It takes me a while to write, as I don’t find it easy, and I am not that good at it. My approach to writing is best described as little and often, frequently getting distracted and losing focus on the task at hand. If you have ever seen Dave Gorman’s “Googlewhack Adventure”, you will understand my problem: his book and stage show outlined how he was meant to write a fictional novel and ended up writing and performing about his experiences of Googlewhacks (Googlewhacking?) instead. He got distracted by less important but much more fun endeavours. 

The other problem is that I don’t get to the point. I write a verbose mess of unconnected thoughts. So with that in mind, I am going to explain how the rise of the machines (we are not far away from ChatGPT working out it wants to be Skynet) assisted me in writing my “research proposal” assignment. 

First Drafts

To start with, I had human help. Stephen Webb, as my project supervisor, read a draft I had written. He demonstrated that a lot of my writing relied on small words to, as he put it “do the heavy lifting”. Using ‘this…’ and ‘it…’ frequently because I understood what I was trying to say –  he pointed out that the reader might not. The only reason he could even start to understand my work was because he knew me and the context of my subject. 

From his extensive feedback, I redrafted, edited and tried to improve my proposal. 

After completing the next draft, I thought I’m done. However, I was well over the word count, so I put sections into ChatGPT and told it to re-write it within my word limit. It only bloomin’ did it! The problem was it was very sterile; it lost all sense of who I am as a writer. This meant I was going to have to manually get the word count down. 

After another version, I asked Stephen for some clarification on some of his earlier feedback. His reply was:

“In the section you sent through, there are still individual sentences that are hard to parse. The initial word of a sentence or clause primes the reader to think in a certain way; if the sentence or clause doesn’t deliver, then confusion arises. You really should pass this through a grammar checker, Tom.”

Not being a confident writer, I already knew that my writing needed work. What this feedback demonstrated to me was that I lacked cohesion and structure. My train of thought constantly jumping around the entire document is a by-product, I guess, of writing in such short unfocussed bursts. 

I wrote a heading titled “Introduction” but did not actually introduce anything. As Stephen had pointed out, I had poorly communicated my narrative. What this meant was that readers were getting lost in my disconnected thoughts. I could now see that certain sections felt shoe-horned in because I liked what I had written. Realistically, those “gems” made no sense to the reader as they were not connected with the text surrounding them. 

I tried to use ChatGPT to see if it could make sense of it, but there was too much there for it to tell me how to rearrange it. The system did not accept the entirety of the text and could not provide clarity to the sections I had written. ChatGPT could not offer clear guidance for how best to rework and rearrange it.

A Quick Aside

At this point, on re-reading the above section, I think it nicely illustrates the problem I was talking about. I have said the same thing here in three different ways. 

  1. I tried to use ChatGPT to see if it could make sense of it, but there was too much there for it to tell me how to rearrange it. 
  2. The system did not accept the entirety of the text and could not provide clarity to the sections I had written. 
  3. ChatGPT could not offer clear guidance for how best to rework and rearrange it.

I only need to use one. In the past, Stephen had raised this issue with me, but it is a hard thing to change. What I am going to discuss next is my recent experiences of using ChatGPT as a tool to develop the parts in my writing I would not have picked up on myself. Heck, as I go back through this blog, I’m sure I’ll find more. I just won’t mention anything I’ve changed, so you’ll never know… 

Editing with ChatGPT

As I worked my way through the editing process, I started to use ChatGPT to check sentences I wanted to keep but was struggling to make coherent. They were either too long, or the idea I was trying to convey was not coming through clearly enough. 

An example of this would be when I asked ChatGPT to “check the grammar”:

My original question:

My situation should be made clear to the participants, allowing them to have fully informed consent, but to also highlight that if they perceive issues in the current hybrid environments I am hoping to act on their concerns and not silence their voices.

ChatGPTs reply:

The grammar of the provided text is correct. However, there are a few suggestions for improving clarity and readability:

“My situation should be made clear to the participants, enabling them to provide fully informed consent. Moreover, it is important to emphasise that if they perceive any issues in the current hybrid environments, I am committed to addressing their concerns and not silencing their voices.”

In this revised version, I made a few adjustments to enhance the sentence structure and clarify the message.

