Highly Moderated Listserver
Since 1994
Invitations
Goals/Participants
Definitions/Issues
Tools/Media
Principles/Structure
Practices/Techniques
Implications/Next
Steps
Synchronous Tools & Media Applications
Synchronous Distance Education Support
Systems, Why Does USF Need One?
Shauna Schullo, University of South Florida, 2003
In 1996, McIsaac and Gunawardena stated “distance education, structured learning in which the student and instructor are separated by time and place, is currently the fastest growing form of domestic and international education. What was once considered a special form of education using nontraditional delivery systems, is now becoming an important concept in mainstream education.” Due to the advances in technology, distance education is growing at an even faster rate. However, many educational researchers discuss the fact that lack of interaction has long been and still is a drawback of distance learning courses (McIsaac & Gunawardena, 1996; McNabb, 1994; Milbank, 1994; Sherry, 1996). Until recently, reliable technology has not been widely available to alleviate this problem.
Research in distance learning continues to emphasize the importance of interaction for effective teaching (Anderson, 1995; Fuller & Zhang, 1993; Garrison, 2001; Hillman, 1994 & 1999; McIsaac, 1999; Moore, 1989; Moore & Kearsley, 1996; Sherry, 1998; Thomerson, 1996; Vrasidas, 1999; Wagner, 1994). However, most distance education methods, even real time solutions such as two-way video and audio, try to emulate lecture hall models of instruction. These methods suffer from long standing pedagogical problems, namely the lack of active student participation and effective interaction. To assuage these problems, many instructors are adding asynchronous computer communications (CMC) to traditional distance learning technologies (McIsaac & Gunawardena, 1996; Burge & Howard, 1990).
At USF and many other institutions, the largest majority of distance courses now use online asynchronous tools, possibly in conjunction with streaming video or other media enhancements. However, interaction between students and instructors is still not sufficient to alleviate the isolation and often frustrations distance students experience. Research shows that this isolation can be a serious detriment to learning in many cases (Besser & Donahue, 1996; Cookson, 1989; Galusha, 1997; Hara & Khling 1999; Kahl & Cropley, 1986; Kubala, 1998; Lever-Duffy, et. al., 1996; Lockett, 1998; Soles & Moller, 2001; Twigg, 1997)
Studies indicate that interactions between students and instructors as well as student-to-student interaction greatly enhance education at a distance by improving attitudes, encouraging earlier completion of coursework, better performance on tests, and greater retention (Willis, 1995; Moore, 1989; Hillman, 1994 & 1999; Harasim, 1990).
A discussion of some important distance education research on the subject of interaction was written by Dr. Barry Willis (1995) (http://www.uidaho.edu/eo/distglan.html). Willis reports,
“Many distant learners require support and guidance to make the most of their distance learning experiences (Threlkeld & Brzoska, 1994). This support typically takes the form of some combination of student-instructor and student-student interaction. Research findings on the need for interaction have produced some important guidelines for instructors organizing courses for distant students:
· Learners value timely feedback regarding course assignments, exams, and projects (Egan, et al., 1991).
· Learners benefit significantly from their involvement in small learning groups. These groups provide support and encouragement along with extra feedback on course assignments. Most importantly, the groups foster the feeling that if help is needed it is readily available.
· Learners are more motivated if they are in frequent contact with the instructor. More structured contact might be utilized as a motivational tool (Coldeway, et al., 1980).
· Utilization of on-site facilitators who develop a personal rapport with students and who are familiar with equipment and other course materials increases student satisfaction with courses (Burge & Howard, 1990).
· The use of technologies such as fax machines, computers, and telephones can also provide learner support and interaction opportunities.”
Historically, technologies that increase interaction have been expensive, difficult to use and not often utilized. With the advances of technology and the highly prolific use of the Internet, distance learning is changing. It is now feasible to incorporate interactive instruction using a new model of distributed learning that combines asynchronous online learning with online synchronous solutions.
USF has taken substantial strides to create learning communities that incorporate many of the above-mentioned interactions and significant progress has been made in our asynchronous online instructional environments. However, we still need a solution that adds the synchronous interaction many students require to complete their learning experience. A model, which combines both asynchronous and synchronous learning to connect students, instructors, and educational content in rich, online learning communities, is our next logical step. The desired outcome of using these synchronous communication tools is to add value of interaction over "mere" content. This will enable social-constructionist and collaborative approaches to learning, provide access to a sense of community that is not currently available to distance students, and integrate communication into the structure of courses resulting in students actively able to negotiate communication situations and increased technology literacy.
One model suggested by Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute is labeled the 80/20 model (Danchak, 1999). In their model, approximately 80% of a student's time is spent on self-paced engagement of online materials and about 20% in interactive, synchronous learning sessions with the instructor and other students. The percentages given are of course flexible, and should be adjusted to meet optimal allocations of time between synchronous and asynchronous components. This ratio is a function of several variables including the nature of the course content, the age of the students, development costs, and faculty. Rensselaer facilitates their program with Learnlinc, an online synchronous courseware solution. Other universities have chosen different solutions. The current market provides USF with many options to choose from for our online synchronous classroom and web-conferencing needs. This paper will outline some of those systems and will be used to inform the selection process to determine the best solution for the USF environment.
What follows is a list of advantages and disadvantages to moving into the synchronous arena flowed by a description of desired product features.
