Tegrity
Lecture Capture Pilot Project Summary
June 2009
In February 2009, Chabot College was offered the chance for up to five faculty colleagues to try out the Tegrity (www.tegrity.com) software-based lecture capture system, for free, with unlimited ‘hosting’ of lectures that were recorded and uploaded, and unlimited access by our students to that material. With the help of the college’s Committee On Online Learning, its chair Jan Novak, and Tom Clark, Dean of Applied Technology and Business, we were able to take advantage of the opportunity, and try out the system.
Between the participants, we recorded almost 30 hours of live lectures from 58 different class sections in 10 different courses. More than 100 students accessed the lectures and provided useful feedback. We recorded lectures with PowerPoint slides accompanied by audio narration, as well as lectures using whiteboards. A shared demonstration access area was set up for colleagues at Chabot to check out some of the recorded lectures at:
http://hera-chabot.tegrity.com userid: chabot password: tegrity
Through the pilot, we learned a great deal about how lecture capture could work at Chabot, and definitely gained valuable experience within our own classrooms about audio, video, and effectively imaging chalkboard/whiteboard work for later viewing on a computer screen. Students in the pilot courses had the chance to look at their lectures, and uniformly expressed the thought that a lecture capture system, in place at the start of a term, could be of significant help in their learning. They felt such a system would given them a way to see and hear lectures again after class, to assist with their studying, and give them a “safety net” were they to miss class.
What is Tegrity?
Tegrity runs on a PC or Mac in a classroom as an application; anything that can be shown on the computer (PowerPoint slides, webpages, simulations, etc.) and any audio or video source attached to the computer in a lecture is automatically recorded, bundled, uploaded to an external server, and made available online to students for viewing and searching from any computer, anywhere, anytime after the lecture. Recording lectures requires the downloading of a special application that self-installed in less than a minute; viewing lectures required students to download a similar free web application to their preferred computer.
Unlike YouTube videos that are uploaded and made available in the public domain, Tegrity recordings are kept on a private server. Students access the recordings online, usually using their “W” numbers for a userid and a password, although these could be set to any values we desired. Student access was logged by userid, and made available via easy-to-create reports.
There are other lecture capture systems available in the marketplace, some requiring additional specialized hardware, and some requiring streaming servers already in place within a campus’ computing network. Tegrity offers hosting services which meant that we could try their software without requiring any network equipment, upgrades, or support.
What was the Pilot
Project Designed to Do?
Who Participated in
the Tegrity Pilot?
After putting out a general note to all Chabot Faculty soliciting interest, we received a dozen responses, from which five faculty were initially selected to participate:
Trish Shannon (Philosophy 50)
Veronica Martinez (Speech 1/3/10
Ashley Long (Machine Tool Technology – Numerical Control 1 & Solid Modeling)
Wanda Wong (Business 1A, Computer Science 14)
Cedric Pounds (Digital Media 36B)
Scott Hildreth served as pilot project coordinator, and also recorded lectures in Astronomy 10 and Physics 4C.
What did the Pilot
Project Require of Chabot?
To participate in the free Tegrity Pilot,
Because the Tegrity system is software based, we could use it on existing laptop and smart classroom computers. One pilot participant used a laptop shared within her division, one used a laptop loaned to the project from Media Services, and one used a personal laptop. Additional hardware for the pilot project (6 wireless USB microphones and 5 webcams) cost $1800; these were general purpose equipment and are now available for use by faculty for other applications. Stipends for participating faculty, underwritten by the COOL committee, totaled $2000.
From March through May, participants met five times to be trained, and to discuss progress, share ideas, and collaborate.
What did we learn
about setting up a lecture capture system at Chabot?
As with almost any technology, successful implementation requires planning and teamwork. The pilot would not have happened without the help of many colleagues across the institution. Once it was decided that this project was something worth pursuing, we had to discuss, review, and sign the pilot contract, requiring conversations with campus administration. Vice President Gene Groppetti was extremely supportive and encouraged the innovation. We had to research, order and receive necessary equipment in two weeks, which was facilitated wonderfully by Jan Novak and Tom Clark. Because the equipment was attaching to computers in smart classrooms, we needed to coordinate with Media Services as well as Chabot’s Computer Support Team. Because the application involved network traffic implications, we needed to involve the District’s IT group.
