Collaborating analysis of group experience in EDLD 5363

Analysis of group experience.

Jason Mansfield = green
April Dickerman = orange
Melissa Eudy = blue
Colin Shannon: Red
Max Windham = Purple

1.   As a team, debrief about your experiences producing the PSA.
2.   Individually, add a brief post to your collaborative team documentation related to the project. Your post should:

• clearly analyze the group’s pre-production, production, and post-production process; shot and editing selection; Web delivery formatting decisions.

The team did an excellent job with the pre-production phase of the project. Everyone contributed and adjustments were made early in light of team members comments. The script and story board were delivered on time and with all team members’ consent. Production was efficient as all team members contributed their part through a community Dropbox. Although we all agreed on what shots were to be used, Max put everything together and did most of the editing selection. We viewed it and agreed on its final form. We decided early that we would post our PSA on Youtube due to ease of use. Our team worked very hard in week three with the pre-production part of the assignment. This made everything easier in the following weeks. We agreed on the topic of our PSA quickly and went straight to the planning phase. Max was our editor and we let him determine the formatting and web delivery portion of the project, however we all had input into the shots and script for the PSA.

Our team worked very well together.  By week 3 we had already gotten together and decided on what we where going to do our PSA on.  Everyone immediately offered suggestions volunteered to do a part.  Our group has worked together before and all of the personalities fit well.  Each individual had their portion done ahead of time and everyone was very timely in offering suggestions for improvement.  Overall our group worked very well together and everyone did a  good part of the project.
We had a great mix of talent and interests, making the project much easier, since we knew what eachother could do.  I was impressed with how quickly the project came together.  Since we are in a technology master’s degree, we logically chose internet safety.  With our varying life experiences and family situations, we were able to put a very different spin on a subject we figured everyone else was taking on as well.  Everyone worked very hard, got their part done in a timely manner and were quick to offer both praise and improvement suggestions.  It was a difficult, yet enjoyable project
I feel that we had a very good and cohesive initial idea.  Overall the work provided what they needed in order to finish the assignment.  I know in the end I made some decisions on my own to get the video finished, but the collaboration worked well and I think we ended up with the most professional looking of the videos that I saw.  

• offer insights into how the group can improve their public service announcement.

The public service announcement could be more cohesive and exciting if all members had been able to actively edit in stead of having to wait to analyze the final product. This would have been difficult to do when different schedules were considered. The only way this could have been improved would have been if we had all been able to get together physically and work on it and possibly been in the video ourselves. As this was not possible, I feel our final product is excellent!

Our public service announcement was well done, but with the time frame and technology available is not at the level of actually playing on TV.  I feel the video Max did in the background went a little fast to Colins voice, but looked great.  The Music was a great choice, especially for the topic, but he tempo also didn’t go with the tempo of the PSA.  I feel the words we used where great, the music was great, and the pictures where great, but we did it over a long distance with all of us very far apart.  If we where able to dedicate more time and be together to work on it we could have easily made it of caliper to appear on television

I feel, as the rest of my team does, that we could have done better with small aspects like tempo.  If we had been working in an office together, rather than in 5 different places, we could have easily and quickly produced a PSA worthy of television.  For what we were able to do from 5 different parts of Texas, I feel we did a very good job.  Improvements that could have been made can be made by us in the future with practice

Although I saw some comments concerning the quick cuts in the video, based on the recorded narrative there was not much leeway in doing long shots.  It is a fine line between leaving a picture up for an extended length of time and doing quick shots.  In today’s crazy fast paced world I thought the pacing worked.  I showed it to several people before posting to YouTube and they thought the quick movement would hold people’s attention.  In reality if we were working together we could have timed the music, voice over and pictures to be more in sync.

• identify copyright attribution for assets.