Advantages
To start the discussion of advantages to online synchronous learning, let's take a look at the writings of Dr. Betty Collis of University of Twente (1996), she states that there are "four equally compelling advantages to synchronous systems:
· Motivation - synchronous systems focus the energy of the group, providing motivation to distance learners to keep up with their peers and continue with their studies.
· Telepresence - real time interaction with its opportunity to convey tone and nuance helps to develop group cohesion and the sense of being part of a learning community.
· Good feedback - synchronous systems provide quick feedback on ideas and support consensus and decision-making in group activities, both of which enliven distance education.
· Pacing - synchronous events encourage students to keep up-to-date with the course and provide a discipline to learning, which helps people to prioritize their studies. "
In this sense, online synchronous learning has many similarities to the physical classroom. The similarities can be a positive element if the best environment is encouraged. For example, live instruction with immediate feedback and human touch benefits, interaction with other professionals whose interests are similar to your own and hands-on labs or exercises with instructor guidance can motivate and increase student learning. Since a live instructor can lead synchronous online learning, the same instructional design methodology can usually be utilized.
When compared to asynchronous online distance learning, synchronous online learning can be more effective in many ways. Aside from the irreplaceable value of interactivity already discussed, the content can be shaped to the needs of a student, instead of being one-size-fits-all. An instructor can assess students’ level of knowledge and tailor the course material appropriately. In addition the inclusion of a scheduled time adds the perception (or reality) that the instructor a students classmates are pushing them to show up, providing external motivation, which leads to higher retention and completion rates.
In higher education as well as Industry, the trend for distance instruction is a blended approach, which combines synchronous and asynchronous media in an attempt to capitalize on the evident benefits of both modes.
Disadvantages
Of course, synchronous online learning is not for everyone. We will face certain challenges in implementing and supporting a new approach, especially since it also includes technology. For starters, users, both instructors and students, will need to be comfortable with the technology and environment and able to grasp the concept of this form of online interaction. The loss of the face-to-face interaction found in a traditional classroom is still a problem. For some learners this may be irreplaceable, as they understand concepts better through direct exchange with an instructor. However, providers of this technology are already making advances to compensate, acclimating more interactivity and expression of emotions with the ability to raise your hand, clap or laugh. While this doesn’t put users face-to-face with their instructor and peers, they do feel more connected. The use of video (one-way and two-way) would help to alleviate this a bit more, but use of video increases the barriers of bandwidth limitations.
In addition, since synchronous online learning is instructor or facilitator led, inconvenience of scheduling and real time participation will be drawbacks for some distance learners. Students and instructors will have to be somewhere they can participate in the course at a specific time. This place can be anywhere with a decent Internet connection, as most systems claim to do well at 56K modem speed. Even with the listed disadvantages, used as a supplement and not as a fulltime replacement for either face-to-face or asynchronous learning, this method will add value to our teaching and learning models.
- Resources for BCCOOC Online Session May
4, 2004:
"Synchronous Groupware for BCCOOC" - Elluminate [vClass]
- Telephone Conference Calls
- Instant Messaging (IM)
Synchronous Distance Education Support
Systems Available
The
following is a fairly comprehensive list of products available on the market.
They vary greatly and we did not do extensive testing on all of them.
However, the list is included to make the evaluation complete. Those not
evaluated were removed from the list for one or more of the following reasons:
-
Cost prohibitive
-
Did not support the structure needed for our situation (Unix Severs, Windows and PC clients)
-
Missing significant number of desired features
|
Product |
Website |
Pilot tested – or reason not tested |
|
Centra Symposium |
Windows Only (was reviewed and tested with favorable results) |
|
|
Elluminate (vClass) |
Product reviewed and tested |
|
|
Horizon Live Distance Learning Inc. |
Product reviewed and tested |
|
|
Interwise |
Unable to review due to problems with their web site- - does not bode well |
|
|
LearnLinc |
Windows only |
|
|
Lotus LearningSpace |
Live collaboration piece is Windows only, also cost prohibitive |
|
|
Placeware
|
Windows only |
|
|
Webex |
Only hosting options are available, cannot run our own server. |
|
|
Web-4M |
New to the list and looks like it may be a player. Have not run a pilot yet. Being used at FSU. |
The remainder of this paper will provide information on the two systems that seem to meet our needs. Another system (Web-4M) has become a possibility and may need to be pilot tested. Both vClass and Horizonlive meet the majority of the desired requirements for a product of this nature on our campus. Centra was also tested, the product was good, but it is not feasible as it does not run on Unix servers and has no Macintosh clients. The following comments will assist you in understanding how the products performed in a true pilot test situation with students in a live class. To assist in understanding the following tables, please refer to this legend:
|
ü |
The product has this feature and it is sufficient for our needs. |
|
ü+ |
The product does this very well. |
|
ü- |
The product has the feature but it is not as good as it should be. |
A quick view version (checks but no comments) is available at the end of this document for easier comparisons.
Feature Review
|
Element |
Desired Functionality |
Systems Considered |
||
|
|
|
Elluminate (vClass) V4.0 - 3/28/03 |
HorizonLive - (Symposium) V3.1.1 - 3/30/03 |
Centra (CentraOne 7.0) 7/16/03 |
|
Administrative Issues |
||||
|
Pricing Structure |
A. USF will require an unlimited license for this product in order to serve the community of students and to provide for conferencing.
