23rd Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning
For more resources: http://www.uwex.edu/disted/conference
Lecture Webcasting at the University of Texas at Austin
Coco Kishi
Senior Systems Analyst, Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment
The University of Texas at Austin
Tomoko Traphagan
Research Associate, Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment
The University of Texas at Austin
Comparison of Webcasting Systems
Interest in lecture Webcasting is growing, as is the number and types of commercial turnkey tools that are
available to produce rich media presentations for live and on-demand viewing. These tools or systems—a
hardware appliance in combination with server software—facilitate the capture and synchronization of the
video/audio of the lecturer along with presentation materials, as well as the compression and encoding of
the media in various formats. By themselves these systems cannot provide complete automation of lecture
recording, however. Still required is purchase and operation of cameras, audio mixers, file storage
systems, and servers and their integration into the existing infrastructure with varying degrees of system
scheduling and management.
Primary considerations when selecting a Webcasting system are the type of visual content that will be
streamed—still images (PowerPoint) vs. time-based (videos)—desired visual quality (resolution),
bandwidth requirements, level of desired automation in scheduling and managing Webcasts, user
interface, and ease of integration with existing infrastructure. Additional considerations include providing
for automatic archiving, type of server and output format, preferred OS of audience, plug-in requirements
to view webcasts, and availability of technical staff to develop desired additional components. Current
costs for such systems are in the range of $9-12K for a basic encoding appliance (one unit per classroom),
with up to an additional $20K needed for servers and licenses, management software, and maintenance
support. Table 1 shows a comparison of key features of three systems in use at UT Austin, which are
similar in that they all offer both mobile and static (rank mount) encoder units, handle multiple inputs
(audio/video, VGA-digital output from any device such as laptop, document camera, projector), and
provide live streaming viewable on PC or Mac using all major browsers.
The College of Communication uses VBrick’s VB Cast (encoder) and EtherneTV (media control system
and scheduler), which can be automated and scaled to manage multiple video signals and output multiple
open standard (MPEG4) streams. This system was selected because of the time-based instructional
content (video) most often shown by faculty in the small to medium sized classes in the college. The
flexibility of this system allows it to be easily integrated into existing infrastructure; however, it does not
come with as many built-in features as do the other systems, and it is not ideal for streaming visually
complex still-image content. The College of Natural Sciences has installed Envivio’s Mindshare
Composer (encoder) with 4Sight server, integrating it with a custom-built event scheduler, storage area
network, and a “virtual cameraman” to automate lecture recordings in some of the largest classrooms on
campus. This system was selected because it manages multiple video signals and outputs a single,
multilayered, interactive, high-quality, open standard (MPEG4) stream. Its intuitive interface displays
both time-based (video) and still-image (PowerPoint) content at very high resolution, and hence requires
relatively high-bandwidth. It also requires a proprietary plug-in for viewing, but that has not been a
problem for users. The Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment (DIIA) and the College of
Engineering use Sonic Foundry’s MediaSite (encoder and server software) to stream still-image intensive
content (PowerPoint) from medium- to large-enrollment lecture courses. This system was selected
Copyright 2007 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System
Duplication or redistribution prohibited without written permission of the
author(s) and the Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning
1
23rd Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning
For more resources: http://www.uwex.edu/disted/conference
because it offers many useful built-in features, it is easy to operate, and it can deliver high-resolution stillimage content at lower bandwidths. However, it is limited to Windows Media player and requires
Windows Media Server to operate, and it is not ideal for streaming time-based instructional content.
Table 1. Comparison of Systems Used at UT Austin
Sonic Foundry
VBrick
Products
MediaSite ML440 with server VB Cast with
software
EtherneTV
Server
Windows Media Server
Any
Output as
Windows Media, video
MPEG-4, both video
implemented
capture at 180 x 240 and 15
and VGA at 320 x 240
fps, VGA capture using high- and 30 fps.
resolution (1024 x 768) JPG
snapshots up to 5 fps. Direct
to MP3 and CD/DVD avail.