We also had to establish whether the rooms each faculty member was teaching within were wired to the internet, and whether the computers present in faculty offices and affected classrooms were capable of running Tegrity software. Downloading the software required administrator privileges that campus faculty do not have, necessitating Computer Support’s help. In at least two cases, office and room computers needed video driver updates. In the case of Trish Shannon’s Philosophy 50 class, taught in the Little Theater using a computer shared within the Fine Arts Division, the logistics of setup and takedown of the equipment required additional time and support from Kari McAllister. And since the computer was not able to be left connected to the web after the lecture, and no campus wireless network exists within the division office, lectures could not automatically be uploaded.
As is typical for projects that get started late, we struggled finding common times to meet, and finding time to devote to trying the system in our classrooms. Our adjunct colleague in the pilot, Cedric Pounds, wasn’t able to attend on-campus meetings with the rest of the team, and ultimately was not able to give the system a real try in his class, much as he wanted to do so. This points to the difficulty we often face leveraging technology with faculty who are not full-time.
What did we learn
about Tegrity and Lecture Capture?
The Tegrity system was indeed very easy to use – with minimal training (one demonstration, some individual hands-on training, and personal exploration time) we were able to capture lectures on our computers with confidence. And students could access the lectures 24/7 as promised. A few students reported problems with the installation of a plug-in that was required for their browsers, and some reported problems with particular browsers (like Firefox). But after a few trials, faculty were able to plug in the microphone, start the recorder, click on the “GO” button, and lecture.
Tegrity’s support during the trial was very good – training on how to setup the system was fast and easy, phone and email questions were answered immediately, and they clearly showed an interest in making Chabot successful. Software glitches that occurred were researched and quickly resolved, and alternative approaches identified.
Setting up the Tegrity system for faculty and student access was very straightforward, requiring one administrator to enter in course names, user names, and passwords, and then cross-referencing users to the courses. All of this was done with a simple Excel spreadsheet which could be maintained and uploaded anytime, from anywhere, making changes very easy to accomplish. (And were the campus to opt for a full-scale implementation of Tegrity, students and courses could be automatically loaded into the system from Banner.
What were Tegrity’s
Strengths and Limitations?
Tegrity’s strengths were its ability to capture audio narration of PowerPoint or Web-based lecture presentations, its ease of use, and its ability to offer hosting and access to our students without any institutional servers or network support. Once recorded, an audio/computer-screen presentation could be uploaded quickly (e.g. 30+ minute PowerPoint/Web lectures enhanced with audio uploaded from a classroom to the Tegrity server in 5-10 minutes on the campus network). These types of lectures were automatically indexed by Tegrity, allowing users to skip to any slide within a presentation, and to search on terms that appear as text within the presentation. Students could search on a key term that might have been used on a slide or in a webpage, as long as the term was indeed text, and find every occurrence of that term in the lecture on any and all slides, and then with one click they could access that particular slide.
Tegrity’s limitations were mostly related to video. The standard Tegrity recording interface provides one larger viewing window for the computer screen image (PowerPoint or web application) and one “picture-in-picture” window which could be a static image, or a webcam image of the lecturer talking while the slides were advanced. When instructors wanted to shift from PowerPoint mode to a webcamera, the camera window could not be made larger without stopping the recording and starting another session. If instead the instructor wanted to maximize the camera window, then the PowerPoint slides could not be seen. It was an either-or choice, rather than providing the flexibility for a user to decide during the lecture which screen – computer or camera – should be larger.
The webcams were very good for individual face close-up shots, which could be used by faculty to record while in their offices or at home. But they simply were inadequate to capture details written on the chalkboards. And “pixilation” became distracting when small-window video was maximized to the large screen size.
