1 / 42

Collaboration and Education Group

Collaboration and Education Group. Jonathan Grudin Microsoft Research jgrudin@microsoft.com. Evaluation / Publication. Refine Prototype. Product Impact. Build Prototype. Collaboration and Education Group. Formed about 12 months ago Mission:

hank
Download Presentation

Collaboration and Education Group

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Collaboration and Education Group Jonathan Grudin Microsoft Research jgrudin@microsoft.com

  2. Evaluation / Publication Refine Prototype Product Impact Build Prototype Collaboration and Education Group • Formed about 12 months ago • Mission: • To explore novel technologies and applications that enhance collaboration and education / training • Current work focuses on streaming media • Research model • Evaluation: Laboratory and Field Studies

  3. Technology and Education • Two broad facets: • Technology for improved content • deep models of subject matter and student • active exploration of subject (simulations) • relate to students context/environment (situated learning) MOSTLY DOMAIN DEPENDENT • Technology infrastructure for: • course and student management • content creation • delivery / distribution • collaboration MOSTLY DOMAIN INDEPENDENT • Both aspects are important and complementary

  4. Technology Adoption Phases • Phase-1: • digital version of non-digital process • Phase-2: • value-added features appear in digital version • Phase-3: • process and technology re-design

  5. Why Consider Multimedia? • Network, processor, memory capability changing quickly • Reasoning about exponential growth • Simultaneous emergence of live and on-demand capability • Shift in the definition of scholarship

  6. Ongoing Projects • MSTE and MURL: Online Seminars • Time Compression, Skimming, Indexing, Browsing • MRAS: Multimedia Annotations and Authoring • Flatland: Telepresentations

  7. MSTE Presentations • Logs of ~10,000 sessions by over 2000 users • Some results: • On-demand audience about 40% of live audience • 60% < 5 minutes • Viewers jump around video • Initial portions much more likely to be watched • Presentations will be designed differently in future • Present key messages early in talk • Present key messages early in slide • Use meaningful slide titles • Reveal talk structure in slide titles • Consider post-processing talk for on-line viewers

  8. Analysis of Online Presentation Viewing • Logs of ~10,000 sessions by over 2000 users • Some results: • On-demand audience about 40% of live audience • 60% < 5 minutes • Viewers jump around video • Initial portions much more likely to be watched • Presentations will be designed differently in future • Present key messages early in talk • Present key messages early in slide • Use meaningful slide titles • Reveal talk structure in slide titles • Consider post-processing talk for on-line viewers

  9. Ongoing Projects • MSTE and MURL: Online Seminars • Time Compression, Skimming, Indexing, Browsing • MRAS: Multimedia Annotations and Authoring • Flatland: Telepresentations

  10. Time Compression, Skimming, Indexing • While text documents are easy to skim, that is not true for audio-video • Ability to skim can be a key advantage of web-video • time-compression: up to ~2-fold; nothing thrown away • skimming: > 2-fold; some content thrown away • indexing: adding navigable structure • Also useful in “live” broadcast scenarios • e.g., late joiners can catch up to live talk

  11. Time Compression: Synchronized Audio and Video • To preserve pitch: throw away portion of each 100ms chunk, then stitch together • Basic signal processing well known, but several systems issues • Results of lab studies: • People choose ~1.4 speed, don’t adjust much • They like it • “I think it will become a necessity… Once people have experienced it they will never want to go back. Makes viewing long videos much, much easier.” • Comprehension may go up

  12. Time-Compression Demo

  13. Skimming: Compression Goes Nonlinear • To beat 2x speedup, must throw away content • Sources of information • audio: pauses, intonation, speech-to-text and NLP • video: scene changes • other: slide-changes, previous viewers’ patterns • Lab studies of 4x-5x speedup • Viewers learn from automatic summaries • Viewers like and learn more when author-edited • Perception of quality increases over time • Mixed-initiative summarization is promising

  14. Indexing • Vanilla video provides no structure for navigation • Indexing provides navigable structure; examples: • textual table of contents (slide titles) • video shots / scenes • speech-to-text => NLP => topic detection

