Audacity, as well as being free and open source, happens to be, in my opinion, one of the best sound recording (providing you have a good microphone) and editing tools currently available. As a Modern Languages teacher, I use Audacity regularly to produce interactive listening exercises, in combination with Hot Potatoes and Wordpress, which are then published online (you can see some examples here www.asisehace.net)
Audacity is very intuitive for the beginner while also allowing the more advanced user to produce professional standard recordings and podcasts. Watch this video which shows you how to create podcasts easily using Audacity in five steps.
Another point worth mentioning about Audacity is the fact that, as the new GCSEs roll in and marking is kept in-house, the examination boards will still be moderating the examinations and will accept recordings in digital format. This means that your department no longer has to invest in often costly recording equipment, all you need is a computer (and you're likely to have one of those!) with Audacity and a decent microphone.
Just a thought...
José Picardo
Since the change in the primary framework we have used audacity more and more to take voice recorded work the children have produced, and create either a podcast or single audio file that we can use on the school website. It has encouraged children to take part more in lessons, and they can't wait to go home to let their family listen to them "on the web". Without audacity, I cannot think of another piece of software that comes as close to the simplicity of use (and it's free!!)
that would be fantasic, if only the exam board would let us.
The exam board (aqa) stipulate that we must use their proprietry windows only tool:
https://aqa.maps-ict.com/dtt/
A few things you can do.
Write to AQA and say that the government's e-gif ploicy requires that they stick to open standards.
Change exam boards. There are several to choose from and one sure way to make providers support open standards is to show them they will lose customers if they don't.
Technically, if any exam board was in a dominant market position and looked like acting cooperatively with a technology supplier that was also in a dominant market position with the effect of blocking competition to the detriment of the customer, it would be illegal under Chapter 1 of the 1998 Competition Act.
http://www.oft.gov.uk/advice_and_resources/resource_base/legal/competiti...
The maximum penalty is a fine of 10% of entire company turnover. Might be worth pointing that out to AQA too.
To add to Ingotian's very valid legal points, I recently attended a meeting in which representatives of all major boards (including JQC) were present. They assured us that .mp3 would be one of the formats in which they would accept delivery of oral examinations.
My guess is that AQA's proprietary portfolio system eventually produces an .mp3 file or some other compatible format. If it is made available for free then I don't see the problem with using their system.
It is not an either/or situation in my view, you can still use Audacity for many other things (oral mocks for example).
In any case, as Ingotian has mentioned, AQA is just one of the boards.
José
Perhaps the ease with which files can be edited is not seen as a plus by AQA.
@DrC Yes, this argument is often brught up, but, if you think about it, are you telling me that you cannot cheat using the traditional tape recording method? Pause, rewind and record over your mistake, easily done. It's been known to happen.
This, I think, is not a valid argument for not using Audacity.
As long as the teacher remains in ontrol of the recording process and of the final outcome, Audacity is not different, in principle, to a traditional tape recorder. Let's keep in mind that audacity is free and that this is the alternative.
I run an Awarding Body accredited by QCA/Ofqual. One of the things all ABs need to do is assess risk from possible malpractice. So let's do a quick risk analysis on say a language certifcate. Possible risks
1. Forge the certificate
2. Marking errors
3. Student plagiarism in coursework
4. Teacher and student collusion to defraud the system
If I was a smart student which option would I chose? Forging the certificate is probably the simplest, least expensive and least likely chance of getting caught. How many employers would know what a GCSE languages certificate looked like? Any reasonably official looking certificate would be likely to get through. Marking errors are possible although probably with coursework where the teacher knows the cadidate, less likely as long as the mark scheme and guidance are unambiguous. Student plagiarism - again down to the local assessor knowing the candidate and it takes a fair bit of skill to disguise plagiarism because te teacer assesor knows the candidate and can check. Do professional teachers actively collude with learnrs to defraud the system. Ok, some might but I think certificate forgery is a much more serious worry and no-one seems much concerned about fixing that. Let's face it, an invigilaor in a conventional exam could tell the candidates the answers or turn a blind eye to crib sheets etc. There comes a point where a degree of trust has to be accepted.
No, the alternative alternative is the sound recorder built in to the board's software. A bit less subtle than Audacity, but a lot better than WIndows Sound Recorder :-)
Anonymous, AQA do not state that you must use their windows only tool to conduct the recordings. If you read their onstructions on the link that you provided page 3 Para. 1 Introduction bullet point 4.
submit digital recordings created using the DTT or an alternative recording application1 directly to AQA.
The DTT is only used to submit the recordings.
The DTT can be used both for the recordings and for submission. There *are* regulations about not being allowed to have multiple attempts unless the recordings get cocked up, but the files are standard mp3 and once created could be replaced. There's a documented naming convention.
Their software is obviously proprietary, windows only, and given development costs there's a snowball's chance of them producing Mac or Linux versions.
Audacity can indeed be used to edit and 'improve', but if you don't trust teachers to be professional the system falls to bits. Actually they don;t trust teacher or pupils, thereofre the whole idea of supervised coursework rather than the current free-for-all which is 'writing a project'. I'm sure they'll gradually tighten procedures for orals as well.
One reason why those schools that can are looking at GCSE very critically and moving to IGCSE or IB. State schools don't have that much choice in the matter, I think.