To effectively capture chalkboard or whiteboard work requires a higher-resolution camera placed optimally in the room – webcams were just not good enough, even though we purchased high-resolution face-following cameras. Attempting to capture equations or drawings on white boards was challenging with the webcams given the reflectivity of the boards and room lighting, requiring tinkering with white balance, contrast, and auto-focus settings.
But setting up better camcorders with tripods before a lecture, and connecting them to the computer, getting the system primed to record, and audio levels checked - and then taking everything apart after the lecture, is more than most faculty can reasonably do. And there were some difficulties identifying what specific types of cameras would work with the Tegrity recorder software, requiring quite a bit of trial and error on the part of two of us until we found some that worked.
The USB wireless microphones were easy to install and produced fair sound quality if held at the right distance and not left in a pocket, and if turned on when the lecture started. They could not capture student comments from elsewhere in a room. A directional room microphone should be considered for classes where significant student interaction needs to be captured.
A more complete list of strengths and limitations of the Tegrity system are attached after the conclusion of this report.
What did we not get a
chance to explore?
Tegrity has many significant features we didn’t fully exercise, including tracking student usage and tying that to performance on assessment, and recording student videos for uploading and review by the rest of the class. We were not able to use the system long enough to see whether students who used it did better on exams. Only one or two student videos were recorded. The Tegrity playback feature allows users to slow down or speed up the accompanying audio stream in a lecture, and we weren’t able to survey whether this was a feature students might appreciate – especially those for whom English is not their native language.
What did the students
say?
The most obvious student comments that ran through all of the responses collected was that students wished they could have used the technology from the beginning of the class, rather than starting as we did in April. We did not have adequate time to really address whether recording the lectures would change student study habits, would lead to better success on exams, or would lead to improved retention. The survey responses received were almost unanimous in recommending that the lecture capture idea was one we should promote; most students cited the idea that they could miss a lecture and be able to catch up, or review a lecture to catch what they missed or possibly didn’t understand. Most students who did respond reported the software to be easy to use, with only a few students sharing that they could not
Summaries of student comments are attached in the appendix; the survey instrument was provided by Tegrity. Although we could have designed our own, in the interest of time we decided to use what was available.
What did the faculty
say about how lecture capture could benefit Chabot’s students?
Participants liked the idea of lecture capture very much. We feel it has potential to help many of our students significantly, in many distinct ways:
-
Capturing lectures provides students who were in
attendance the chance to review key concepts anytime, anywhere after class.
-
Capturing audio can significantly enrich the learning
experience for students who might not understand or process information spoken
by their professors as quickly as we sometimes delivery that information.
-
Capturing lectures provides conscientious students
convenient access to their class without interruption when they must miss class
because of work, family, or other personal reasons.
- Capturing lectures can help students who don’t write quickly in class, or find themselves unable to take notes effectively, or prefer to listen attentively rather than attempt to listen and take notes simultaneously.
What should we take
away from the trial?
Institutional coordination for technology implementation is once more shown as absolutely crucial to our success. This was an extremely easy to use software-based system – and we still needed to involve quite a few players. Were we to try to ramp up usage from just 5 colleagues and a handful of classes to perhaps 50 colleagues, touching perhaps 100-150 courses, 2500-5000 students, and 500 FTES, significant ongoing training and faculty support from our ITC, Media Services, and Campus Computer support teams would be required. While not at all as complex as Blackboard, lecture capture will still be an application that requires more than just faculty and computers to make it work, and work well enough for students to really benefit.
Ease of use will be paramount with any system we might decide to pursue – unless we will be willing to spend much more money supporting faculty with dedicated staff who could setup and take down equipment before and after class.
Quality for some lecture capture applications involving chalkboards or whiteboards will be an issue. One way to explore this further would be to equip at least one or two lecture rooms on campus with higher-quality cameras pre-wired to room computers, and pre-configured room microphones – in essence creating “super-smart” classrooms. Other institutions do this already, and there are hardware based room lecture capture systems available in the market that take exactly this approach. CSUEB uses one system (Echo), and it offers some definite advantages, although setup, maintenance, and processing of the captured lecture requires more in the way of staff time than we might be able to afford.
