The survey asked over 500 college students nationwide about their experiences with viewing course content over video streamed online. And 78% reported that their professors have used web streaming - either a live feed or videotaped lectures - with nearly a third saying that their professors use web streaming frequently. 21% of students reported that over half their course learning is done by viewing video content online.

Many students admitted that they only show up to class for the exams, and instead borrow notes and tapes from others in their class. 32% say they've asked a friend or classmate to record a class for them so they didn't have to attend in person.

The top benefits college students associate with having their lectures and college courses available via video online are "being able to 'attend' classes even though they are really out of town" (63%) and "being able to attend class when they want, not when the university has it scheduled" (58%). 47% reported that online content made it easier for them to work more hours at their jobs. And 43% touted the benefit of not having to get dressed for class. Only 15% listed "being able to attend more parties" as the main benefit of having their courses available online.

Video Streaming Makes Them Better Students?

Students also said that being able to access course content online gave them the flexibility to learn at their own pace. 64% said that viewing classes via online video lets them fast forward through the parts they do not find useful. More than half also said that online video helps them to spend more time studying by themselves. In addition, many reported that they felt more comfortable asking questions to professors online because they don't have to speak up in front of the class.

Three-quarters of those responding said that having their professors post video online or live stream their lectures would help them be better prepared for exams. And over half said that they think they can learn more effectively when they can watch videos via live streaming than when they sit in a classroom, with 54% saying they've seen their grades improve because of access to video lectures.

A third of those responding admitted that their parents would be upset to hear about the frequency with which they skip class or about their preference for finding alternative ways to access course material. (Only a third?!)

But whether or not parents understand, the results of this study seem to confirm what many already see as higher education's future: it's going to be online. Many students already prefer it that way.

Photo credits: Flickr user Sholeh

The major drawback to mobile broadcasting is having to deal with network connectivity issues. Mobile users in an area of poor network coverage or who are moving in between areas of good coverage and bad, have typically faced video quality issues like stuttering, stops and starts. But with Justin.tv's mobile applications, both on Android and the soon-to-launch iPhone version, connectivity issues have been addressed through the use of smooth streaming and adaptive bitrate technologies. What this means is that the mobile app can ping the phone to determine how much upload bandwidth you currently have available and then make adjustments to the quality of the encoded video on the fly, adaptively reducing or increasing the bitrate of your stream as the network coverage gets better or worse.

Although the app can't record high-quality video when cell towers simply aren't providing your device with a good signal, the app can seamlessly make adjustments for varying coverage. In addition, it can perform hand-off from Wi-Fi to 3G and vice versa without dropping the connection.

The app also takes advantage of hardware developments like hardware encoding, a feature common on many of today's smartphones. Your phone doesn't have to offer hardware encoding (a separate chip that handles video) in order for you use to app, it makes the experience better if you do.

Given the talk of all the hardware and mobile advancements that have made the Justin.tv application finally possible, you may think that it's limited only to select devices or those running the latest version of the Android operating system, for example. But the company says that's not actually the case. The Android app runs on over 95% of the devices in the marketplace today. Justin.tv itself tested the app internally on ten different phones then ran a beta program where it was tested on a number of other handsets, too. When asked what phones it wouldn't work on, Seibel wasn't sure. Maybe the G1?, he wondered. We suppose we'll find out today as the app is released to the official market.

Other Features: Social Networking, Unlimited Storage, Chat

In addition to focusing on video quality, Justin.tv also strived to make an app that mainstream mobile users could embrace, even if they had never heard of the company. All registration and social networking integration setup, including direct broadcasting via links to Facebook and Twitter, is configured within the app itself. You never have to visit the company website. Other features introduced today include built-in chatting and unlimited video storage, at no additional cost. The app itself isn't monetized yet - it's free, has no ads and it may remain that way for good. The company says it's focused only on the product for now. The links created by the app drive traffic to the Justin.tv website which is already successfully monetized, so there may never be a need to charge for the app or insert ads within it, we're told.

Of course, a lot of companies claim their apps are "the best" at what they do, so Justin.tv released this comparison video that positions their Android app head-to-head with its competitors. Will it perform as well for you? There's only one way to find out.

Unsurprisingly, this study, which tracked the media consumption habits of 350 Americans, also found that older adults tend to spend more time in front of their TVs, while they also spend significantly less time in front of their computers. Interestingly, among all age groups, the overall time spent in front of screens is very consistent (about 8 1/2 hours), but boomers 45-54 consume about one hour more than all the other age groups.

With regards to computer usage, surfing the web, emailing, and using 'any software' are the predominant activities. On an average day, young adults 18-24 watch about 5 minutes of online video. As expected, this group also uses email far less than any other group (20 minutes), except for users over 65 (11 minutes). According to this study, younger adults also have a stronger tendency to use all different kinds of media simultaneously (think surfing the web on the couch while watching TV).

Online Video is Still Very Small Compared to TV

Surfing the mobile web (0.9 minutes per day), and watching mobile video (0.1 minutes per day) is clearly only a hobby for a small minority of users. We do know, however, that those users who do watch online and mobile video tend to watch a lot of it, so clearly, this market has a lot of room to grow, even though TV will surely hold on to its dominant position as the preferred means of consuming video content for quite a while.

A Few More Interesting Results

• users who owned a DVR early on used it to watch TV far more often than those who only got a DVR recently.
• HDTV owners who just bought their first or second HDTV watch more TV than others
• Americans over 45 spend more time fiddling with the screens on their GPS navigation systems than they spend on watching Internet video.

Sadly, the report does not include data for users under 18. Our suspicion is that the numbers for online and mobile video viewing might be quite different for this demographic.

Overall, the results from this study also correlate well with Nielsen's own A2/M2 Three Screen Report from 2008.

Here is a copy of the press release (pdf).

CC-licensed logo image used courtesy of Flickr user Aaron Escobar.

Among some of Watershed's most interesting features are its granular security settings (down to limiting access to certain IP addresses), detailed analytics, and real-time chat and polls.

Competition

Other white-label video streaming services like Level 3 (pdf) or Move Networks offer similar solutions, though they generally only target larger enterprises and media companies. While Watershed's pricing model seems reasonable, the price itself feels rather high, though Ustream's CEO argues that it is comparable to services from other live streaming providers.

Other streaming services like Mogulus Pro tend to charge a monthly fee for their 'pro' services. Mogulus, however, also charges for bandwidth and Ustream argues that its pay-as-you-go service provides more flexibility.