Request a Demo

Want to see Tk20 in action?

University of Indianapolis: Benefits of Using Tk20 for Video Assessment

by Jody Rose, Data Manager, School of Teacher Education, University of Indianapolis

Brief Overview:

The University of Indianapolis School of Education includes three Undergraduate Programs including the Department of Teacher Education. This department is responsible for approved programs leading to teacher licensure in Elementary, All Grade, and Secondary content areas. In response to a need for current and accurate data collection, Tk20’s HigherEd Program was implemented in 2008. In 2011, in cooperation with Tk20 engineers, the department began electronic submission of all Transition Point II projects and Student Teaching Portfolios.

The Problem: Creating, Collecting, and Assessing Effective Video Teaching Clips in Transition Point Projections and Portfolios

Teacher Education candidates are required to record and submit a video segment demonstrating their classroom practice with the Transition Point II project and Transition Point III portfolio. Creating and viewing these videos created several problems for both the Teacher Education candidates and the Transition Point II and III project reviewers. These problems included:

  • Students used many different programs to record and save their video clips. This created many different formats.
  • Reviewers often had problems opening and viewing the videos because of the different formats. Several programs were required to open the files.
  • Projects are scored by at least two reviewers; transporting the projects to different reviewers was time consuming and costly.
  • Students had to wait 3-4 weeks for feedback. After all of the scores were complete, an Administrative Assistant would copy comments and compile letters to each candidate informing them of the results. These letters were then mailed via US Mail to each candidate.

These problems created a great deal of confusion and frustration for all involved.


The Video Tool in Tk20 offered a solution to these problems. Candidates were given instructions for capturing and compressing the video. They loaded the video clip with the other pieces of the project into Tk20. Projects were then assigned to the individual reviewers. Each reviewer was able to view the candidate’s written work along with the video in Tk20. Reviewers did not need to have specific viewing programs. Reviewers came to campus and received training in scoring the projects online, thus eliminating the need to transport the projects between reviewers. Projects could be viewed and scored simultaneously; the time required for all reviewers to complete the scoring process was cut in half. Candidates were then able to view the scores and comments concerning their work in Tk20 within two weeks.

Reflections on the Process: 

While there are always lessons learned when implementing any new process, we were pleased with the results. Reviewers had no problems scoring the projects and had no problems implementing the process. There were, however, a few candidates that struggled with uploading their videos. We encountered the following problems.

  • Tk20 gave us very specific guidelines for the length of video clips; our candidates did not always follow these instructions.
  • We assumed that our candidates would know how to compress videos; this was not the case.

Candidates will be reminded of the guidelines and required to follow time restrictions. We have been working on better instruction for capturing and compressing the videos and have scheduled help sessions on campus for our candidates. We hope that this will alleviate problems that were experienced last semester with the loading of videos. We have also decided to create video tutorials for our reviewers so that they do not have to travel to campus. The engineers at Tk20 were very responsive to our questions and concerns as we worked through the process. We feel prepared to move forward with this program and look forward to continuing refinement of the process.