How should we
proceed?
Before we can say that any lecture capture system would possibly improve student retention and success, it is clear that we need to test it for at least one semester, offering faculty training before the term starts, outfitting all rooms and offices with hardware and software before the term stars, and offering students the chance to use the system from the outset of the class.
Had we been able to use Tegrity’s system in this way, we might be in a much better position to say that continuing with their solution would be the best course. Tegrity does offer a one-year trial, for up to 15 faculty, again externally hosting and serving all content to all students 24/7, for a $25,000 fee – and that is one option we could consider to generate more input on student usage. Before we might really take advantage of Tegrity’s particular strengths, though, we would need a larger critical mass of faculty teaching with PowerPoint or Web-based lectures, who want to capture their audio presentation to complement the computer screen images and words. And given how few classrooms are equipped with capable projectors and computers on campus, it is not clear whether we have that large a base of faculty users.
There are numerous other commercial lecture capture systems designed
for education that we could consider, some with external hosting options, and
some requiring local streaming server hosting.
Additionally, we could explore low-cost or free hosting services, such
as those provided by
A group of faculty and ITC staff have been exploring these
options in parallel with the Tegrity pilot over the last two months, and we are
considering how
One approach we might consider immediately to continue the momentum built by our pilot project would be to look at all of the faculty scheduled to teach in the Technology-Enabled Classrooms (our so-called “smart” rooms), during 2009-2010, and survey them to see how many are indeed using the computer and projection systems as their primary means of lecture delivery. With that group as a potential pilot user base, we could consider how to encourage individual solutions (with faculty purchasing their own lecture capture server space provided by external vendors) and institutional solutions (through iTunes U, or other companies like Tegrity, Granicus, MediaSite) over the next year.
As more classrooms come online through the Bond construction work, more faculty should have the opportunity to make the transition to computer-based materials supporting lectures, where and when that is appropriate for their curriculum and for their students. With an institutional commitment to increasing student success, to improving retention, and to encouraging excellence as well as innovation in our teaching, lecture capture could – and should – become an integral part of the overall package of educational resources we provide to our students.
Faculty User Comments & Questions
Positives Thus
Far
+
With PowerPoint,
zipping to any points within the lecture is very easy.
+
Searching
on PowerPoint text or webpage text is great - IF it is indeed text and not a
graphic.
+
Once
set up initially, subsequent recording is a snap.
+
Using
a remote wireless PowerPoint presenter mouse and wireless microphone makes
recording a narrated lecture very easy, with no restrictions on movement.
+
Availability
on any computer anytime to view lecture is very nice.
+
Content
uploads in background, and will auto-pause and auto-restart once a computer is
disconnected and later reconnected to the net.
+
Easy
to copy/move content around once uploaded.
+
Relatively
easy to administer with Excel spreadsheet to associate users with courses and
update it from anywhere, anytime.
+
Relatively
easy to get going, even without dedicated tutorial.
+
Webcam
picture is quite good for individual close-up images. With proper placement
you can read chalk/whiteboard writing in a limited area.
+
Installation
of the recorder software was easy; getting PCs and Macs set up was simple.
Negatives Thus
Far
-
Can't swap windows to select where the video and
where the computer application display appears.
-
Sound
with xTag microphones is not as clear as hoped.
-
Output
is not as smooth as with Camtasia.
-
In
recorder mode, you can't see what you are recording from the camera unless you
put the recorder into full-screen camera mode, but then PowerPoint/web/PC
applications aren’t visible.
-
In
full-screen mode, you don't have access to controls to pause or play or stop
the playback as a student or see other applications running to toggle between
them.
-
Creating
DVD movie doesn't produce a file that can be played on a DVD; it is computer
video only, and would need to be converted.
-
Using
external camera is not well documented; it isn't clear what models or
interfaces are supported, and using standard SONY camera didn't work.
-
Some
native software with text on the screen don't appear
to be searchable within the uploaded video.
-
Adding
extra content to lectures (weblinks, PDFs, etc.) is rather cumbersome.