Output
35 to 300 kbps (typically set
Averaging 600 kbps
Bandwidth
at 150 kbps), defaults to 35
(not recommended for
kbps on Macintosh
dial-up)
Player
Windows Media Player
QuickTime, Real
requirements
Player, or Windows
Media Player
Video quality
Low on Macs, good on PCs
Good, dependent on
player and platform
User Interface Customizable interface
No interface provided,
templates come with system.
created a simple 2User controlled slide or video window synchronized
viewer.
window enlargement.
Polling and emailing function
included
Playback
Available using PC only, as
Using Windows Media
speed control
feature of Windows Media
on PC only
Provisions for Can integrate live captioning None
Captioning
only in newest version
Content search Slide thumbnails
None, other than video
features
automatically generated.
controls (fast forward,
Video controls (fast forward, rewind)
rewind) (Chapter indexes and
text search are available in
new version)
Automatic
Yes, disk storage comes with No storage for
archiving provided.
archiving for
system
Developed SAN
on-demand
integration
viewing
Event
Web-based access to
Web-based access to
management
scheduler comes with system scheduler comes with
EtherneTV
Automatic
Not in version implemented.
None
viewer
(New version comes with
tracking
viewer tracking)
Copyright 2007 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System
Duplication or redistribution prohibited without written permission of the
author(s) and the Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning
Envivio
Mindshare Composer with 4Sight
streaming server software
Any
MPEG-4, video capture at 640 x
480 up to 30 fps.
VGA capture in high-resolution
(up to 1024 x 768) averaging 5
fps. Direct to MP3 and CD/DVD
available
Averaging 1000 kbps (cannot be
watched with dial-up)
Requires proprietary plug-in to
view in QuickTime, Real Player,
Windows Media Player, ActiveX
Generally very good, dependent
on player and platform
Customizable interface templates
come with system.
User controlled independent
placement, transparency and
enlargement of video/slide
windows.
Using Windows Media on PC
only
None
Chapter indexing available but
was not implemented for class
webcasting. Video controls (fast
forward, rewind)
Yes, disk storage comes with
system, however developed local
SAN integration instead.
Created it separately and
integrated it with system
IP address tracking possible
2
23rd Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning
For more resources: http://www.uwex.edu/disted/conference
The systems in use at UT Austin have been successfully integrated into their areas of operation because
technical staff have been able to develop additional functionality and efficiency. Because lecture
webcasting at UT Austin is still an emerging technology with relatively limited and localized offerings,
many issues—such as bandwidth, player flexibility and the need for full automation, management and
integration—have not yet reached an enterprise level of consideration, but the dialog is beginning.
Student Survey and Summary of Results
At UT Austin, Webcasting has been offered as a study tool, not as a substitute for attending class. To
understand the impact of webcasting on students in medium- to large-enrollment courses, surveys were
conducted in select classes that were Webcast using the MediaSite or Envivio systems in 2005 and 2006.
Table 2 summarizes survey results.
Table 2. Survey Results
Webcasting
System
Course/Section
Survey
Format
paper
survey
Dates
Enrollment
Response
Rate
GEO 303
11/28/05153
89% (136)
Introduction to Geology
12/2/05
GEO 302D
181
11% (20)
MediaSite
12/8/05Age of Dinosaurs
online
1/16/06
GEO 302P
survey
256
17% (43)
Living with a Planet
PGE 383
online
4/24/06MediaSite
37
49% (18)
Advanced Production Engineering
survey
5/26/06
(graduate course)
CH 301 Principles of Chemistry I
online
4/24/06Envivio
1512
8% (122)
CH 302 Principles of Chemistry II1
survey
5/26/06
CH 310N Organic Chemistry II
In view of low response rates for the online surveys, caution is necessary in interpreting the results.