B. The prices seen here are for an unlimited number of users unless otherwise noted. |
A. ü Unlimited licenses
B. |
A. ü Unlimited licenses
B.
|
|
|
Blackboard Compatibility |
A. The product is compatible with Blackboard in that one login and one password will allow access through Blackboard and into synchronous classrooms.
B. It is a Blackboard partner which allows for easy insertion into an asynchronous class shell |
A. ü- Elluminate claims that this product can interface with our blackboard system allowing for only one login and no additional authentication. This needs to be verified by the technical gurus.
B. ----Not currently a BB partner. Not sure if this can be solved with API. |
A. ü Can authenticate with Blackboard login.
B. ü A BB partner using BB building block technologies. Not sure how easy it is to add an event to Blackboard. |
|
|
Technical compatibility with current systems |
A. The product would need to be run on a Unix system to be compatible with our current technical systems.
B. Should have a client or plugin for both PC and Mac environment, Unix would also be useful. |
A. ü VClass runs on both Unix and Windows servers.
B. ü Windows, Mac or Unix clients. |
A. ü Unix is the only server platform
B. ü Windows, Mac or Unix clients. |
|
|
Minimum Client Requirements |
|
For an IBM compatible: · Pentium II 266 MHz processor or faster · Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/NT · 64 megabytes of RAM · 20 Megabytes of available disk space on your hard drive · Soundcard with speakers and microphones or headset · 28.8 kbps or higher internet connection · Internet Explorer 4.0 (or higher) or Netscape 4.7 (or higher)
·
Graphic
Tablet (optional) · Mac OS 9.0, 9.1, 9.2, Mac OS X 10.1 or later · G3 233 or better · 64 Megabytes for OS 9, 128 megabytes for OS X and above · 20 megabytes of available disk space on your hard drive · Stuffit Expander · Soundcard with speakers and microphone or headset · 28.8 kbps or higher internet connection · Internet Explorer 4.0 (or higher) · Graphic Tablet (optional) |
Participant· Windows, Mac or Unix · 32 MB RAM · IE or Netscape 4.0+ · RealPlayer 8+ or QuickTime 5* · Internet Access · Sound card with speakers*
Presenter · Windows, Mac or Unix · 64 MB RAM · IE 5.0+ or Netscape 4.0+ · RealProducer 8.5 or QuickTime encoder* · Internet Access · Sound card with microphone*
|
|
|
Need for additional software/plugins |
Ideally, there would be no downloads required. However, this is probably not possible. So, this section will rate how easy it is to install whatever is required from both the participant side and the instructor/leader side. |
Sun Microsystems Java Web Start or an open-source alternative (Open-JNLP) must be installed and configured prior to running vClass™ for either a live or a pre-recorded session. This can be a significant download on a modem, but it is easy to install. |
Simple wizard is run to check for system compatibilities. Instructions are provided on how to fix any problems in setup that are found. Possible downloads, but easy to install and most are small. |
|
|
Element |
Desired Functionality |
Systems Considered |
||
|
|
|
Elluminate (vClass) V4.0 3/28/03 |
HorizonLive (Symposium) V3.1.1 3/30/03 |
Centra (CentraOne 7.0) 7/16/03 |
|
Desired Features |
||||
|
Instructor Control |
The instructor should have as much control as possible over the development and distribution of the course without causing undue problems for the technical support personnel.
A. Instructor has full control over all available tools during the course session
B. Instructor can determine if a course should be archived for playback
In addition, C. Instructors should be able to control the pace and interaction in the course from within the instructor interface. |
A. ü+ The instructor has great control of the environment.
B. ü Instructor can start a recording of the class for archival purposes.
C. ü+ Instructor can control most tools including the ability to spontaneously create additional materials and the ability to create breakout rooms on the fly. These real-time tools are easy to use. |
A. ü- Instructor has a significant amount of control of this system, but much of it needs to be prepared in advance.
B. ü- Instructor can start a recording of the class for archival purposes only if not using 2-way audio.
C. ü- Instructor loading of information on the fly was difficult and the interface for the instructor a bit buggy. Not sure if the instructor can create breakout rooms on the fly or if they need to be made ahead of time. If using 2 way audio, the instructor does not always have good control of who has the floor. |
|
|
Textual Chat
|
A. Allows for real-time conversations with all other class participants using the keyboard. It is sequential, with all messages intermingling based on when they were typed.
B. Access can be controlled by the instructor or left open for anyone to use.
C. Should be able to save for future reference. |
A. ü Textual Chat is available and works well.
B. ü The instructor can determine if chat is to be used.
C. ü Is recorded if session is recorded. |
A. ü Textual Chat is available and works well.
B. ---Cannot see how instructor can control chat.
C. ü Chat can be logged and is recorded if session is recorded. |
|
|
Private Messaging |
A. Private messaging should be available between instructor and student for private questions without disruption of session.
B. It can also be available between students, but should be controlled by the instructor (he should be able to disable this). |
A. ü Private messaging is available and works well.
B. ü The instructor can determine if Private Messaging is to be used. Also, instructor sees private messages between students. |
A. ü Private messaging is available and works well. Uses an external window.
B. ---Instructor cannot control Private Messaging.
|
|
|
Content Presentation |
Provides instructor, guest speaker or students, with authoring privileges so that they can upload prepared presentation materials.
A. It should be easy for an instructor to author ahead and save agenda and/or on the fly during class.
B. Content can contain many different data forms, but must contain the ability to use PowerPoint slides, HTML and graphics.