-
You
can't use most webcams with a Mac (yet … expected to be coming for summer 09)
Glitches and Gotcha's
Ø
Using
webcam, autofocus might need to be turned off, and auto-light balance as well,
depending upon the lighting, the sheen of the whiteboard, and clothing worn.
Ø
Using
auto-following with the webcam is a bit jerky and may need to be turned on or
tuned to capture only a portion of the chalkboard or whiteboard.
Ø
Don't
forget to turn on your microphone!
Ø
Using
xTag microphones "resets" default audio
playback device, so some tweaking of the SOUND control panel on PCs is required
to make playback work. (Recording works OK).
Ø
If
you start Tegrity first, then put it in *pause* mode, THEN start PowerPoint,
your slides may not be searchable. You can either start
PowerPoint, then start Tegrity, or start recording, then start PowerPoint.
But if you use full-screen "presentation mode" with PowerPoint
you lose the command bar below and can't "find" the Tegrity recorder
icon.
Ø
Upload
time for lectures can range from 5 minutes to 45 minutes - a bit unpredictable.
Student Response Summary
Physics 4C (Hildreth) – 12 lectures recorded (8.5 hours)
9 responses; 13 students logged in to access lectures; 27 viewing sessions logged, 10 hours accessed
All full-time students;
All but two accessed 1-5 times; (1) respondent never accessed, (1) accessed 6 – 10 times
(4) answered rarely used Tegrity; (3) answered sometimes, (2) never
(5) answered Tegrity made student somewhat more effective; (3) answered Tegrity made study much more effective; (1) answered no impact.
(8) of 9 said impact of Tegrity contributed substantially or somewhat to learning
Overall, please rate the impact of Tegrity on your studying in this course (comments)
Complete the sentence: My experience with Tegrity would have been better if:
Impacted course experience compared to courses where Tegrity was not used:
Increased somewhat ~50% No impact ~50%
Rate ease of use:
(4) Very easy (2) Easy (3) Acceptable
Would you recommend Tegrity to your classmates?
Tegrity Student Survey Results - Physics 4C (cont.)
Would you request that professors record their classes using Tegrity?
Astronomy 10 (Hildreth) - 4 lectures recorded (2 hours)
4 responses; 4 students logged in to access lectures; 8 viewing sessions logged
(3) Part-time, (1) full-time student
(3) accessed 1-5 times; (1) respondent never accessed
(3) answered rarely used Tegrity; (1) never
(2) answered Tegrity made student somewhat more effective; (1) answered Tegrity made study much more effective; (1) answered no impact.
(3) of 4 said impact of Tegrity contributed substantially or somewhat to learning
Overall, please rate the impact of Tegrity on your studying in this course (comments)
Complete the sentence: My
experience with Tegrity would have been better if:
Impacted course experience compared to courses where Tegrity was not used:
Increased somewhat ~50% No impact ~50%
Rate ease of use: (3) Very easy
Would you recommend Tegrity to your classmates?
Would you request that professors record their classes using
Tegrity? Yes (unanimously)
Tegrity Student Survey Results (cont.)
Machine Tool Technology (Long) – 12 lectures recorded (6 hours)
9 responses; 29 students logged in; 190 viewing sessions; 46+ hours access time
(4) part-time student, full time job, 25/older;
(1) part-time student, full-time job, 17-24
(2) part-time student, part-time job, 25/older;
(2) full-time student, 25 or older.
(4) accessed 1-5 times; (5) accessed 6-10 times
(5) answered often used Tegrity; (4) sometimes
(5) answered Tegrity made student somewhat more effective;
(3) answered Tegrity made study much more effective;
(1) answered no impact.
(5) of 9 said impact of Tegrity contributed somewhat to learning;
(3) of 9 said significantly;
(1) of 9 said impact was very substantial
Overall, please rate the impact of Tegrity on your studying in this course (comments)
Complete the sentence: My
experience with Tegrity would have been better if:
Impacted course experience compared to courses where Tegrity was not used:
Significantly increased ~ 22% Increased somewhat ~55% No impact ~22%
Rate ease of use: (5) Very easy; (3) Easy; (1) Acceptable
Tegrity Student Survey Results - Machine
Tool Technology (cont.)