The nature of survey questions and student response patterns did not reflect differences in the webcasting
systems, so the results should be interpreted as reflecting the impact of Webcasting in general, rather than
of specific Webcasting systems. Results from a previous year’s Webcasting study at UT Austin are also
included when relevant.
•
•
1
Attendance: One primary faculty concern is that Webcasting will decrease class attendance. While a
majority of students in all classes (57-83%) reported that they preferred receiving course content in
class rather than in other ways, many students (52-72%) skipped lectures at least once because of
Webcasts. In fact, in a quasi-experimental study in the same geology course (GEO303), a statistically
significant decrease in attendance was found for the Webcast section as compared to the non-Webcast
section. But, the frequency of class skipping because of Webcasts may be generally low. In chemistry
and engineering, a majority of students (63-66%) reported that they never used Webcasts instead of
attending class, or did so only rarely (31% in geology). Also, it was found that attendance could be
effectively increased using certain teaching strategies, such as clearly communicating instructors’
expectations of attendance, employing in-class activities, and having pop-quizzes.
Learning: In a quasi-experimental study in a geology course (GEO303), no statistically significant
difference in test/quiz scores was found between Webcast and non-Webcast sections, even though the
attendance rate was lower in the Webcast section. In a previous study concerning a UT Austin
There were two Webcast courses of CH302 Principles of Chemistry II taught by two different instructors.
Copyright 2007 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System
Duplication or redistribution prohibited without written permission of the
author(s) and the Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning
3
23rd Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning
•
•
•
•
•
•
For more resources: http://www.uwex.edu/disted/conference
government course, students who more frequently watched webcasts performed better on the final
exam (fall 2005). Student interviewees suggested that webcasts helped them improve their
performance, while instructors’ perceptions of the effects of webcasts on performance were mixed.
Comparing the webcasts with being in class: Geology students tended to agree more frequently (48%)
than did students in other classes (19%) that Webcasts can replace being in class, that Webcasts are as
good as going to class (57% vs. 25-38%), and that Webcasts helped them learn course material better
than being in class (36% vs. 20-25%). More engineering and chemistry students (53-63%) stated that
they would not take a course that is entirely Webcast (39% in geology). But half (50-51%) of the
geology and chemistry students agreed or strongly agreed that they would enroll in two courses
offered at the same time if at least one were being Webcast (40% in engineering).
Course satisfaction: A majority of students reported that Webcasts were important to their overall
course satisfaction, geology and engineering students in particular (59-63% agree/strongly agree, 42%
in chemistry). Students considered Webcasts to be relatively more effective than office hours for
helping them succeed in class in all colleges. In geology, students tended to consider Webcasts to be
more effective than face-to-face lectures, which was not the case in the other disciplines. Other course
resources (e.g., PowerPoint slides, online lecture notes) were considered more effective than
Webcasts in geology and engineering, but not in chemistry.
Reason for watching Webcasts: Students cited learning and psychological benefits in watching
Webcasts: (a) to make up for a missed class (50-82%), (b) to study and review course content (3270%), (c) to understand lecture content better (42-67%), (d) to reduce anxiety about the course (3769%), and (e) to control how they learned (57-87%).
Most students watched at least one Webcast, averaging 7 (chemistry) to 11-12 (geology and
engineering) views during the semester. They typically watched the entire Webcast, most intensively
before exams or during the same week as the lecture, during evening and night, and from home using
high-speed Internet connections.
Quality and difficulties: Most students (63-91%) in all colleges were satisfied with the overall quality
of Webcasts. Geology students reported experiencing difficulties less frequently (9%) than did
chemistry (17%) and engineering (37%) students. In geology, problems with sound volume (31%)
and sound quality (22%) were reported most frequently. In chemistry, slow loading (47%) and slide
and movie synchronization problems (25%) were reported most frequently. In engineering, slow
loading (44%), slide and movie synchronization problems (39%), and video quality problems (39%)
were reported most frequently. Students in all colleges typically did not seek any help when they had
technical difficulties.
