Closing The Distance With Technology: Changing How We Teach to Meet Student Needs
|
Joan Esterline Lafuze Randall E. Osborne Anna McDaniel The Interactive Course Across Two Semesters:Technology is opening many doors for faculty and students that just a few years ago few of us could anticipate existed (Jeffries, 1997). Students in rural areas can now interact with students in classrooms hundreds of miles away. There are additional benefits to utilization of such technology including: (1) reaching a maximum number of students with a minimum number of faculty persons, (2) plugging directly into the needs of visual learners, (3) providing less expensive alternatives to traditional education, and (4) reaping the benefits of having students at multiple sites interacting with and learning from each other. But the utilization of technology in education is not without problems. We reported on the trials, tribulations and triumphs of team-teaching a dual-site interactive video course during the spring semester of 1997 (Osborne & Lafuze, 1997). Some of the tribulations we reported as being brought on by the technology were: (1) the impact technology has on the instructor's ability to read the non-verbal communication of the students, (2) the fact that focusing the document camera on the material being presented exacerbated the problem of non-verbal communication, and (3) the realization that students needed to be trained to ask and answer questions using the new technology format. Students seemed tentative to ask questions given that speaking into the microphones would interrupt the transmission and send the signal to the site from which the sound was made. Additional issues of concern were: (4) resolving issues over in-class work and quizzes given the desire to make maximal use of "air" time, and (5) confidentiality. Because this was a course on the biology of mental illness, students wanted to share any personal examples they had of these illnesses and their biological implications. In the Fall of 1997 we added new challenges by adding two IHETS sites to the class structure. In this paper we will report on the effects of adding a different technology, increasing the number of sites and on combining IHETS technology with the interactive video. In addition, we will discuss several changes made in the course to respond to student needs brought about partially because of the technology and the effects of those changes on the teaching/learning experience. The second time we taught the course we participated in a project that resulted in the addition of an observer to evaluate the effects of our use of technology on the quality of student learning. We also changed the role of the team-teacher. The first time the course was taught there was a teacher at both sites. Both instructors were prepared to conduct the class period without technology should there be a breakdown with the technology. In the most recent offering of the course there was one primary instructor who taught from one interactive video site on Tuesdays and the other on Thursdays. The team-teacher role changed to that of a consultant who also served as primary professor and presenter for four of the sessions. Another change that was the distribution of students was more balanced the second time we taught. The first time there were eighteen students in one classroom and only one in the other. The second time we taught the course there were thirteen students in one interactive video classroom and eleven in the other. One IHETS site had one student and the other had six. Although most of the guests in the classroom presented from the site in the larger city, we were able to have one session in which a social worker from the largest mental health center in the state was on a panel with a care provider who met similar needs of clients located in a very small, rural/small community satellite facility. The two compared and contrasted their strategies to reach the same goals for their clients and families. Expanded comments on these changes and opportunities will appear later in the paper. There were four students who took the course by tape the first time it was offered. During the second semester there were two students who took the course by tape because of scheduling problems. Neither could attend the class two days a week but both of these students agreed to enter the IHETS classroom at least once during the semester and also to enter the two way interactive video classroom at least once during the course. These two students were willing to have a conversation comparing the experiences. This arrangement allowed at least an informal comparison of three kinds of technology in teaching the course. Issues Raised by Technology and Changes in Teaching in Response:We discovered that there were a number of issues that became important as we proceeded and offer suggestions on how others might avoid some of the problems that we encountered. In the following few sections we will address those issues individually by stating the nature of the problem, describing how it arose and the implications and suggesting either a strategy that might have prevented or mitigated the problem in the first place or an approach to a solution to the problem. Issue 1. Quality of Technical Support. In the two semesters we have had some involvement with four different interactive video sites. One of these sites had a full support team. If a problem arose during the class there was at least one person who was technically knowledgeable who could intervene with problem solving. Two of the sites had persons "on call" who were a few minutes away and could come in with only a brief delay. The fourth site was not designed to have someone intervene when trouble occurred. The implications of the differences were greatly noticeable on the learning environment. Any hint of a problem in the classroom without technical support brought a "nervous" atmosphere to the classroom. When the primary instructor was in the remote site, the students were "on their own" to solve the problem. Although the students became very proficient in troubleshooting the technology, it was very distracting to the flow of the class. Our suggestion would be for instructors considering use of interactive video technology for the first or second time to negotiate for a classroom with persons who are technically competent and immediately available to support. It is difficult enough to attempt to make the