Integration Project: John Modaff

Project Overview

The product of this project is twofold: 1) integration of technological power into the complex and grueling process of evaluating performance in human communication, and 2) an improved software program (CommuniCoach, currently under development with Isoprime Inc., Modaff et al.) for integrating multimedia computing with performance evaluation in a wide range of communication and performance courses.

Using CommuniCoach™ Speech & Communication Evaluation Softwarein CMSP 100--Voice and Articulation

The purpose of this project was twofold:

1. to have an instructor (Dr. Modaff) field-test a beta version of the CommuniCoach™ software to determine its suitability for providing evaluations in a performance-based course in speech & communication
2. to observe student responses to their experience using the student version of CommuniCoach™ (courtesy of the computer lab in Breckinridge 334.)

Field Test: Instructor

Voice & Articulation was chosen as the ideal course for this field test due to the average size (25) of the class and the brevity of the performances in this course. These features allowed a realistic but not overly cumbersome environment for the instructor. Also, the 2 computers in BR 334 where CommuniCoach™ student version was loaded would not be overtaxed as they are already heavily used by other students.

Dr. Modaff used CommuniCoach™ in complete evaluation cycles of two types of performance in Voice & Articulation: 1) "Attitude Contrast," and 2) "Volume & Projection." A complete evaluation cycle included the following:

1. digital recording of the performances in class using an IBM ThinkPad notebook computer and subsequent placement of the digital movie files on a SNAP server in Ginger hall via the MSU intranet.
2. instructor's preparation of a CommuniCoach™ evaluation using the software, and the posting of the evaluation on the Host computer (in BR 315E) in a way that students using the lab computers could access both the movie files and the evaluation database.

Problems:

1. the most common problems occurred during video capture, and not with the CommuniCoach™ software. Typical problems: poor mic response; computer capture software failure; incorrect settings. These problems might be ascribed mainly to "human error" as the instructor learned proper setup and operation. Also, certain equipment limitations were discovered that required upgrades to the notebook computer. "Backup" steps were added to reduce vulnerability to data loss. Far less difficulty was noted in performance #2.
2. in the preparation of the first evaluations using CommuniCoach™, the lack of practice caused great amounts of "adjustment and orientation" time to be spent by the instructor. E.g., the first couple of evaluations of performances that lasted only 90 seconds took 25-30 minutes to prepare. This was due in part to learning the software, and in part due to the nature of the "building" of comment categories and standard comments for future use. This time was reduced significantly by the end of the first performance evaluation cycle to about 10 minutes per performance.

There was no problem posting the evaluations for students to retrieve and print in BR 334. The integration via the MSU LAN of the lab workstations (of which there were 2), the host computer in BR 315E, and the SNAP server in Ginger Hall was seamless*. No software glitches were discovered.

Field Test: Students

Voice & Articulation students perform frequently. Performance is, in a sense, the "testing" methodology in such a course. Therefore, for students to be able to review written comments by the evaluator while also having access to recordings of their performances is highly desirable. In the past this required use of individual video or audio tapes (provided either by instructor or student) for each performance, the equipment necessary to record to such media, and some arrangements for simultaneous playback of the recording during review of written comments. This has always been an awkward and inconvenient arrangement. The students who took the time to go to the lab in BR 334 were unanimously impressed and relieved by the accuracy and simplicity of the integration of written evaluation and performance-recording-playback. On one PC screen they viewed instructor comments and the movie of their performances. The student could click on a video "node" in the text of the evaluation and the movie playback would instantly jump to the section in question. They seemed also to enjoy the capacity to print out the written evaluation for discussion with the instructor at a future time. The performance evaluations were left posted on the system for future or repeated reviews as well.

Problems:

1. access to lab computers; computers down; lab hours
2. cost of printing (one student offended by this)
3. travel requirement (to lab)

These are the only recorded difficulties or concerns of students during this field test. The software itself worked without error, and the students simply needed the instructor-supplied Evaluation ID and password for secure access to their own evaluations.

Conclusion

CommuniCoach™ Speech & Communication Evaluation software does indeed provide a useful, integrative, exciting, fun environment for teachers and students to use in courses that require performance work. Significant obstacles to usage of this technology are not located in the software, but rather the context of its application (equipment, setup, orientation, LAN integration, etc.)

The author is enthusiastic about future applications of CommuniCoach™, and is grateful to the PT3 program for providing the means for this successful field test! The stipend provided by the grant program was used for the purchase of the notebook computer mentioned above and thereby significantly defrayed the cost of video/audio capture equipment required. Demonstrations and training in the use of this software would be provided by the grantee with dispatch once appropriate software licensure is secured.

*The arrangement for storage of media files was somewhat cumbersome. Once Information Technology understood clearly what manner and amount of space was required, the operation went smoothly. IT's concern over "CPU time" demands on "their" servers resulted in the designation of an office PC as the host computer for the database. While this is convenient in a way, it is outside of the original design of the software. One can understand a protective attitude from IT concerning processing demands, however, as well as security issues.