The pictures, videos, and narration were created by team members so there would be no copyright infringement, the music was also copyright free. We were able to choose a creative commons license under each individual’s name. Early on we decided to use team members’  personal pictures so that we would not have any copyright issues. Later, the music was done this way also.
All pictures, videos, and narration were copyright free.  The words used didn’t contain any quotes or information from anyone other then us.  The pictures used were of us so there were no copy right issues there either.  
All pictures were copyright free, since they were of us or our families.  The music was also free of copyright (unlike happy birthday!), and we attained a creative commons license with eachother’s name.  
All pictures except for two that we cited where produced by the team.

• critique your team’s collaboration and interactions with each other.

Our team does an exceptional job of collaborating and interacting with each other. This is the second project we have worked on together. After the first project we decided to remain together as a group for any other projects. We are able to identify strengths in each member and use those abilities to create high quality products. Any critiques are given in an informative, not insulting or demeaning, manner. After completing this project, I would not hesitate to work with this group again. This is a great group. We work great together and we all know what the strengths are in the group. When we first started this project, we all jumped in with what we would be comfortable and good at doing. This helped to start us out on the right foot. I would love to work with these people again if possible!
We all have been very blessed to have met in the beginning of the Graduate program and to have worked with each other on every group assignment.  We all work great together, do our part and then some, and all seem to agree on the same concept.  Whenever a member sees an area of improvement they offer the suggestion in a positive constructive way.  Also, whenever a member has an issue or a personal matter come up the others offer help and suggestions to ensure the project gets done on time.  Having gotten my Bachelors also online, which involved many group projects, I can say this is the best group I have ever worked with.  
All I can say is, I wish these four were on my teaching team at work!  We all met in 5306, and were very lucky to be grouped to critique eachother’s wiki’s.  We decided to colaborate in teaching with Technology, worked unbelievebly well together, and decided to remain together for any future projects.  I am very touched that the team has actually remained in contact outside of the projects.  We have actually come to depend on eachother for questions and answers if one of us is confused, we just e-mail someone in the group and the problem is usually solved.  We knew eachother’s stregnths from the previous projects, and I think that’s what helped the PSA come together so quickly.  If these four were on my teaching team at work, my first year would be so much easier.
I think given that we had not met each other and had different schedules, I think the team worked well overall.  I would like to have seen what would have been accomplished if we truly had worked together together versus asynchronously.

EDLD 5363 Week 5 Web Conference

12-13-11

Last night’s web conference was an enlightening experience. Dr. Abernathy was very helpful in focusing our attention on the more important aspects of this weeks activities. She explained the problem with the final exam reflection and why it no longer is to be counted as part of our grade. She made this an opportunity for us to learn that technology sometimes has glitches for everyone, not just the students. Her handling of the situation was a good modeling of how to work with technology difficulties. The information given about using creative commons licensing was very helpful. This is a new area for me and I appreciate all the information I can get.

I have been somewhat apprehensive about the final assignment in this class. However, after attending the web conference I feel much more competent that I am completing the elements of the assignment appropriately. I also believe my group is doing an excellent job of collaborating and producing a quality PSA. 

EDLD 5363 Web Conference Week 2

11-22-11

Thanks to Thanksgiving, I was unable to attend the web conferences for week 2, but I watched the recording of the Nov. 22 web cast to help me understand the week 2 assignment. As usual, Dr. Abernathy started the web conference with a great deal of enthusiasm and clarification about expectations for week 2. She was very explicit in her comments about not having to assess any one video editing tool. In the explanation for allowing the assessment of different tools, Dr. Abernathy proved her knowledge of the state of public education and the resources (or lack of resources) that are available. She also did an excellent job of relating the reason for the week 2 assignments: in order for us to become competent technology facilitators that are familiar with many different tools.  After all, it isn’t about the cost of technology, but the use of technology.

