Degree | Type | Year | Semester |
---|---|---|---|
2501928 Audiovisual Communication | OT | 4 | 0 |
This course demands students to show advanced reading, speaking and writing English skills as it is entirely given in this language. The course also requires them to have capacity for creative and productive teamworking. In fact, it is conceived as the culmination of learning processes in audiovisual creation developed during the preliminary courses of the entire Bachelor's program. Students must show competence in advanced script writing and audiovisual (e.g. TV and Radio) production. The course demands creating and producing audiovisual interactive programs.
The course Interactive direction techniques (IDT / Técnicas de realización interactiva) is part of the subject "Audiovisual creation", which in turn gives name to a specific mention of the bachelor's entire program. The mention on Audiovisual Creation is formed by seven optional courses, apart from a compulsory one. This course is one of the optional courses. All of these courses are offered between the third and fourth year of the Audiovisual Communication Bachelor's degree. The objectives of IDT is: "providing specific knowledge on the creative strategies needed for the design, production, capturing, edition, and post-production of the audiovisual communication messages" (cfr. Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación, Memoria de Grado, p. 58, Spanish).
Students will acquire knowledge and develop skills through different methodological teaching/learning strategies:
Specifically, there will be master classes, activities in seminars and practical sessions (direction and evaluation). In groups, students must create and produce an interactive narrative (transmedia) and evaluate it with real users. Finally, they must give detailed account of their experience in a report and present it to the rest of the classroom.
The calendar will be available on the first day of class. Students will find all information on the Virtual Campus: the description of the activities, teaching materials, and any necessary information for the proper follow-up of the subject. In case of a change of teaching modality for health reasons, teachers will make readjustments in the schedule and methodologies.
Title | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|
Type: Directed | |||
Laboratory practices | 22.5 | 0.9 | 2, 16, 4, 14, 12, 10, 9, 11, 13, 17, 15 |
Master classes | 15 | 0.6 | 2, 16, 7, 12, 10, 17 |
Seminars | 15 | 0.6 | 2, 4, 6, 3, 7, 12, 10, 17, 18 |
Type: Supervised | |||
Atendance to tuttoring | 7.5 | 0.3 | 16, 4, 6, 3, 10, 13 |
Type: Autonomous | |||
Readings, analysis and project creation | 82.5 | 3.3 | 16, 14, 3, 10, 9, 17 |
The subject consists of the following evaluation activities:
To be able to pass the subject, it is necessary to obtain a minimum grade of 5 in the project and exam.
The project consists in a detailed academic professional report (and its evaluation) about the creation, audiovisual production, testing, analysis and exhibition/presentation of an interactive narrative. This project will be produced in groups by the students and supervised by the professor.
The exam will evaluate the contents provided by the master classes and the material discussed in the seminars.
To be able to submit to the reavaluation of the subject, the average grade of 3. It will be possible to reavaluate the exam and the laboratory practices. The seminars will be excluded from the reavaluation process.
Title | Weighting | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|---|
Exam | 20% | 2 | 0.08 | 4, 5, 3, 7, 11, 13, 17, 18 |
Project (Interactive audiovisual production) | 60% | 4 | 0.16 | 2, 16, 1, 4, 14, 5, 3, 8, 12, 10, 9, 11, 13, 17, 15, 18 |
Seminars | 20% | 1.5 | 0.06 | 16, 4, 14, 5, 6, 3, 7, 9, 11, 13, 17, 18 |
Blumenthal, Hank. & Xu, Yan. (2012). The ghost club storyscape: Designing for transmedia storytelling.IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, 58 (2), 190-196.
Cooper, Alan., Reimann, Robert., Cronin, David & Noessel, Christopher. (2007).About face. The essentials of interaction design. Indianapolis: Wiley.
Cooper, Michael. (2016). Web accessibility guidelines for the 2020s. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2899475.2899492
Costa, Carmen., & Piñeiro, Teresa. (2012). Nuevas narrativas audiovisuales: multiplataforma, crossmedia y transmedia. El caso de Águila Roja (RTVE). Icono 14, 10(2), 102-125.
Fischer-Kafoury, Matthew. (2013). Transmedia Cohesion in Motion Picture Advertising. Communication Honors Theses, 9. Texas: Trinity University.
Gifreu-Castells, Arnau. (2014). El documental interactiu i transmèdia. Aproximació, estat de desenvolupament i anàlisi de casos en l’àmbit espanyol. Comunicació: Revista de Recerca i d’Anàlisi [Societat Catalana de Comunicació], 31(2) 19-45. DOI: 10.2436/20.3008.01.123
Greco, Gian María. (2016). On accessibility as a human right, with an application to media accessibility. In A. Matamala and P. Orero (eds.), Researching audio description. New approaches (pp. 11-33). London: Palgrave.