technology "transparent." If little or no technical help is close-by, the chances for maintaining an effective learning environment are compromised. Issue 2. The Addition of IHETS. IHETS is a one-way video and two-way audio system. We designed the expansion of our class by adding this component to accommodate students who could not participate otherwise. Another advantage of adding this technology was that it assisted in taping the course primarily for students who were taking the course by tape. Taping from the IHETS connection provides a product that contains an automatic switching mechanism to the site "where the action is." It is a method which is far superior to taping from local sites. These sites are restricted to the perspective of the local site (when the pre-set is there) or the far site (when the pre-set is there) or having an operator manually switch the taping to the point of greatest interest during the class. The problems that adding IHETS created were numerous and costly. We will list the problems numerically ordered and discuss the implications and our suggestion for someone adding this component as follows: 1. In an attempt to keep management of the system at the site of the primary professor as she moved from site to site, the plan called for the person from the IHETS control center to call in to that station before class. Because the "tablets" at different sites were different and the technical processes for setting up each system varied and were so complicated on one tablet that appropriate personnel had to be on site to do the set-up appropriately, the cost was loss of class time to achieve the goal. It also seem to "lock out" the IHETS student from one far site often and the IHETS students from another site frequently. Our suggestion would be to keep the IHETS connection in the same location each time even though the primary professor changes sites. Unless that person is fully able to handle the incoming connection call without technical assistance, the benefits are not worth the costs. 2. The second problem with IHETS was that the system seems to be very vulnerable to weather interference. This is a commonly reported problem with IHETS. Our suggestion would be to keep the IHETS classes, but to dismiss them when the weather interference is enough to "bog the class down." Then provide taping on those occasions from other video sites rather than through the IHETS connection and make it available to the IHETS students. Although watching a class from a videotape cannot completely replace the interaction possible from being there, it is far better than the slowed pace and interference that arises with weather conditions while utilizing the IHETS system. 3. The third problem introduced with IHETS was the creation of a "second class citizen status" for students in the IHETS classrooms. Sometimes the technology was not working, and those students could not "phone in." Thus they lost a "voice" in the classroom. Several shared that they felt isolated from the rest of the class. They were never "seen" and often not "heard." Often when they did "get through" they came in at a noise level that was very loud and startling to the rest of the classrooms. Our suggestion would be to let none of these reasons keep an instructor from considering the use of IHETS. IHETS students are frequently grateful for being able to participate in the course even when they are in a position that could be considered "disadvantaged." Some students prefer not to be seen. Given a choice they would pick either taking the course via tapes or via IHETS for that reason. Even students who do not mind being on camera, but only have access to an IHETS site can be "pictured." Having a photograph available for each IHETS participant would allow the instructor to display the student's picture as he/she talks over the phone connections. Another technique employed by the primary instructor was to encourage students at the IHETS sites to share their thoughts, asking those who chose to respond to provide their names (Franklin, Yoakam & Warren, 1995). Within a couple of weeks, the primary instructor had learned to recognize those remote voices and to make affirming comments about each student's contribution mentioning that student specifically by name. The inclusion of the student's name, and the primary instructor's recognition of that student's voice seemed to go a long way toward minimizing the "second class citizen status" the IHETS students may have at first been experiencing. Acknowledging students' contributions to the class period seems even more important when dealing with students who are connected via IHETS. Calling these students by name, remembering each student's major, and personally thanking them for their contribution has been effective methods employed by the primary instructor in this course. Students report, "I feel like she really cares about me", "it is really neat the way she makes the class examples relevant to my major", and "I always feel like what I have to say is valuable". 4. A fourth problem with IHETS is that maintaining a learning environment can be difficult. We have several suggestions to make. In situations which involve more than two or three students at an IHETS site, it might be worth considering a class assistant with a responsibility of guiding that class site into a positive learning environment. A special section of the syllabus or expanded workbook could consist of a special welcome and appreciation for the students participating via IHETS. 