Integrating Digital Video Technology in the Classroom

Integrating technology into kinesiology-related professional preparation pro-grams has the potential to enhance and improve student learning. A media-literate and experientially grounded student population, relatively easy-to-use and inexpensive resources, and higher professional expectations and accreditation standards support this integration. Digital video technology, in particular, is a strong tool that can enable students to develop a variety of skills, including research, communication, decision-making, problem-solving, and other higher-order critical-thinking skills (Theodosakis, 2001). In addition, the integration of digital video technology has the potential to enrich university classroom curricula, enhance authentic and meaningful pedagogical experiences, and provide new and sophisticated ways to improve student learning (Fiorentino, 2004). Technology-related standards have been progressively developed by various accrediting agencies and professional organizations, including the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), and the National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE). Digital video integration can be used as an example of technological competency for students and faculty. In recent years, technology in the classroom has become easier to use and less expensive. A number of companies offer easy-to-use video-editing software for less than $100 and some even for free. Video-editing software enables students and faculty to integrate various types of media—such as text, video, audio, graphics, and animation—to create meaningful educational videos. The purpose of this article is to discuss the importance and benefits of digital video integration, describe the essential tools needed (e.g., hardware and software) and the steps to create a digital video, and provide examples of digital video assignments or projects and an evaluation rubric for assessing them

Non-NSAID over-the-counter (OTC) remedies for arthritis: Good, bad or indifferent?

This overview looks at some of the issues involved with the ever- increasing availability of marketed non-prescription products, specifically claiming to treat the pain and inflammation of arthritis and other musculoskeletal problems. The question of whether the buyer is getting (any) value for their money cannot be answered without considering several key issues. These include: (a) reliability of claims; (b) placebo effect (but for how long?); (c) reliability of composition, and reproducibility (especially of natural products); (d) general safety; (e) interactions with other medications; (f) honest labelling (in the absence of stricter guidelines). A particularly difficult problem is to know how to recognise a 'drug of choice', particularly for such a multi-faceted disease as chronic arthritis, when there is so little information about the actual pharmacology/potential toxicity of these OTC products in the standard drug compendia and other readily available reference texts. This grey area can only be illuminated by (i) further introduction (and enforcement) of adequate standards/quality controls for products offered OTC; (ii) earliest prosecution of clinical trials to supercede unverified testimonial claims; (iii) appropriate funding to research/establish basic pharmacology of the active principles. In summary, more research, more regulation, and more realistic investment will be required to dispel present uncertainty about which non-NSAID drugs/nutriceuticals are indeed effective against arthritis/other forms of inflammation, and which are not