C. Instructor can markup the content during the session.
D. No plug-ins are required in addition to the regular software to accomplish this task. |
A. ü Content can be loaded ahead of time or on the fly fairly quickly and easily.
B. ü Uploading of materials in the form of PPT slides is quite easy. Any image can be loaded as long as it is Web friendly. C. ü Instructor can markup the content during the session.
D. ü There are no additional plug-ins or programs required. |
A. ü Content can be loaded ahead of time or on the fly fairly quickly and easily.
B. ü Uploading of materials in the form of PPT slides is quite easy. Any image can be loaded as long as it is Web friendly. C. ü Instructor can markup the content during the session.
D. ü- The only additional program needed is to upload questions for polling. |
|
|
Whiteboard |
A. The whiteboard should be object oriented so that each object can be deleted and edited sepeartely.
B. Both instructors and learners should be able to use the whiteboard, but access should be controllable by the instructor.
C. Graphics should be able to be pasted or uploaded to the white board for discussion. |
A. ü Object Oriented whiteboard.
B. ü+ The instructor controls access, but all tools can be made available to the student.
C. ü Image files can be imported |
A. ü Object Oriented whiteboard.
B. ü+ The instructor controls access, but all tools can be made available to the student.
C. ü Image files can be imported |
|
|
Audio |
A. Should provide for two way communication between all participants in the class using a toggle switch for current speaker. Can use either full or half duplex options.
B. Access can be controlled by the instructor or left open in full duplex mode for anyone to use.
C. This is typically conducted using Voice over Internet Protocol (VOIP). It is important that it does not require a phone bridge or telephone communications in addition to an Internet connection. |
A. ü+ Can be set for two-way communication. A Talk button is built into the interface and can be held open without holding down any key. It is released by clicking again. Only one can speak at a time
B. ü+ Is easily controlled by the instructor. Can give students the microphone or remove their ability to talk.
C. ü Does not require any additional equipment except for a microphone and speakers. VOIP is used. |
A. ü Can be set for two-way communication, using the control key to activate the microphone. You must hold the control key down while you speak and release it to shut off microphone.
B. ü- The person setting up the event, not the instructor, controls number allowed to speak at one time. If more than one is allowed etiquette must be enforced to keep people from talking over each other.
C. ü+ Can utilize a phone bridge as well a VOIP. |
|
|
Video |
A. Provides a means of one way or two way communication between all participants in the class using a toggle switch for current video.
B. Access can be controlled by the instructor or left open for anyone to use.
***This feature is one that would be nice, but is not considered to be absolutely necessary for courses due to the technological barriers that accompany the current technology. However, it would be useful if this product is to be used for conducting meetings, especially over the I2 connections. |
A. ---** Does not currently support video. A work around was tested using the application-sharing feature. This would be one way to facilitate 2-way video with high bandwidth connections. |
A. ü- Supports one-way video only.
B. ---Video is an option when setting up the event. When video is used there is no way to use 2-way audio. The instructor has no control. |
|
|
Polling/ Questioning |
A. Provides the instructor with a means of getting feedback and responses from the participants.
B. Questions can be preplanned or on the fly.
C. Questions are presented in a multiple formats; multiple choice, true/false, yes/no, fill in the blank and possibly short answer.
D. Students are able to respond with a click of the mouse.
E. Good output for reporting should be included that records responses for the instructor to review later.
F. Good output for reporting back to students during the class should also be available. |
A. ü+ Easy to use polling tool.
B. ü Questions can be preplanned or created on the fly.
C. ü+ Supports the following question types: multiple choice, true/false, yes/no, fill in the blank and possibly short answer.
D. ü Students can respond with the click of the mouse.
E. ----Not sure
F. ü+ Has the ability to push results back to students in a summary format such as pie charts, bar chart, etc. |
A. ü Basic yes, no polling is built in, but extensive polling requires an additional program for the instructor.
B. ü Questions can be preplanned or created on the fly.
C. ü+ The external polling program supports the following question types: multiple choice, true/false, yes/no, fill in the blank and possibly short answer.
D. ü Students can respond with the click of the mouse.
E. ---Not sure
F. ü- I was able to create polls, but was not successful in getting the interactive feature, which allows for pushing results to students to function properly on a regular basis. These tools will be replaced with an internal one in the next version. |
|
|
Synchronized/Guided Web Surfing |
This allows the instructor to take everyone participating to a web site. The instructor can then either let students explore on their own or use the web as a presentation tool and take the students along for the ride.
A. This tools is present and works well.
B. Instructor can control the environment to the point of giving students the ability to “take” the class on a tour.
C. Instructor can also allow for individual navigation once at the site.
D. Bookmarks can be created ahead of time to make the use of this tool easier.
E. The tool is not browser specific. |
A. ü This tools is present and works well..
B. ---Not Sure
C. ü Instructor can allow for individual navigation once at the site.
D. ü Can prepare slides in advance
E. ü The tool is not browser specific. |
A. ü This tools is present and works well.
B. ---Not sure
C. ü Instructor can allow for individual navigation once at the site.
D. ü Can prepare slides in advance
E. ü The tool is not browser specific |
|
|
Hand Raising/ simple feedback |
A. Students can interact with the instructor by raising their hands in a manner similar to the face-to-face classroom.
B. The instructor is notified and students are placed in a queue based on the time they raised their hand.
C. Additional Feedback for students to the instructor is available such as smileys, hand clapping and pace meters. |
A. ü Includes the ability for students to raise hand.
B. ü+ Raised hands are queued so that the instructor will know who raised their hand first.
C. ü+ Student can give a thumbs up and down, smiley and frown. Student can also “step out” and the instructor can see this status. |
A. ü Has a function that allows students to click on a question mark to notify the instructor that the student has a question
B. ---Not sure, but do not remember the ability to see who was first
C. ü Student can use a smiley, a frown and hand clapping. |
|
|
Application Sharing/ Viewing |
A. The ability to open and share any program on your computer. The screen is replicated on each particpant’s screen. Full application sharing should be possible, not just viewing.