It was this repeated process that helped me (despite, at times, slowing me down) as I kept re-reading the submission each time, trying to tighten up my writing. Finding new thoughts that were slightly out and attempting to move them to the correct place. It became a good rule of thumb that, if the text I wrote did not fit in the new, leaner version, despite how much I wanted to keep it, it was gone. (Well done Tom – you just discovered the true meaning of editing!)

Below is an example of how I started to use ChatGPT to my advantage so I could improve my writing. 

My question to ChatGPT:

Should it be “that allowed” or “allowing” in the following text – 

Before the pandemic only the most confident teaching staff employed interactive tools (Nearpod, Mentimeter, etc.) within a lecture space that allowed students the ability to creatively engage with the material (Tan et al., 2020).

ChatGPTs reply:

Both “that allowed” and “allowing” are grammatically correct in the given sentence. However, the choice between them depends on the intended meaning and emphasis.

“That allowed”

Using “that allowed” suggests that the interactive tools were specifically designed or configured in a way that granted students the ability to creatively engage with the material. It implies that the tools had a built-in functionality or feature enabling such engagement.

“Allowing”

Using “allowing” suggests that the interactive tools, in a general sense, provided the opportunity or capability for students to creatively engage with the material. It implies that the tools had the potential or capacity to facilitate such engagement.

Both options are valid, but if you want to emphasize that the interactive tools had a specific functionality designed to enable creative engagement, “that allowed” would be more suitable. If you want to convey a more general sense of opportunity or capability, “allowing” would be a better choice.

As you can see, ChatGPT helped to explain how the slight difference in the sentence structure changed the meaning of what I was writing. I was able to consider what it was I’m trying to say and use the most appropriate version. 

Through all my previous doctoral assignments, I had a different tutor who helped me with my drafts. They told me they liked my writing style, which gave me the impression I was good at it. I can’t say what they specifically liked about my writing. I can make an educated guess that, because it was a level 8 assessment, my mistakes were forgiven. The marker was able to interpret the little words “that are doing the heavy lifting” (as Stephen had pointed out) more easily than your ‘average’ reader. Stephen helped me understand that it is one thing to have an interesting voice running through your text but is quite something else to actually be good at writing. 

The ethics of using AI

When I got ChatGPT to reduce my word count, I spoke with Stephen about the ethics of it and (ignoring the sanitisation of the output) it felt like a great way for a writer to do this. However, it felt wrong to take what ChatGPT had created as my own.

There is going to be an ethical divide between those who see using any form of AI as wrong and those who see it as a tool for improvement. The problem (as always) lies in the grey area and the boundaries of where people choose to deploy it, for example how far the tool is shaping their work beyond what would have been possible by them alone. While knowing it might be unethical, some will use it due to other commitments (work, family, etc). This scenario is a foreseeable eventuality, much like those who copied other work or paid essay mills for their work. But perhaps AI may feel slightly more ethical? As I am about to discuss, maybe a strong referencing code is what is required. But people (I was going to put students, but felt that unfair as we all have a personal line we move and adjust depending on the subject) will always push and flex the boundaries of fairness.

Referencing AI

In a recent ALT mailing list post, the question was asked about referencing when AI was used to  support work. The reply pointed to Boston University’s faculty of computing and data science guidance “Using generative AI in coursework”. The post highlighted this text:

“When using AI tools on assignments, add an appendix showing

(a) the entire exchange, highlighting the most relevant sections;

(b) a description of precisely which AI tools were used (e.g. ChatGPT private subscription version or DALL-E free version),

(c) an explanation of how the AI tools were used (e.g. to generate ideas, turns of phrase, elements of text, long stretches of text, lines of argument, pieces of evidence, maps of conceptual territory, illustrations of key concepts, etc.);

(d) an account of why AI tools were used (e.g. to save time, to surmount writer’s block, to stimulate thinking, to handle mounting stress, to clarify prose, to translate text, to experiment for fun, etc.).”

This almost feels as if there are too many barriers to use for a subject (or level) where you may be writing assignments of 6000+ words. Especially if you have to reference every section of text AI helped with. The follow-up question is then do you have to highlight every time spellcheck made a correction? Do you have to disclose that you used a service like Grammarly to make minor amendments? That is of course hyperbole. I think that if you get AI to generate starting paragraphs or change substantial amounts of your work, yes, this should be explained in an appendix. For re-writing a sentence and making grammatical choices, then no. That raises another question, how many sentences constitute a substantive change? 

Are AI tools always correct?