Guarinos, Virginia., Gordillo, Inmaculada, & Ramírez, María del Mar. (2011). El relato audiovisual transmediático. Esquivando los media tradicionales. Estudio de caso y propuestas creativas. Trípodos Extra, 577-585. Disponible en: https://idus.us.es/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11441/16227/file_1.pdf?sequence=1
Harris, Randy Allen. (2005). Voice interaction design. Crafting the new conversational speech systems. San Francisco: Elsevier.
Hayes, Gary P. (2011). How to write a transmedia production bible. A template for multi-platform producers. Screen Australia. Disponible en: http://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/documents/sa_publications/transmedia-prod-bible-template.pdf . Último acceso el 6 de julio de 2018.
Jenkins, Henry. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: New York University Press.
Kapetilini, Victor., & Nardi, Bonnie.A. (2006). Acting with technology. Activity theory and interaction design. Cambridge: MIT.
Lallemand, Carine., Gronier, Guillaume., & Koening, Vincent. (2016). User experience: A concept without consensus? Exploring practicioners perspectives through an international survey. Computers in Human Behaviour, 43, 35-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.048
Lopez Cintas, Jorge. (2007). Por una preparación de calidad en accesibilidad audiovisual. Trans. Revista de traductología, 11, 45-59.
Moloney, Kevin T. (2011). Porting transmedia storytelling to Journalism. Master thesis. Denver: University of Denver. Disponible en: http://www.colorado.edu/Journalism/photojournalism/Transmedia_Journalism.pdf.
Orozco Gómez, Guillermpo., & Francés i Domènec, Miquel. (2019). Documentación yproducción transmedia de contenidos audiovisuales. Madrid: Síntesis.
Pardo, Federico. (2011). New media and transmedia for documentary storytelling: a comprehensiveapproach. Master thesis. Montana: Montana State University. Available at: http://scholarworks.montana.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1/2011/PardoF0811.pdf?sequence=1. Último acceso el 6 de julio de 2018.
Quiñones, Daniel & Rusu, Cristian (2017). How to develop usability heuristics: A systematic literature review. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 52, 89-122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2017.03.009
Rubin, Jeff & Chisnell, Dana. (2008). Handbook of usability testing. How to plan, design and conduct effective tests. Indianapolis: Wiley.
Rubio-Tamayo, José Luis., Gertrudix Barrio, Manuel., & García García, Francisco (2017). Immersive environments and virtual reality: Systematic review and advances in communication, interaction and simulation Multimodal Technologies and Interact, 1-21. DOI :10.3390/mti1040021
Scolari, Carlos Alberto (2013). Narrativas transmedia. Cuando todos los medios cuentan. Barcelona: Deusto.
Scolari, Carlos Alberto (2009). Transmedia storytelling: Implicit consumers, narrative worlds, and branding in contemporary media production. International Journal of Communication,3, 586-606.
Scolari, Carlos Alberto. (2017). Las leyes de la interfaz. Madrid: Gedisa.
Schneiderman, Ben., Plaisant, Catherine.,Cohen, Maxine., Jacobs, Steven., Elmqvist, Niklas., Diakopoulos, Nicholas. (2018). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer-interaction. Essex: Pearson.
Soto-Sanfiel, María T. (2009). Interactividad y contenido como factores de disfrute en las ficciones interactivas. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 64. Available at: http://www.revistalatinacs.org/09/art/853_UAB/54_77_Soto_et_al.html
Soto-Sanfiel, María T. & Igartua, Juan José (2016). Cultural proximity and interactivity in the processes of narrative reception. In. J. Arts and Technology,9(2), 87-107. Available at: http://diarium.usal.es/jigartua/files/2012/07/Soto-Sanfiel-Igartua-IJAT-2016.pdf
Soto-Sanfiel, María T., Aymerich-Franch, Laura., & Romero, E. (2014). Personality in interaction: how the Big Five relate to the reception of interactive narratives. Comunicación y Sociedad, 27(3), 151-186. Available at: http://search.proquest.com/docview/1625907638/fulltextPDF/E40DE4644FD42E5PQ/1?accountid=15292 Último acceso el 6 de julio de 2018.
Tidwell, Jenifer. (2011). Designing interfaces. Sebastopol: O`Reilly.
Torrado Morales, Susana., Ródenas Cantero, Gabriel., & Ferreras Rodríguez, José G. (ed.) (2017). Territorios y narrativas audiovisuales. Barcelona: Editorial UOC.
Veglis, Andreas (2012). From cross media to transmedia reporting in newspaper articles. Publishing Research Quaterly, 28(4), 313-324. Available at: http://academia.edu/2122434/From_Cross_Media_to_Transmedia_Reporting_in_Newspaper_Articles