B. Application sharing should be two way with instructor activation.
C. The ability to share a specific window or region in addition to the whole desktop is useful to control bandwidth requirements. |
A. ü+ Has a good full application-sharing tool. That seems to allow use of any program on your machine. Elluminate claims their app sharing is quicker and functions better than the competition. Can also do a simple screen capture. Used app sharing to stream video.
B. ü The instructor has the ability to give sharing capabilities to students
C. ü+ Contains both regional and full screen application sharing. |
A. ü+ Has a good full application-sharing tool. That seems to allow use of any program on your machine.
B. ü The instructor has the ability to give sharing capabilities to students
C. ü+ Contains both regional and full screen application sharing. |
|
|
Group Breakout Rooms |
A. This feature allows the class to break into smaller working groups. Each group would have a space that contains separate tools for interaction. B. Ideally, all tools would be duplicated in the Breakout room for group use. C. Breakout Rooms should be instructor created (preplanned and/or on the fly). D. Breakout rooms can be recorded. E. Materials from breakout rooms can be brought back to the main room. |
A. ü Instructor can create any number of breakout rooms and place students in each room.
B. ü Tools are duplicated in each room.
C. ü+ Rooms can be created on the fly easily.
D. ---Rooms are not recorded.
E. ---Not sure |
Was unable to test this feature in the single channel provided by Horizonlive. |
|
|
Additional features included in product |
This will list the features that are found in each product that are not on the want list or stand out in a certain product. |
|
|
|
|
Element |
Desired Functionality |
Systems Considered |
|||
|
|
|
Elluminate (vClass) V4.0 - 3/28/03 |
HorizonLive - (Symposium) V3.1.1 - 3/30/03 |
Centra (CentraOne 7.0) 7/16/03 |
|
|
Usability Issues All usability elements are scored on a 1-5 Likert scale |
|
||||
|
Screen Navigation |
Navigation of the screen can be difficult for users with little to no experience. It is possible to change the way the windows are structured, and there are many different elements that need to be navigated. For instance, to talk, the student will need to know how to activate the microphone option which is similar to pressing the talk button on a CB radio. Screen navigation in this product is considered to be … |
1= Easy--------------5= Difficult
2 |
1= Easy ------------5= Difficult
4 |
|
|
|
Screen Busyness |
As noted before, there is a lot on the screen in a SWBCS. This can cause a visual overload that may effect learning. This rates the products based on how busy the screen is for both students and faculty |
1= Clean ---------------5= Busy
2 |
1= Clean ---------------5= Busy
4 |
|
|
|
Instructor ease of use |
If it is not easy to use, instructors will not be successful. This category discusses how easy the systems are to operate from the instructors perspective. Task such as putting up presentation slides, operating instructor controls and multitasking in the environment are considered. In addition, the ability to get help from the system and the intuitive nature of the system are considered. |
It took me approximately 1 hour to orient myself to the vClass system the first time I used it as an instructor. The tools were laid out well and I was comfortable with the interface fairly quickly.
1= Easy -----------5= Difficult
2 |
The first time I used HorizonLive, it was with no direction from the support people at the company. I muddled through with the basics, but was unable to successful use the system to its potential. I will be receiving an hour of training from HL for the second go around and will see if it helps to make the experience better. After the training, I was a bit better equipped, but the operation from an instructor’s perspective was still not seamless. I still am unable to accomplish everything I know the system is capable of.