The final point relates to whether they are always correct. Now I know these tools are better than me at the construction of language. I have always been better at face-to-face conversations as a form of communication. During a conversation I can see when people don’t understand me, so adapt how and what I say accordingly. Writing does not afford the writer or reader the same luxury. So why do I ask if they are correct? As I have already mentioned, ChatGPT sterilised my voice. When asked to reduce the word count, it did what it was supposed to do but it strips out the humanity of the author (unsurprising being that it is a computer).

Another example (inside a paragraph that starts “The final point”, I do get the irony) is that Grammarly made corrections to the generated text from ChatGPT. 

This is a screenshot of a reply from ChatGPT placed within a box saying 'Both "that allowed" and "allowing" are grammatically correct in the given sentence. This box appears on the lefthand side of the screen on the righthand side is a box created by Grammarly. Grammarly has written Formality, then says to engage with the material creatively. The to-infinitive to engage has been split by the modifier creatively. Avoiding split infinitives can help your writing sounds more formal.
Another “another example” of a final point is: I put the above paragraph into ChatGPT to ask if I had used irony correctly. This is what it said:

Yes, the use of the word “irony” in this context is correct. Irony is a literary device that involves a contrast between expectations and reality. In your statement, you are highlighting the irony in two situations:

The first example of irony is that despite recognizing that language generation tools like ChatGPT are better than you at constructing language, you also acknowledge that you excel at face-to-face conversations where you can adapt and clarify your communication based on people’s reactions. The irony lies in the contrast between the effectiveness of these tools in writing and your personal strength in face-to-face communication.

The second example of irony is that Grammarly, a tool designed to enhance writing and make corrections, ends up making corrections to the text generated by ChatGPT. Here, the irony arises from the fact that a tool meant to improve the quality of the text is itself making changes to the output of another tool that is supposed to assist in generating text.

Overall, both examples demonstrate a contrast between expectations and reality, highlighting the ironic situations in your statement.

The system had not understood how I had used irony in the sentence but said that the overarching point I was making was ironic.

This image is of a person standing, with their eyes focusing as if they're looking at someone else who might be sitting down, because their chin is tilted down a little. The wording across the top of the image reads: I am still none the wiser if I used irony correctly in the parenthesis when I keep adding examples to a final point. The wording along the bottom of the image reads: And at this point I'm too afraid to ask.

Conclusion

In conclusion, ChatGPT ‘saved my life’ by allowing me to interrogate my writing in a way I have never been able to before. We should promote ChatGPT to students as a resource that can help tighten up their drafts before needing academic support. It should be utilised to alleviate the burden on academics, who are often asked to critique early drafts of work. Academics should hopefully then only see much more polished versions of submissions that require less input from them. 

As a final example, I didn’t like my last sentence. ChatGPT gave me another version:

It should be used to relieve the burden on academics who are frequently asked to critique early drafts. Ideally, academics would primarily review more polished submissions that require minimal input.

I didn’t like that version either. Maybe then I should just delete it? That is where the human side wins out over AI, your sense of self and how you want to sound when writing.

AI is here to stay (and take over the world if the Terminator documentaries are anything to go by), but actually, that is alright (AI being here as a tool, not taking over the world). At levels 4 and 5, we need to find creative ways to incorporate AI tools into the assessment process (which may mean fewer essays). Levels 6, 7 and 8, it’s about using AI to help improve our own voice but not lose it. 

The ChatGPT re-write: How ChatGPT Revolutionized My Writing Process – The AI version.

Credit Image: Photo by rupixen.com on Unsplash

Image in the text created by T. Langston using imgflip.com

Lockdown Learning Fatigue – How can we re-engage drifting students

Amy Barlow, National Teaching Fellow and Head of Academic Development reflects on how in TB2 ‘Connection and Belonging’ should be the priority curriculum activities 

Universities first went online in lockdown, March 2020; webcams were fired up, adrenaline was high and we were all navigating teaching from a place of unfamiliarity and novelty while the sun shone outside. Our pets and children became part of the daily Zoom on-screen family as tails hovered across the screen and toys were passed to Mum or Dad during calls. ‘You’re on Mute’ became the unspoken mantra of the working day. Restricted trousers and heels were replaced by comfortable joggers and leggings – it was academia Jim but not as we knew it.