  15. Ongoing Projects • MSTE and MURL: Online Seminars • Time Compression, Skimming, Indexing, Browsing • MRAS: Multimedia Annotations and Authoring • Flatland: Telepresentations

  16. Multimedia / Temporal Annotations • Motivating scenarios: • a virtual university • all students are remote, asynchronously watching lecture videos • a standard university • making better use of in-class time • Temporal annotations: • annotations associated with streaming media • each annotation is linked to the media time-line • annotations stored separately from the media files

  17. Ability to annotate can add significant value • shared notes for asynchronous collaboration • question-answers linked to a streaming-video lecture • archived feedback for the instructor • personal notes on audio-video found on the web • personal/shared table of contents; summarizations • annotations may be computer generated • use speech-to-text providing search and seek ability • captured strokes from electronic white-board • captured questions, slide-flips, from “live” broadcast • ...

  18. Results from Preliminary User Studies • Personal note-taking study (MRAS vs. Paper) • similar # of notes (~1 / minute) • positioning: none in paper; ~10-15s later in MRAS • all subjects preferred MRAS (although more time), and thought more useful for future reference • Shared notes study • text preferred to audio • 14/18 stated more participation than in “live” session • auto-tracking particularly useful

  19. Currrent Work • MSTE class to use MRAS and recorded lectures • Can we increase instructor productivity? • Can we emulate live-classroom discussion / community formation in an asynchronous environment using MRAS?

  20. Ongoing Projects • MSTE and MURL: Online Seminars • Time Compression, Skimming, Indexing, Browsing • MRAS: Multimedia Annotations and Authoring • Flatland: Telepresentations

  21. Flatland Tele-presentation System • Joint project with the Virtual Worlds Group • Flexible architecture for distributed collaborative applications • Target scenarios: • presentations to remote audience • online conferences • distributed tutored-video-instruction • ...

  22. The Flatland Project

  23. Do We Need to Sacrifice Quality? • The goal is to improve it • Stanford Tutored Video Instruction (TVI) • Process: • video tapes of un-rehearsed live lectures • small group of students watch along with a para-professional tutor • Results from 1978-86 • All MSEE: 1800 students, avg. GPA 3.40 • TVI-MSEE: 89 students, avg. GPA 3.62 • Similar observations recently for D-TVI version

  24. Stanford TVI Experiments: 10/73 - 3/74 • remote TVI students with tutor do best • it helped “at-risk” students even more • Source: J.F. Gibbons, et al. Science, Vol. 195, No. 4283, 18 March 1977

  25. Flatland Experiences • Initial use in 3 multi-session MSTE classes • Presentations from desktop to remote audience • Students: • Liked the convenience • Liked ability to multitask • Did not think learning suffered • Instructors: • Missed familiar sources of feedback • Comfort level rose over time for 2 of 3 • Overall: Lack of awareness of others a key problem

  26. Issues Being Explored • Creating presence and awareness • representing attendees; gaze; activity level; ... • Providing for interactivity; protocols for online talks • types of widgets; floor control; multiple back channels • Complexity of interface for speaker / audience • use of channels over time; different physical contexts; … • Capture and replay of tele-presentations • capture “all” activity; time-compression; annotations

  27. Activity Surrounding Teaching/Learning • Pre-authoring • Slides, web notes, reference material, exercises, … • Content delivery • Synchronous delivery to local/remote audience • Archived for on-demand audience and review • On-demand access by students • Watch content; personal notes; TOC; index; … • Discussion around content • Synchronous: small group; one-on-one • Asynchronous • Post-lecture work by instructor / tutor • Answer questions; discussions; feedback & redesign; … • Student evaluation • …

  28. Concluding Remarks • Key drivers of change • market needs • technology • Key new directions • learner-centric • asynchronous; small-group synchronous • Key challenges • concrete studies to indicate effectiveness • technology/products taking value beyond cost • business model and bootstrapping issues

  29. For More Information: http://www.research.microsoft.com

  30. Watching Behavior Within a Session 70 60 50 40 User count 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Nth minute into the talk

More Related