Curious if anyone on here has experience with both of these tools yet. Is there anything that GOREACT can do that ARC can't/etc?
This isn't a comprehensive review of both, but here's a few highlights of the differences. Caveat: I work at GoReact and teach at the University of Utah (I use GoReact and Canvas in my courses). I don't use Arc yet, but have a working knowledge of it. Our team interacts with the guys at Instructure on a fairly regular basis (GoReact is a Canvas Alliance Partner and has a popular Canvas LTI integration). We've been aware of Arc throughout its development and release. That should sufficiently disclose both my perspective as well as any biases.
Here's my take:
Similarities: Interactive video, video storage, and standard video controls. Both use commentary timelines, although Arc uses a more simplistic method similar to VoiceThread.
Arc is similar to Kaltura in that its core function is video management with tools built on top of it for commenting and discussion. Arc's self-stated purpose is to drive teacher and student conversations around videos.
Arc uses student avatars and has some reports about videos and that GoReact doesn't.
GoReact is designed around combining video and feedback so students can develop and demonstrate skills. At its core, GoReact is about formative assessment—coaching and training students to develop skills. GoReact supports:
Many universities already have an enterprise video solution that helps students engage with video. The universities using GoReact have the ability to dig in and assess student learning and provide personalized feedback so students learn skills rapidly.
These are both great tools, but they were built to do different things. GoReact is focused on skill-development; Arc is focused around engagement with video. If you're teaching History or Biology and you want to discuss a supportive video, pick Arc. If you're teaching skills like public speaking, language training, or teacher ed, pick GoReact.
Retrieving data ...