Fast forward to February 2021 and the prolonged need to teach online, during another lockdown (in Winter this time) has resulted in a sense of fatigue for many staff and students. It’s been months since some of our students have been physically on campus and seen their peers and tutors. The ebb and flow of each semester starting and beginning haven’t been felt. They have not experienced the celebratory feel on campus when their assignments are finally all handed in and they have not revelled in the social buzz of navigating their new timetable as teaching resumes and new exciting subjects take centre stage. Lockdown learning fatigue has settled heavily on the shoulders of many and there is a growing concern for their progress when attendance is minimal and much of the well designed self-directed learning is missed, or engaged with, out of sequence. The blend of online tools and the skillset of colleagues, to deliver distance learning is at an all-time high – but how can we bridge the disconnect that seems so apparent for some lecturers staring at empty discussion boards and sitting patiently in silent Zoom rooms?

Studying has become a lonely activity and the multiple ways students orientated their studies previously have stopped. Although on the plus side lockdown has taken away many distractions and time pressures, it has also brought with it a learning environment that has many new barriers especially in terms of mental health and wellbeing. Staying on track week to week and navigating multiple module pages in the VLE is a new method of time management required from students.  In terms of community, the face-to-face interaction and ‘get to know you’ activity which scaffolds peer groups and support structures for students have been diminished. For example, the chats walking out of lectures, the informal opportunity to meet over coffee and a safe space to ask their friends questions are no longer a learning resource available to them. It’s this period of orientation to new modules which is so crucial to the curriculum gaining momentum and to students staying on track. 

Over time, withdrawal from study may escalate into missing a week, or weeks of teaching and then feeling that re-engaging, or attending the Zoom taught session is too much to face. A student, for example, may feel overwhelmed. Some may just feel uncomfortable studying in bedrooms and attending online classes in this private space. Ironically, they are disengaged from the one shared learning experience and readily available support structure which may help them. If they get out of sync with their peers and the module content, it is understandable that they may not want to join in,  feeling embarrassed for not completing the prep work they may have been set. Logging into Moodle may seem daunting when done sporadically – all of sudden there are new posts, everyone is chatting and answering questions and it’s a confusing picture.  This Learning Well resource is useful to help students understand why they may find it hard to concentrate when they are feeling anxious and overwhelmed. It’s on our course and department pages but is a good tool to bridge the subject with them.  Many courses saw at the end of TB1 that all of these factors had resulted in a last-minute assignment panic for many. This was seen when views of recorded sessions spiked in the days prior to deadlines and demand for one-to-one catch up sessions increased. 

Meeting the needs of this students group is new territory for teachers everywhere, who are also battling with their own lockdown fatigue and the challenges of home working. 

So, how can we re-engage students during a time of lockdown learning fatigue?

View our top tips to Re-Engage here.

There is no quick fix. There are, however, some simple steps that can be taken to bring students back into the online learning space. To re-engage and help them all to feel on track – but most importantly relaxed about their studies so they can learn. They need to understand that everyone (including their lecturers)  are sharing the same struggles and anxieties as they are. It’s safe to speak up and share that they feel a bit lost – no one will judge them, they can catch up – it’s all there on Moodle if they feel able to work through the scaffolded learning activities that are set in small chunks. Importantly, they work together as a team to help each other succeed in a difficult time. 

A key recommendation is focusing on the first, three weeks of the module being fun, accessible and social-based around fascinating disciplinary content. This time is make or break in terms of engagement. Then bring in further social, low-pressure activities as the module progresses. Students may not want to keep their videos on during zoom sessions, that’s fine – perhaps a quick wave at the start and a commitment from everyone to communicate with the chat function would help the group to get to know each other. Informal drop-in sessions have been successful in our Faculty of Business and Law to create a social online space to ask the questions that may otherwise seem stupid. For example, setting clear expectations about participation is key, but don’t just tell the students what you expect, ask them to discuss what they think is fair:

Would they like to use their videos during calls? 

Would they expect to contribute to the VLE activities every week or every few days? Are they happy to be part of a group chat (e.g. Whatsapp) just for this group? 

Should all sessions be recorded and available for those who didn’t attend? 

What should they agree to do if they feel they are falling behind?

How will they hold each other to account?

What will the group do if they are confused or have missed content?