1= Easy -------------------------------5= Difficult
4 |
|
|
|
Student ease of use |
Adding considerable cognitive load to the students by making it difficult to navigate and use the system will not make for successful use of the synchronous classroom software. This category discusses how easy the systems are to operate from the students perspective. Tasks such as viewing presentation slides, asking for help, using the communication tools and overall screen usability are discussed. In addition, the ability to get help from the system and the intuitive nature of the system are considered. |
1= Easy -----------5= Difficult
2 |
1= Easy ---------5= Difficult
3 |
|
|
|
Speed/ flexibility, Quality of transmissions |
In order to effectively present material to students in different areas with different technical capabilities, it is important that the system have some flexibility in how much data is sent at one time. Clear transmissions at any speed are important. However, we also would like to not limit ourselves so that we can take advantage of our high bandwidth capabilities at USF. |
1 = Bad ---------5 = Excellent
3 I am not sure that our tests truly measured this. We would need to add more students (a large load) to see if there were problems. Although I tested with students on modems, there was not application sharing and audio tended to be a slight bit choppy. |
1 = Bad --------5 = Excellent
3 I am not sure that our tests truly measured this. We would need to add more students (a large load) to see if there were problems. Although I tested with students on modems, there was not application sharing and audio tended to be a slight bit choppy. |
|
|
|
|
|
Elluminate (vClass) V4.0 - 3/28/03 |
HorizonLive - (Symposium) V3.1.1 - 3/30/03 |
Centra (CentraOne 7.0) 7/16/03 |
|
Additional Comments |
|
VClass seems to have some problems with XP, but this has not been reproduced. However, on my home machine, I have been unsuccessful in running the program and it tends to shut down my machine. This may have been fixed in newer versions, as I have not tried it since Fall semester. Many of the new features have not been tested in a live session with myself as instructor and students. Since the initial testing they have improved the interaction capabilities, added breakout rooms and enhanced their application sharing to name a few noticeable changes. |
Horizonlive repeated had problems during the trials I attempted. They did not have support on the weekends or after hours, so the problems could not be solved. Initially the testing was as a courtesy, so this did not bother me as much. However, the last test cost $500. I would consider 2/3 of the sessions unsuccessful due errors. During one session, the audio console did not work. The error message was erroneous, leaving me with no idea what the problem might actually be. On a second instance, the instructors console became flaky and did not show the students view of the screen or list participants as they entered. This occurred again in the last session. This causes many of the tools to be useless (hand-raising) yes, no, etc.) Polling is an external product and I did not find it satisfactory. I also was unable to test Breakout rooms as I had only one channel available. |
|
Comparison Checklists For Synchronous Online Courseware
Administrative Issues
|
Element |
Desired Functionality |
Systems Considered |
||
|
|
|
Elluminate (vClass) V4.0 - 3/28/03 |
HorizonLive - (Symposium) V3.1.1 - 3/30/03 |
Centra (CentraOne 7.0) 7/16/03 |
|
Administrative Issues |
||||
|
Pricing Structure |
A. USF will require an unlimited license for this product in order to serve the community of students and to provide for conferencing. B. The prices seen here are for an unlimited number of users unless otherwise noted. |
A. ü B. |
A. ü B.
|
|
|
Blackboard Compatibility |
A. The product is compatible with Blackboard in that one login and one password will allow access through Blackboard and into synchronous classrooms. B. It is a Blackboard partner which allows for easy insertion into an asynchronous class shell |
A. ü- B. ---- |
A. ü B. ü |
|
|
Technical compatibility with current systems |
A. The product would need to be run on a Unix system to be compatible with our current technical systems. B. Should have a client or plugin for both PC and Mac environment, Unix would also be useful. |
A. ü B. ü |
A. ü B. ü |
|
Comparison Checklist For Synchronous Online Courseware
Desired Features
|
Element |
Desired Functionality |
Systems Considered |
||
|
|
|
Elluminate (vClass) V4.0 3/28/03 |
HorizonLive (Symposium) V3.1.1 3/30/03 |
Centra (CentraOne 7.0) 7/16/03 |
|
Desired Features |
||||
|
Instructor Control |
The instructor should have as much control as possible over the development and distribution of the course without causing undue problems for the technical support personnel.
A. Instructor has full control over all available tools during the course session B. Instructor can determine if a course should be archived for playback C. Instructors should be able to control the pace and interaction in the course from within the instructor interface. |
A. ü+ B. ü C. ü+ |
A. ü- B. ü- C. ü- |
|
|
Textual Chat
|
A. Allows for real-time conversations with all other class participants using the keyboard. It is sequential, with all messages intermingling based on when they were typed. B. Access can be controlled by the instructor or left open for anyone to use. C. Should be able to save for future reference. |
A. ü B. ü C. ü |
A. ü B. --- C. ü |
|
|
Private Messaging |
A. Private messaging should be available between instructor and student for private questions without disruption of session. B. It can also be available between students, but should be controlled by the instructor (he should be able to disable this). |
A. ü B. ü |
A. ü B. ---
|
|
|
Content Presentation |
Provides instructor, guest speaker or students, with authoring privileges so that they can upload prepared presentation materials.
A. It should be easy for an instructor to author ahead and save agenda and/or on the fly during class. B. Content can contain many different data forms, but must contain the ability to use PowerPoint slides, HTML and graphics. C. Instructor can markup the content during the session. D. No plug-ins are required in addition to the regular software to accomplish this task. |
A. ü B. ü C. ü D. ü |
A. ü B. ü C. ü D. ü- |
|
|
Whiteboard |
A. The whiteboard should be object oriented so that each object can be deleted and edited sepeartely. B. Both instructors and learners should be able to use the whiteboard, but access should be controllable by the instructor. C. Graphics should be able to be pasted or uploaded to the white board for discussion. |
A. ü B. ü+ C. ü |
A. ü B. ü+ C. ü |
|
|
Audio |
A. Should provide for two way communication between all participants in the class using a toggle switch for current speaker. Can use either full or half duplex options. B. Access can be controlled by the instructor or left open in full duplex mode for anyone to use. C. This is typically conducted using Voice over Internet Protocol (VOIP). It is important that it does not require a phone bridge or telephone communications in addition to an Internet connection. |
A. ü+ B. ü+ C. ü |
A. ü B. ü- C. ü+ |
|
|
Video |
A. Provides a means of one way or two way communication between all participants in the class using a toggle switch for current video. B. Access can be controlled by the instructor or left open for anyone to use. ***This feature is one that would be nice, but is not considered to be absolutely necessary for courses due to the technical barriers that accompany the current technology. However, it would be useful if this product is to be used for conducting meetings, especially over the I2 connections.
|
A. ---** B. --- |
A. ü- B. --- |
|
|
Polling/ Questioning |
A. Provides the instructor with a means of getting feedback and responses from the participants. B. Questions can be preplanned or on the fly. C. Questions are presented in a multiple formats; multiple choice, true/false, yes/no, fill in the blank and possibly short answer. D. Students are able to respond with a click of the mouse. E. Good output for reporting should be included that records responses for the instructor to review later. F. Good output for reporting back to students during the class should also be available. |
A. ü+ B. ü C. ü+ D. ü E. ----? F. ü+ |
A. ü B. ü C. ü+ D. ü E. ---? F. ü- |
|
|
Synchronized/Guided Web Surfing |
This allows the instructor to take everyone participating to a web site. The instructor can then either let students explore on their own or use the web as a presentation tool and take the students along for the ride.