Would you recommend Tegrity to your classmates?
Would you request that professors record their classes using Tegrity?
Philosophy 50 (
60 responses to survey; 11 students logged into access
lectures; 40 sessions; ~6.5 hours access time
(44) full time students, 17-24;
(1) full-time student 25/older
(8) part-time student, full-time job, 17-24;
(5) part-time student, part-time job, 17-24
(1) part-time student, part-time job, 25/older;
(1) part-time student, full-time job, 25/older
(36) said they logged in 1-5 times;
(16) never;
(5) said they logged in 6-10 times;
(2) said they logged in more than 20;
(1) said logged in 11-20 times
(Note that recorded statistics only indicate 1 person logged in 9 times, 1 person 8 times, and the remaining 8 logged in 4 or less times, so some of the student survey data is therefore suspect.)
Tegrity Student Survey Results - Philosophy
50 (cont)
Of the ~ 44 students
who indicated they used Tegrity:
~20 answered sometimes used Tegrity; ~24 rarely used Tegrity
(16) answered Tegrity made study much more effective;
(20) answered Tegrity made student somewhat more effective;
(9) answered no impact.
(18) said Tegrity contributed significantly or very substantially to learning;
(21) said Tegrity contributed somewhat to learning;
(7) said it did not contribute to learning
Overall, please rate the impact of Tegrity on your studying in this course (comments)
Complete the sentence: My
experience with Tegrity would have been better if:
Impacted course experience compared to courses where Tegrity was not used:
Significantly increased ~ 5 Increased somewhat ~ 13
Between no impact and Increased somewhat ~ 14 No impact ~ 13
Tegrity Student Survey Results - Philosophy 50 (cont)
Rate ease of use: ~10 Very easy; ~20 Easy; ~15 Acceptable; (1) Not easy
Would you recommend Tegrity to your classmates?
Would you request that professors record their classes using Tegrity?
* responses
from students who indicated they never used Tegrity.
Tegrity Student Survey Results (cont.)
Speech 1 (
6+ students logged in; 13+ sessions; ~1 hours access time
Speech 1: (24 surveys)
(15) full-time student, 17-24
(3) part-time student, 17-24,
(1) part-time student, part-time job, 17-24
(3) full-time student, 25 or older.
(2) part-time student, part-time job, 25 or older
(20) said they accessed 1-5 times; (4) never accessed
(12) answered rarely used Tegrity; (4) sometimes; (6) never
(4) answered Tegrity made student somewhat more effective;
(3) answered Tegrity made study much more effective;
(13) answered no impact.
(10) of 24 said impact of Tegrity contributed somewhat to learning;
(1) said significantly;
(3) said impact was very substantial
(5) said did not contribute
(1) said it was a distraction.
Overall, please rate the impact of Tegrity on your studying in this course (comments)
Complete the sentence: My
experience with Tegrity would have been better if:
Tegrity Student Survey Results – Speech 1
Impacted course experience compared to courses where Tegrity was not used:
Increased somewhat ~20% No impact ~80%
Rate ease of use: (3) Very easy; (3) Easy; (10) Acceptable; (3) Not easy
Would you recommend Tegrity to your classmates?
Would you request that professors record their classes using Tegrity?
Speech 3 (
3+ students logged in; 16+ sessions; ~3.6 hours access time
Speech 3: (6 surveys)
(2) full-time student, 17-24
(1) part-time student, 17-24,
(2) full-time student, 25 or older.
(6) said they accessed 1-5 times;
(3) answered rarely used Tegrity; (2) sometimes; (1) never
(3) answered Tegrity made student somewhat more effective;
(1) answered Tegrity made study much more effective;
(2) answered no impact.
(3) of 6 said impact of Tegrity contributed somewhat to learning;
(3) said did not contribute
Overall, please rate the impact of Tegrity on your studying in this course (comments)
Complete the sentence: My
experience with Tegrity would have been better if:
Tegrity Student Survey Results – Speech 3 (cont.)