Icebreaking and ‘Get to Know You’ activities could feature at the start of each week not just at the start of the module. Many small steps early on can make a big difference – 

Read more at our Re-Engage resources 

Are you struggling with engagement on your module and could use some fresh eyes or advice? Contact your Academic Development Liaison for support :

Faculty of Science – amy.barlow@port.ac.uk

Faculty of Technology – catherine.murgatroyd@port.ac.uk

Faculty of Business and Law – andy.clegg@port.ac.uk

Faculty of Creative and Cultural Industries – stuart.sims@port.ac.uk

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences – andre.van-der-westhuizen@port.ac.uk 

 

Credit Image: Photo by Chris Montgomery on Unsplash

Zoom vs Webex vs Google Meet: Important Features to Compare and Consider

There is a growing need to deliver lectures online and capture online live lectures with the new Blended and Connected learning approach, which was recently introduced by our University to help our students in this challenging time. The Blended and Connected learning approach is driven by our Content Capture policy which emphasizes that “…all students should have access to learning from all formal teaching sessions regardless of whether they are able to physically attend.” Furthermore, with the regulatory requirement that our content needs to meet the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications)(No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018, it is now more important than ever to ensure that our online taught content is captured and captioned. 

The University has a few online conferencing tools available to meet this need. They are all easy to use with some differences between them. This document compares and considers important teaching and learning features in each tool to hopefully help you find the best tool to use for your needs.

On top of that, the University has acquired Panopto which helps to pre-record lectures and has a built-in auto caption facility. It is advisable that all formal teaching sessions, including online live lectures, are captured, uploaded and stored in the Panopto server for caption, security and storage purposes.

But of course, it is almost impossible for any caption, generated by automated speech recognition tools, to achieve 100 per cent accuracy. So, please do check and edit your captions to ensure the accuracy, and add a disclaimer to the video or module site. 

The following text has been officially signed off by Harriet Dunbar-Morris, Dean of Teaching and Learning.

Currently our video content, delivered via Panopto, uses closed captions generated using automated speech recognition. This is about 70–80% accurate depending on the topic, audio quality and lecturer. We advise you not to rely solely on the captions when reviewing your video content. Make sure you check the captions against the PowerPoint and readings to ensure you have a good understanding of the topic and the terminology used. If you are reliant on these captions due to a disability or additional learning need then please contact ASDAC for advice on additional support for your study.

Below is the list of online conferencing tools available in the University and their important learning and teaching features to compare and consider.

Zoom

Zoom is the new online conferencing tool that the University has acquired to support our Blended and Connected learning environment.

Screen or application sharing

  • Zoom allows hosts to easily share their device screen with meeting participants. There’s an option to choose between sharing the complete screen or to share a specific app or document such as Powerpoint or MS word. 
  • Hosts can enable or disable the participant’s ability to share audio, video, and the screen in the meeting.

Mute/Unmute

  • Hosts have a distinct level of control during the meeting. As the host or co-host in a meeting, you can manage your participants, including muting and unmuting participants, to manage background noise and distractions.

Breakout rooms

Remote control

Storage and Caption

  • All Zoom sessions recorded with the ‘cloud recording’ option are automatically uploaded to Panopto and captioned. Please check your captions to ensure the accuracy and add a disclaimer to the video or module site. 

Webex

Webex is a web conferencing and video conferencing application by Cisco Systems.

Screen or application sharing

  • Hosts can easily share their device screen with meeting participants. There’s an option to choose between sharing the complete screen or to share a specific app or document such as Powerpoint or MS word. 

Webex Meeting Center

    • Participants can share the content in the meeting by simply selecting ‘Share’ on the Quick Start tab, Menu Bar and Floating Icon Tray. This feature is enabled by default to make it easier to change presenters in a meeting and improves the overall collaboration experience. If hosts want more control over sharing, they can disable this feature while the meeting is in progress by selecting ‘Participant’ -> uncheck ‘Anyone Can Share’.

Screenshot showing that anyone can share

Webex Training Center

    • By default, the host has to designate participants as the presenter before they can share contents or screen. Hosts can reclaim the presenter role or change the presenter at any time by right-clicking the name on the Participants panel, including the host themselves, then select Change Role To -> Presenter.

A screenshot of how to change the role to presenter

Mute/Unmute

Webex Meeting Center

    • For Webex Meetings, you can choose to prevent attendees from unmuting themselves until you grant them permission to. 

Webex Training Center

    • When you mute participants in Webex Training, only you can unmute them, they can’t unmute themselves.