A. This tools is present and works well. B. Instructor can control the environment to the point of giving students the abiliity to “take” the class on a tour. C. Instructor can also allow for individual navigation once at the site. D. Bookmarks can be created ahead of time to make the use of this tool easier. E. The tool is not browser specific. |
A. ü B. ---? C. ü D. ü E. ü |
A. ü B. ---? C. ü D. ü E. ü |
|
|
Hand Raising/ simple feedback |
A. Students can interact with the instructor by raising their hands in a manner similar to the face-to-face classroom. B. The instructor is notified and students are placed in a que based on the time they raised their hand. C. Additional Feedback for students to the instructor is availble such as smileys, hand clapping and pace meters. |
A. ü B. ü+ C. ü+ |
A. ü B. ---? C. ü |
|
|
Application Sharing/ Viewing |
A. The ability to open an dhare any program on your computer. The screen is replicated on each particpant’s screen. Full application sharing should be possible, not just viewing. B. Application sharing should be two way with instructor activation. C. The ability to share a specific window or region in addition to the whole desktop is useful to control bandwidth requirements. |
A. ü+ B. ü C. ü+ |
A. ü+ B. ü C. ü+ |
|
|
Group Breakout Rooms |
A. This feature allows the class to break into smaller working groups. Each group would have a space that contains separate tools for interaction. B. Ideally, all tools would be duplicated in the Breakout room for group use. C. Breakoutrroms should be instructor created (preplanned and/or on the fly). D. Breakout rooms can be recorded. E. Materials from breakout rooms can be brought back to the main room. |
A. ü B. ü C. ü+ D. --- E. ---? |
Not Tested |
|
|
Element |
Desired Functionality |
Systems Considered |
|||
|
|
|
Elluminate (vClass) V4.0 - 3/28/03 |
HorizonLive - (Symposium) V3.1.1 - 3/30/03 |
Centra (CentraOne 7.0) 7/16/03 |
|
|
Usability Issues All usability elements are scored on a 1-5 Likert scale |
|
||||
|
Screen Navigation |
Navigation of the screen can be difficult for users with little to no experience. It is possible to change the way the windows are structured, and there are many different elements that need to be navigatged. For instance, to talk, the student will need to know how to activate the microphone option which is similar to pressing the talk button on a CB radio. Screen naviigation in this product is considered to be … 1= Easy -------------------------------5= Difficult
|
2 |
4 |
|
|
|
Screen Busyness |
As noted before, there is a lot on the screen in a SWBCS. This can cause a visual overload that may effect learning. This rates the products based on how busy the screen is for both students and faculty 1= Clean -----------------------------------5= Busy
|
2 |
4 |
|
|
|
Instructor ease of use |
If it is not easy to use, instructors will not be successful. This category discusses how easy the systems are to operate from the instructors perspective. Task such as putting up presentation slides, operating instructor controls and multitasking in the environment are considered. In addition, the ability to get help from the system and the intuitive nature of the system are considered. 1= Easy -------------------------------5= Difficult |
2 |
4 |
|
|
|
Student ease of use |
Adding considerable cognitive load to the sutdents by making it difficult to naivgate and use the system will not make for successful use of the syncrhonous classroom software. This category discusses how easy the systems are to operate from the students perspective. Tasks such as viewing presentation slides, asking for help, using the communciation tools and overall screen usability are discussed. In addition, the ability to get help from the system and the intuitive nature of the system are considered. 1= Easy -------------------------------5= Difficult |
2 |
3 |
|
|
|
Speed/ flexibility, Quality of transmissions |
In order to effectively present material to students in different areas with different technical capabilities, it is important that the system have some flexibility in how much data is sent at one time. Clear transmissions at any speed are important. However, we also would like to not limit ourselves so that we can take advantage of our high bandwidth capabilities at USF. 1 = Bad -----------------------5 = Excellent |
3
|
3
|
|
|
References
Anderson, T. D. (1995). Transactional Issues in Distance Education: The Impact of Design in Audioteleconferencing. The American journal of distance education. 9(2), 27.
Besser, H & Donahue, S. (1996). Introduction and overview: Perspectives on . . . distance independent education, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(11) 801-804.
Burge, E.J., & Howard, J.L. (1990). Audio-conferencing in graduate education: A Case Study. The American Journal of Distance Education, 4(2), 3-13.
Coldeway, D.O., MacRury, K., & Spencer, R. (1980). Distance education from the learner's perspective: The results of individual learner tracking at Athabasca University. Edmonton, Alberta: Athabasca University.