Impacted course experience compared to courses where Tegrity was not used:
Increased somewhat ~50% No impact ~50%
Rate ease of use: (1) Very easy; (1) Easy; (2) Acceptable; (2) Not easy
Would you recommend Tegrity to your classmates?
Would you request that professors record their classes using Tegrity?
Speech 10 (
2+ students logged in; 4+ sessions; ~1.5 hours access time
Speech 10: (14 surveys)
(7) full-time student, 17-24
(3) part-time student, part-time job 17-24,
(3) full-time student, 25 or older.
(1) Part-time student, part-time job, 25 or older
(11) said they accessed 1-5 times;
(8) answered rarely used Tegrity; (4) sometimes; (1) never, (1) often
(7) answered Tegrity made student somewhat more effective;
(5) answered Tegrity made study much more effective;
(2) answered no impact.
(7) of 14 said impact of Tegrity contributed somewhat to learning;
(5) said it made a very significant or substantial contribution.
(2) said did not contribute
Overall, please rate the impact of Tegrity on your studying in this course (comments)
Tegrity Student Survey Results – Speech 10 (cont.)
Complete the sentence: My
experience with Tegrity would have been better if:
Impacted course experience compared to courses where Tegrity was not used:
Increased somewhat ~80% Significantly Increased ~10% No impact ~10%
Rate ease of use: (3) Very easy; (4) Easy; (7) Acceptable
Would you recommend Tegrity to your classmates?
Would you request that professors record their classes using Tegrity?
Business 1A (Wong) – 8 lectures recorded (3.5 hours)
13+ students logged in; 63+ sessions; over 16 hours time
Bus 1A: (30 surveys)
(14) full-time student, 17-24
(2) part-time student, full-time job 17-24,
(5) part-time student, part-time job 17-24,
(6) full-time student, 25 or older.
(3) Part-time student, part-time job, 25 or older
(26) said they accessed 1-5 times; (1) never
Tegrity Student Survey Results – Business 1A (cont.)
~50% answered rarely used Tegrity; ~50% sometimes;
~40% answered Tegrity made student somewhat more effective;
~40% answered Tegrity made study much more effective;
~20% answered no impact or less effective
~60% said impact of Tegrity contributed somewhat to learning;
~20% said it made a very significant or substantial contribution.
~20% said did not contribute
Overall, please rate the impact of Tegrity on your studying in this course (comments)
Complete the sentence: My
experience with Tegrity would have been better if:
Impacted course experience compared to courses where Tegrity was not used:
Increased somewhat ~80% Significantly Increased ~10% No impact ~10%
Would you recommend Tegrity to your classmates?
Tegrity Student Survey Results – Business 1A (cont.)
Would you request that professors record their classes using Tegrity?
Computer Science 14 (Wong) – 2 lectures recorded (0.5 hours)
15+ students logged in; 38 sessions; 4+ hours
CS 14 : (15 surveys)
(6) full-time student, 17-24
(1) part-time student, Full-time job 17-24,
(2) part-time student, part-time job 17-24,
(5) full-time student, 25 or older.
(1) Part-time student, part-time job, 25 or older
(13) said they accessed 1-5 times;
(12) answered rarely used Tegrity; (2) never,
(11) answered Tegrity made student somewhat more effective;
(2) answered Tegrity made study much more effective;
(2) answered no impact.
(11) said impact of Tegrity contributed somewhat to learning;
(2) said it made a very significant or substantial contribution.
(2) said did not contribute
Overall, please rate the impact of Tegrity on your studying in this course (comments)
Tegrity Student Survey Results – Computer Science 14 (cont.)
Complete the sentence: My
experience with Tegrity would have been better if:
Impacted course experience compared to courses where Tegrity was not used:
Increased somewhat ~40% Significantly Increased ~10% No impact ~50%
Rate ease of use: (4) Very easy; (5) Easy; (4) Acceptable
Would you recommend Tegrity to your classmates?
Would you request that professors record their classes using Tegrity?