Breakout rooms

Remote control

(To assign this privilege, while in the session -> select ‘Participant’ -> ‘Assign Privileges’ -> Control shared applications, Web browser, or desktop remotely).

A screenshot of the label showing where to assign privileges

To remote control another participant’s screen in the meeting, the host needs to assign them the presenter role then request them to grant remote access control to the host.

Storage and Caption

  • All recorded Webex sessions should be downloaded and uploaded to Panopto for storage and captioning. Please check your captions to ensure the accuracy and add a disclaimer to the video or module site. 

Webex Meeting Center 

Webex Meeting Center session is recorded in mp4 format. It can be easily uploaded to Panopto.

Webex Training Center

Webex Training Center session is recorded in a Cisco specific .arf format. It needs to be converted to mp4 before uploading to Panopto.

Google meet

Previously known as Hangout, is Google’s video conferencing solution.

Screen or application sharing

  • By default, all participants can share their whole screen or a specific window, or chrome tab during the meeting. Through screen sharing, one can share documents, spreadsheets, presentations, and more. When you share a Chrome tab, it shares the tab’s audio by default. Hence, you can play an online video as well.
  • Hosts can prevent participants from sharing their screen but they need to update this setting for every new call, even if it is a recurring event. 

To prevent sharing:

  1. Join a Meet video call.
  2. At the bottom, click ‘Host controls’.
  3. Turn off ‘Share their screen’.

Mute/Unmute

  • Anyone in a Google Meet conference can mute anyone else.
  • If you mute someone, no one in the conference will be able to hear them.
  • When you mute someone, everyone will be notified that you have muted the person.
  • You cannot unmute someone once they have been muted. They have to unmute themselves. Google says this is for privacy reasons.

Breakout rooms

Remote control

  • Google Meet does not have a built-in option to give remote control over to another person. However, Google has provided a tool that can be used right alongside Google Meet to accomplish this. That tool is called Chrome Remote Desktop.

Storage and Caption

  • All recorded Google meet sessions should be downloaded from Google Drive and uploaded to Panopto for storage and caption. Please check your captions to ensure the accuracy and add a disclaimer to the video or module site. 

 

Credit Image: Image by Hatice EROL from Pixabay

A different way of welcoming students

For both staff and students, the start of a new academic year is, even in normal times, an exciting (and sometimes stressful) occasion. With this year being far from normal, departments are having to adapt to a more virtual environment and for some degree apprenticeship courses, this is going to mean welcoming new students online. On top of the barrage of information all new students have to deal with, our apprentices have additional requirements to meet such as creating an ePortfolio. Indeed, degree apprenticeship applicants to the School of Civil Engineering and Surveying had an online welcome to the department in mid-August while applicants to Business and Law Leadership and Management and Project Management were also welcomed online rather than face to face.

Welcoming and inducting new students is an essential part of starting out on a new educational adventure and moving online does not have to mean losing out completely on the experience of face to face sessions. Applicants to our surveying degree apprenticeship programme were able to ‘meet’ the staff long before they set a foot on campus through welcome videos hosted on a Google site.

Screenshot of the Google Site containing the Welcome page for the School of Civil Engineering & Surveying

Screenshot from the SCES pre-applicant site.

The SCES pre-applicant site provided a user-friendly platform allowing the department to offer prospective apprentices with a wealth of information, helping to create an early connection with the University. Through this site, the pre-applicants could be made aware not just of the demands of the surveying course but also the requirements of the apprenticeship aspects of the course such as the need to maintain a log of their off the job training.

In the words of Module Coordinator Tom Woodbury,
“Due to the restrictions imposed due to the COVID-19 crisis, our Applicant Open Day moved to an online-only format. Working with TECH OCD, we developed the content for the session using a Google Plus site which meant that as well as having the content organised for the day, applicants that could not attend and those wanting to revisit the content were able to access at their convenience. In the end, this method worked out really well, and seemed very well-received by attendees.”

The sites helped prepare students for some of the skills that they will need to help complete their course successfully, for example, what IT skills will be required and offered early access to study support information and library facilities.

This model was also used by the faculty of Business and Law for their Chartered Manager DA, Project Management DA and their MBA DA course. The ease with which Google sites can be used to create web pages also meant the sites could be put together and published relatively quickly. However, the structure that Google sites forces on the user can be a little frustrating at times, but this can be overcome with some bespoke HTML.