Collis, B, (1996) Tele-Learning in a Digital World: The Future of Distance Learning, Internet. The Globalisation of Education. Retrieved April 2, 2003, from http://www-iet.open.ac.uk/staff/robinm/GlobalEdu.html.
Cookson, P.S. (1989) Research on learners and learning in distance education: a review, The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 22-34.
Danchak, M. M., (2000). WebCT and the Rensselaer 80/20 Model. Presented at the WebCT2000, July 9 – 12, 2000, Athens, Georgia. Retrieved April 2, 2003, from http://www.rpi.edu/~danchm/Pubs/WebCT2000.htm#_ftn1
Egan, M.W., Sebastian, J., & Welch, M. (1991). Effective television teaching: Perceptions of those who count most...distance learners. Proceedings of the Rural Education Symposium, Nashville, TN.
Fuller, C. P., & Zhang, S. (1993). Perceptions of Interaction: The critical predictor in distance education. The American journal of distance education. 7(3), 8-21.
Galusha, J. M. (1997). Barriers to Learning in Distance Education. Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century. 5(3-4)6 - 14. Retrieved April 11, 2003, from http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~ipct-j/1997/n4/galusha.html
Garrison, D R. (2001). Articles - Critical Thinking, Cognitive Presence, and Computer Conferencing in Distance Education. The American journal of distance education. 15(1), 7.
Hara, N. Khling, R. (1999). Students' Frustrations with a Web- Based Distance Education Course. First Monday. 4(12). Retrieved April 11, 2003, from http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue4_12/hara/
Hillman, D. C. (1994). Learner-Interface Interaction in Distance Education: An Extension of Contemporary Models and Strategies for Practitioners. The American journal of distance education. 8(2), 30.
Hillman, D. C. (1999). Articles - Authors' Response - A New Method for Analyzing Patterns of Interaction. The American journal of distance education. 13(2), 37.
Kahl, T.N. & Cropley, A.J. (1986) Face-to-face versus distance learning: psychological consequences and practical implications, Distance Education, 7(1), 38-48.
Keegan, D. (1986). The foundations of distance education. London: Croom Helm.
Kubala, T. (1998). Addressing Student Needs: Teaching on the Internet. T. H. E. Journal. Feature, March 1998. Retrieved April 11, 2003, from http://www.thejournal.com/magazine/vault/A2026A.cfm
Lever-Duffy, J., Lemke, R.A. & Johnson, L.. (1996), Learning Without Limits. Mission Viejo, CA: League for Innovation in the Community College.
Lockett, K. (1998). The Loneliness of the Long Distance Learners? Using Online Student Support to Decrease the Isolation factor and Increase Motivation. A paper presented at WebNet98 World Conference, Association for Advancement of Computing in Education.
McIsaac, M. S., (1999). Papers - Student and Teacher Perceptions of Interaction in Online Computer-Mediated Communication. Educational media international. 36(2), 121.
McIsaac, M.S. & Gunawardena, C.N. (1996). Distance Education [Electronic version]. In D.H. Jonassen, ed. Handbook of research for educational communications and technology: a project of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. 403-437. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan. Retrieved August 21, 2000, from http://seamonkey.ed.asu.edu/~mcisaac/dechapter/
McNabb, J. (1994, October). Telecourse effectiveness: Findings in the current literature. Tech Trends, 39-40.
Millbank, G. (1994). Writing multimedia training with integrated simulation. Paper presented at the Writers' Retreat on Interactive Technology and Equipment. Vancouver, BC: The University of British Columbia Continuing Studies.
Moore, M. G. & Kearsley, G.(1996) Distance education : a systems view, Wadsworth Publishing Co, Belmont.
Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2002) Exploring Social Communication in Computer Conferencing Journal of interactive learning research. 13(3), 259.
Sherry, A. C. (1998). Articles - Assessing Distance Learners' Satisfaction with Instruction: A Quantitative and a Qualitative Measure. The American journal of distance education.12(3), 4.
Sherry, L. (1996). Issues in Distance Learning [Electronic version]. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(4), 337-365. Retrieved August 21, 2000, from http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~lsherry/pubs/issues.html
Soles, C., Moller, L. (2001). Myers Briggs Type Preferences in Distance Learning Education. International Journal of Educational Technology. 2(2). Retrieved April 11, 2003, from http://smi.curtin.edu.au/ijet/v2n2/soles/index.html
Thomerson, J D. (1996). Student Perceptions of the Affective Experiences Encountered in Distance Learning Courses. The American journal of distance education. 10(3), 37.
Threlkeld, R., & Brzoska, K. (1994). Research in distance education. In B. Willis (Ed.), Distance Education: Strategies and Tools. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.
Twigg, C.A. (1997). Is technology a silver bullet? Educom Review. (March/April) 28-29.
Vrasidas, C., (1999) Articles - Factors Influencing Interaction in an Online Course. The American journal of distance education. 13(3), 22.
Wagner, E. D. (1994). In Support of a Functional Definition of Interaction. The American journal of distance education. 8(2), 6.
Willis, B. (1995). Distance Education Research Guide. University of Idaho, College of Engineering excerpted from Distance Education: A Practical Guide. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.[online] http://www.uidaho.edu/evo/
Daily Office Hours: 10AM to 6PM Eastern (But we're often
here later & sometimes earlier.)
Directions
to: One
Columbia Avenue, Takoma Park, Maryland 20912 USA
phone (301)
270-8312 fax: (301)270-8110
e-mail: online@tltgroup.org