Important features: In all classes, students considered important was seeing the blackboard or slides
(90-100%), having play/stop/pause/fast forward/rewind (87-100%), scanning through the video (83100%), having an index or search function (73-81%), and manipulating windows (70-80%).
While these results suggest that webcasting offers learning and psychological benefits to students, the
findings are as yet inconclusive, so it is critical to continue investigating the effects of webcasting and
informing our future practices in integrating Webcasting into UT Austin courses.
References
Brittain, S., Glowacki, P., Ittersum J. V., & Johnson, L. (2006). Podcasting lectures: Formative evaluation
strategies helped identify a solution to a learning dilemma. Educase Quarterly, (3), 24-31.
Harley, D., Henke, J., Lawrence, S., McMartin, F., Maher, M., Gawlik, M., & Muller, P. (2003, March 1).
Costs, culture, and complexity: An analysis of technology enhancements in a large lecture course
at UC Berkeley. Retrieved April 25, 2007, from University of California, Center for Studies in
Higher Education Web site: http://repositories.cdlib.org/cshe/CSHE3-03/
Copyright 2007 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System
Duplication or redistribution prohibited without written permission of the
author(s) and the Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning
4
23rd Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning
For more resources: http://www.uwex.edu/disted/conference
Traphagan, T. (2005). Class lecture Webcasting, Fall 2004 and Spring 2005: A case study. Retrieved
April 26, 2007, from the University of Texas at Austin, Division of Instructional Innovation and
Assessment Web site:
http://www.utexas.edu/academic/mec/publication/pdf/fulltext/webcast0405casestudy.pdf (for the
appendices:
http://www.utexas.edu/academic/mec/publication/pdf/fulltext/webcast0405programeval.pdf)
Traphagan, T. (2006a). Class lecture Webcasting, Fall 2005: A case study. Retrieved April 26, 2007, from
the University of Texas at Austin, Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment Web site:
http://www.utexas.edu/academic/mec/publication/pdf/fulltext/classlecturewebcasting.pdf
Traphagan, T. (2006b). Class lecture Webcasting, Fall 2004, Spring 2005, and Fall 2005: Summary of
three case studies. Retrieved April 26, 2007, from the University of Texas at Austin, Division of
Instructional Innovation and Assessment Web site:
http://www.utexas.edu/academic/mec/publication/pdf/fulltext/webcast_summary.pdf
Biographical Sketches
Tomoko Watanabe Traphagan is a research associate in the Division of Instructional Innovation and
Assessment at the University of Texas at Austin. She has been involved in research and evaluation of
various instructional technology programs at the university, including webcasting, Second Life, digital
media services, course management systems, Web-based inquiry-based learning, and usability of
instructional websites. Her research interests concern the impact of technology on students’ learning
behaviors and performance.
Address: The University of Texas at Austin
Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment
Continuing and Innovative Education
P.O. Box 7246
2616 Wichita Street
Austin, TX 78713-7246
E-mail:
tomoko.traphagan@austin.utexas.edu
URL:
www.utexas.edu/academic/diia
Phone:
512-232-2646
Fax:
512-471-3509
Coco Kishi is manager of the New Media Group at the Division of Instructional Innovation and
Assessment at the University of Texas at Austin. She coordinates research and development for campus
instructional technology projects and services in new media technologies in everything from streaming
media to 3D visualization.
Address: The University of Texas at Austin
Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment
Continuing and Innovative Education
P.O. Box 7817
Austin, TX 78713-7817
E-mail:
coco@uts.cc.utexas.edu
URL:
www.utexas.edu/academic/diia
Phone:
512-475-6050
Fax:
512-475-6353
Copyright 2007 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System
Duplication or redistribution prohibited without written permission of the
author(s) and the Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning
5