Screen shot of one of the pages on the Google Site it's titled: IT Skills Required

For courses starting before the official October re-opening of the University, the sites were an important way to communicate with students. The sites were not made public and anyone accessing the site needed the actual link that was sent out to the prospective students. Google Analytics was used to monitor the level of access and early data indicated many applicants were using the sites. With Google sites already being used extensively by Business and Law degree apprentices for their ePortfolios, using them as a way of welcoming new apprentices in these unusual times seemed a logical and workable solution but it will be interesting to collect feedback from the students.

Photo by Kaboompics .com from Pexels

Zoom Vs Meet Vs WebEx

With the new term fast approaching it can feel pretty daunting with all this new terminology and jargon to learn. Within the TEL team, we have received quite a few queries from staff about what’s the ‘best’ technology to use when it comes to online video conferencing and meetings, particularly when it comes to Zoom, Meet and WebEX. It’s a good question! The short answer is all of them, which doesn’t help I know. So firstly we advise to think about what you want to ‘achieve’, what’s the purpose of using the technology, is it to create an online classroom within Moodle? Is it to create an event, with conference-style presentations? Or is it just for a one-to-one chat? All have pros and cons which we have tried to outline in this post below. We hope you find it useful!

Let’s get started!

There are many articles that cover what each system does and the benefits of each one, some of which are featured below: 

From the University’s perspective, we have licences for all 3. So where articles talk about the limitations of a free licence, they do not apply to us for Zoom, WebEx or Meet. 

My quick summary of each tool from a “Virtual Classroom” and learning and teaching perspective is this:

Zoom
  • Can add a classroom directly in Moodle
  • Has video-enabled breakout rooms
  • There is no link between Moodle and the creation of the breakout sessions. 
  • 300 users with no time limit
  • Can be password protected
  • Has a waiting room
  • Can be set to allow access before the host
WebEx
  • The biggest issue with WebEx is it is actually four products with each version offering something different. 
    • WebEx Meeting – For Meetings, has no breakouts
    • WebEx Training Centre – For teaching, has breakouts but poor video share (most geared towards a virtual classroom with permissions etc)
    • WebEx Events – For conference-style presentations
    • WebEx Support – For providing a supportive environment.
  • Can add a classroom directly in Moodle
  • Has audio-only breakout rooms using WebEx Training centre.
  • 1000 users with no time limit
  • No waiting room
Google Meet
  • Not designed as a classroom
  • No admin features
  • No breakout sessions
  • No Moodle integration
  • Loads of plugin features such as Tactiq for a live transcription which saves to your Google Drive.

What I would like to offer, however, is the ability for you to share your experiences of each system, both positive and negative, so that a more realistic and natural picture can be shared between academic staff.

Made with Padlet

Remember we, the TEL team, are here to support you to get to grips with these new technologies, so please feel free to contact us at elearn@port.ac.uk if you do have a query. We also offer TEL Me How Surgeries twice quickly where we can go over any questions or queries you may have. The 2-hour sessions focus on supporting staff with the transition to online delivery and offering guidance around alternative forms of online assessment, please book your place here.

Credit Image: Photo by NordWood Themes on Unsplash

Guest Blogger: Fiona Cook – Isolation Reflections and Co-worker Jealousy

A month ago I posted on LinkedIn, sharing what I’d learnt about working from home after doing so for three weeks. Yesterday, I was asked if my advice would still be the same and I realise that seven weeks of home working, with an unknown number of weeks left, meant it wouldn’t be. 

There are still a few basics that help me. I only work at my desk, in my spare room, so that I can keep a work-life balance and switch off when I’m done for the day. I also have space from my boyfriend so that we can catch up with friends independently, as we would do in the outside world. The rest, however, has evolved a bit since I first shared it.

Two computer screens on and a cat sitting on a chair in front of them looking at the screens

I’m now less fussed about dressing as I would for work every day. Although I’m lucky to have a fairly decent desk set-up it’s not completely optimal, so I have put a bit more value on being comfortable in what I wear. This also helps ensure I have time for a workout at lunch, which is actually something I’ll surprisingly miss when I’m back in the office. And no-one can see my trackies in a video meeting, anyway! 