As the web conference continued, there was an explanation of descriptive tags that was very helpful. At first I was confused by this requirement, but since it aids people when searching for specific information, it began to make much more sense. I enjoyed Dr. Abernathy’s question about why we should post our podcast on YouTube. I agreed with others that it makes it public and might help others. I did not realize that the embedded code that is given to you through YouTube would allow you to embed your podcast or video into your wiki. My podcast was uploaded to my wiki without any trouble, but I previously had difficulty adding a file that was too large. The embedded code should make uploading videos to my wiki a much easier task. I was relieved to see that other students were having difficulty uploading an mp3 file to YouTube. I have uploaded my podcast to podbean which allowed me to use descriptive tags, give a short explanation of the podcast, and display my creative commons license. This was a short, but informative, web conference that helped clarify for me why we were doing the assignment and what I was expected to learn.

EDLD 5363 Web Conference Week 1

11-13-11
Tonight I was able to attend the first web conference for EDLD 5363. There were a lot of new names on the participants list. Dr. Abernathy was her usual informative self. There was quite a bit of clarification about instructions in the week 1 assignment. I was pleased to discover that my IA was Linda Marshall. I think several partnerships were also created during the course of the web conference. I appreciated Dr. Abernathy's inability to break us into groups. Having us form our own groups makes it our own group, not just a group that we were assigned to. I thought this web conference was much more informative. Several of the web conferences I have attended in the past have become forums for students who are panicking and have not fully read the instructions for the assignments. In fact, in some classes I have stopped even watching the recordings because people were off topic or uninformed. This conference was well-conducted and kept to a 1 hour time limit.
I appreciated Dr. Abernathy's sharing about her digital story. Once she explained how she selected her story, it was easier for me to focus on what story I wanted to tell. Her story seemed very personal and yet something that could be shown to others. I enjoyed her openness about why she chose her story and the journey that she was involved in at that time. Using her reasons as a guide, I was able to select a journey in my life that I wanted to share with others as well.

EDLD 5397 Week 3 Web Conference 7/27/11

     The web conference was once again an informative experience. Dr. Mason and Dr. Davis do an excellent job of answering questions and keeping the meeting on task. There were some very interesting action research projects that were discussed. I felt overwhelmed by the scope of some of the projects. I enjoyed listening to ideas about how to handle other types of research. Of course, since I am an ET, I always am tempted to tell them to add technology regardless of the plan. I don’t do this as not everybody is ET and technology is not always what their research is about. It is interesting to see the “other side” (EA) and what areas they are researching. As always there was confusion with Tk20 and who has to do what. I think those questions are becoming fewer and the answers are getting better. Maybe by my next class those questions won’t have to be asked. I “left” the meeting unexpectedly at 7:45 because I dropped my Internet connection, but I think it was another successful web conference.

EDLD 5397 Week 2 Web Conference 7/19/11

     This week the web conference contained very little discussion about the week’s assignment. However, the conference contained an interesting discussion on interpretation of administrators’ actions. I felt that there were some very good ideas about using actions of current administrators to help define what individuals consider as desirable. This type of discussion aides in addressing things that are not desirable in a more positive light. If I see an action that I don’t agree with, then it is an action I would not want to emulate. I also agree that seemingly negative actions of administrators are sometimes due to circumstances we know nothing about. This was of personal interest to me as my campus will be undertaking the beginning of STARR testing, implementing CSCOPE, and changing from block to traditional scheduling. I will be using this as an opportunity to observe my administrators’ actions in light of these various changes.

EDLD 5333 Week 4 Web Conference: 6/16/11

Last night I was able to attend a web conference for EDLD 5333. This is the first web conference I have been able to attend since my first class in the program. Although I always watch the recordings of the conferences, I do not attend them. I enjoyed Dr. Mixon. He was a great host for the meeting. He answered questions in a rapid fire manner. I think he managed to answer all questions I had about the assignment and I gathered new information about the ILD class, TK20, and the principal certification practice test. Dr. Mixon was able to answer all questions and helped attendees feel at ease with the requirements of the programs. He had knowledge about not only the Educational Leadership program, but also the Ed Tech program. After this experience, I will try to attend more of these conferences.