I drink less hot drinks when the weather is warmer but I’m still making sure I’m taking breaks when I need them. There’s a quote I’ve seen a lot which is “You are not working from home; you are at your home during a crisis trying to work.” This really resonates with me and it’s a great reminder that things aren’t normal right now and we can’t be expected to act as if they were. My boss has been flexible and supportive and I know that it’s okay if I’m not quite with it sometimes. 

Staying in touch with people, both for work and socially, hasn’t been too hard – even with the odd technical glitch. However, last week a lot of people seemed to be getting fatigued with lockdown and I actually felt socially drained. I’ve found that people are reaching out more than usual and whilst it’s great to know that friends want to stay in touch I felt my introverted self wanting to hide after four days of video calls and messages from numerous group chats. My boyfriend and I now make sure one evening a week is a phone-free film night so that we can focus on ourselves and not be glued to screens all the time. I also try not to feel bad about ignoring my phone when I need to switch off, and my friends completely understand when I explain why I’ve gone awol. That being said, despite the anxiety of having video calls with friendship groups for the first time, I arranged a video quiz with friends who I ordinarily might not have seen as a group and it was really wonderful to see their faces. 

I’ve also not gone on many walks lately. As I don’t drive I already had a recurring food delivery pre-lockdown and the deliveries are slowly becoming more reliable so I haven’t often had to go out, which I’m grateful for. Part of me feels like I’m wasting the sunshine and Pompey seafront, but I’m able to work out in my lounge and sit in the garden so I can still get exercise and fresh air. I want to go out, and I imagine I will soon, but I know it’s safer at home so I’m trying not to beat myself up for staying safe when I can. 

It’s not easy, especially as people close to me have to go out to work or deal with difficult employers, but we all need to work out what is best for us and our individual circumstances without comparing everything we do. I’ve only baked twice, I’d already recently started exercising, and I’m not learning any new skills. It’s okay to focus on your wellbeing to get through this and not emerge as a new shiny version of yourself, which is definitely worth remembering during Cat curled up fast asleep on a cover Mental Health Awareness Week. Be kind, to others but also to yourself.

Oh, and I’m also still very jealous of my new colleagues who sleep all day.

 

 

Credit Image: Photo by Mish Vizesi on Unsplash

Episode 10 – Bartolomeo Meletti from Learning on Screen – Copyright

TelTales Podcast
TelTales Podcast
Episode 10 - Bartolomeo Meletti from Learning on Screen - Copyright
Loading
/

Copyright Resources:

copyrightuser.org

learningonscreen.ac.uk

The Game is On

BoB National

IPKat

1709 Blog

Nowhere Land – Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

Hold – A rewarding app

What is it?

Hold is an app aimed at students that discourages them from using their mobile phone. Hold works by presenting a timer on screen that awards points every 20 mins. If you do exit the app, you receive a warning, and then if you don’t go back the timer resets to zero and you have to start again. The points that you earn can be converted into real-world prizes, such as; Amazon vouchers, coffee shop vouchers, and cinema treats.

The app certainly caught our eye in the TEL office after the BBC published an interesting article about it.

Hold App

Why use it?

Hold is clearly targeted at students who need a way to counter an addiction to using their phones, and is trying to help those students to focus on their lectures, reading or revision. It’s particularly popular in Norway where 40% of students are using Hold to help focus on learning and break their addiction.

What next?

Smart phones have changed how we interact with the world, they provide 24/7 social interaction that is now the norm for many of us, especially young people who have never known any different. Yet some experts are already highlighting how this new lifestyle may not be healthy, so perhaps any way to gain a little more control over our digital lives should be seen as a good thing.

If the amount of users of the app increases it could be a fantastic way to focus the attention of those students who are easily distracted both in and outside of the classroom.

We are living in a digital age, many academics are using phones and tablets as part of their teaching. It could be seen as sending a mixed message if you simultaneously ask students to put away their devices, as they prevent them from concentrating, and also ask them to use mobile technology to learn in class.

It is more than likely that the creators of this app, and those like it, are hoping to tackle the issues of those students who struggle to focus their time on learning. It is not meant to destabilise any attempts at implementing new and innovative teaching tools in the classroom.

Apps like Hold do however raise the wider issue of how much a university is expecting the student to provide their own device for learning interactions. Should more money be put into providing each student with a learning device? Where once it was expected the student brings a pen and paper, should that expectation now be that they have a tablet or PC/Chromebook that they use for their note taking and/or classroom interactions?

« Older posts

© 2024 Tel Tales

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