5. Our final concern about IHETS would be that it is very noticeable from an instructor's point of view that it took the students from the IHETS classroom longer to perceive what was being said and shown in the classroom. There was a noticeable learning delay. Our suggestion here is to plan even more than the planning that is necessary in a two-way video classroom (which is considerably greater than in a traditional face-to-face classroom). Instead of having just a detailed syllabus, one should plan a greatly expanded syllabus or even a course workbook. All student expectations need to be stated clearly and in writing at the very beginning of the semester. All of the participants in the class would benefit from such a carefully planned and implemented guide book, but the success of the IHETS students should be markedly improved by such an action. In fact, we recommend that even if the class must be postponed a semester to prepare such a workbook and guide, it would be well worth considering. Having special planning and presentations for IHETS students that are clearly specified and give the IHETS presenter greater management would improve the morale of those students. Giving the IHETS students some special opportunity would enhance their status in the class and legitimately position them in a more active role. Although the expanded syllabus or workbook would benefit IHETS students, it would benefit all students taking the course. The observer commented that a need for students to know what was expected from the very beginning of the class was revealing because even though the material might have been disseminated via the technology, it was not necessarily received. There is an assurance that comes from having "it all in writing." The necessity of having this information in writing leads us to the conclusion that an expanded course syllabus and workbook is especially important with a technology based course. We will discuss this issue in more depth toward the end of this article. The effects of some of the other changes were as follows: 1. Having a distribution of students that is more even across the sites seemed to increase the total sense of class community. Although the IHETS students suffered some isolation, that should be remedied with the suggestions that we have made. We made every effort to build that community by directing questions according to sites. For instance, "Let's hear from someone in the Richmond classroom talk about the effects of ........" or "What are the special properties of that neurotransmitter that would make it a good candidate for consideration in what it is we are talking about? Let's move to the Versailles classroom for that one." When a student was having difficulty answering a question or commenting on a topic, we asked if the student wanted help from another student. If the answer was affirmative, we would move to another classroom for that help. When there are more students at a site, it provides opportunity for more interaction on that site to come up with team answers where that is appropriate. It is that dynamic which builds a sense of class community across distance. 2. A second bridging of the distance came with the blending and valuable contributions of diverse classrooms. The students from the small community or rural area in one classroom had a perspective to share that contrasted to the experience of those in the larger city. The diversity of majors can also be a point for learning. As often as was possible, information was provided that created a specific link between the course content and certain majors of students in the various classrooms. That same dynamic pertained to the guests in the classroom (Franklin et. al, 1995). A wonderful experience occurred when we had the health care providers from the largest of the state's community mental health center's crisis unit presenting from the Indianapolis classroom and a health care provider from one of the state's smallest satellite of a community mental health center in the Richmond classroom presenting together. Although the novelty of the technology made it difficult for both of the presenters, it was a wonderful experience for the class. The opportunity to enter into a conversation between professionals who approach meeting the needs of people who suffer a devastating illness that involves the totality of life as much as the mental illnesses do was an opportunity that many of the students from all of the classrooms appreciated. An aside about the far-reaching benefits of such distributed learning approaches is that the two professionals (who had never met each other before) made arrangements to visit each other's workplaces. One of the visits has occurred at the time of this writing and has made a profound impact on all of the professionals involved. In this sense, distributed learning can create even a greater learning community than the one formed by the students and teachers in the classroom. Students across both semesters report, "feeling privileged to have such guests enter the classroom", and "we know that having such guests is only possible because they can enter the site close to where they work and that can then be broadcast to the other sites". This expanded classroom reinforces one of the primary strengths of the use of technology. It truly opens up the world of opportunity to students. Although the technology brings with it its own sets of challenges and requires changes in how we teach, it seems that these challenges and changes are far outweighed by the benefits to be gained by opening up the classroom through technology. Student Assessment of Resources That Led to Maximum Success: A high percentage (70%) of students responded to a survey sent out by the observer involved in the course during the Fall 1997 semester. Students were quite open about challenges they felt were presented by the use of the technology. These same students were equally willing to explain how the instructor responded to maximize their success and minimize any negative impact due to that technology. Of all things mentioned, the students focused most on the essential need for communication with the instructor. The primary instructor created an envelope system to distribute materials to all students at all sites. As mentioned previously, the instructor also called on students from different sites and suggested how important those contributions were to the learning of students at all of the sites. Electronic mail, and the fax machine were utilized by some students as well (e.g., Franklin et. al, 1995). According to survey responses, students saw technology as both enhancing and detracting from the learning process. Students felt that technology: (1) presented a positive challenge by allowing them to participate in a "new" and "exciting" teaching-learning environment, (2) allowed them to learn about new technology, and (3) taught them about the value of face-to-face interaction. Informal discussions and written feedback from the two students who used all three modalities during the course of the semester added interesting insight in evaluating the three (tape, IHETS, and two-way interactive video). Both were grateful for the opportunity to take the course by tape because it allowed them to participate. Taping provides students a chance at asynchronous participation. Both were meeting curriculum requirements for an appropriate and "approved" course for their discipline of study. The alternative was either an independent study or correspondence course. Both were more satisfied with this course choice. One of the students expressed the disadvantage of the tapes as being that the class seemed to move more slowly by tape than either by IHETS or two-way interactive video. That seemed to surprise her. She was amazed at how much the pace seemed to "pick-up" in real-life and real-time. Both of the students who took the class by tape expressed great satisfaction over being able to "back the tape up" (rewind) to catch important points or to stop the tape to make notes on especially relevant material. Both were also grateful to have the opportunity to run the entire tape again if necessary to experience the total "message" of the material. During the first semester in which this course was offered via distance technology, four students took the course as an independent study option by watching the tapes. These students formed a working group, watched the tapes together, and expressed similar sentiments about the benefits of being "in control" of the speed at which content was covered. From an instructional point of view, providing the tapes can be time-consuming and costly. That cost is either absorbed by the presenting campus, the faculty member or the student. Perhaps a standard "taping fee" could be devised. It is our opinion that the benefits of having the tapes available far outweigh the actual costs. Even if no students are enrolled in the course via the tapes, they are a very valuable asset for students who must miss an occasional class or to have on reserve at the library for students to review prior to exams. The primary frustration about technology expressed by the students was over technical problems. Students felt somewhat "cheated" when technical problems used up class time. Again, a workbook and expanded syllabus could provide a buffer against such feelings. If students have information available through the workbook that can provide "first exposure" with the material, then more of the class time can be used for application. When technology uses up class time, then, first exposure is not lost. Both students who tried the three modalities in one semester expressed the least satisfaction with IHETS. They acknowledged that the IHETS classroom that they both attended was the one with six students. It was interesting to note that they both reported a kind of "culture" or "class spirit" that the students in the classroom had developed that perhaps subtly excluded them as "guests." These students did not visit the IHETS classroom at the same time. The fact that both of them expressed this feeling of being "excluded", therefore, is particularly interesting. Both indicated at sometime in the semester that they would have benefited from the course regardless of the means of delivery, and that only the scheduling difficulty would prevent them from taking the course regardless of mode of delivery. As willing as students were to raise concerns about the technology, they were as willing to suggest methods being employed within the course that minimized the negative impact of the technology. Students also suggested that these efforts to build a community across the classrooms maximized their success. Summing Up:Technology is opening doors to educational opportunities that were hidden just a few years ago. Along with the advantages brought on by this technology, however, are challenges that must be addressed. These challenges are far from overwhelming but, left unattended could escalate and interfere with learning. Challenges encountered while utilizing distance technology include: (1) technical problems, (2) community building, (3) "second class citizen status" for IHETS students who can be seen and not heard, (4) differences between what is presented and what is learned and (5) how to maintain communication between all students and the instructor. It is interesting that the methods for addressing such concerns need not be technological at all. An envelope system for returning items to students and for submitting items to the instructor can increase perceptions of confidentiality and can reinforce the feeling that the instructor was and will "be there for you". An instructor who calls on different classrooms and quickly learns students' names and voices can minimize the potential isolated feelings of students who can "see" the classroom but cannot themselves be "seen". Feelings of "community" can be built in much the same way. The primary instructor brought guest speakers into the classroom specifically knowing that such speakers had relevance to the fields of study of students within the classroom. This technique brings both other experts into the classroom and also enhances students' perceptions of the relevance of the course material. A class manual or workbook would go a long way toward alleviating the potential disparity between what is presented visually via the technology system and what students "take away" from the class session. The ultimate challenge while utilizing technology is not fundamentally different from the challenge presented in any teaching/learning scenario. One must know the limitations of the pedagogical method along with having a clear understanding of the skills and abilities of the learners involved. The importance of this relationship is simply enhanced by both the positive possibilities and the negative potentials of utilizing distance technology. The concerns and the need for advance planning are further enhanced when multiple technological modalities are being employed. IHETS students run the risk of being considered as less "plugged in" to the total classroom. Although this can be easily rectified, proactive measures must be utilized to minimize those feelings. When an instructor is not available at every site, technological and weather related problems become particularly salient. Again, proactive steps can be taken to bridge the distance technology can create in such situations. A detailed workbook, a comprehensive syllabus, and a detailed action plan in case of technological and/or weather related interruptions can be developed and employed. Once again, videotapes can be quite efficient. If the course has been offered at least once already and tapes have been made, such tapes can be placed on reserve in the library and listed in the action plan as the backup strategy should technology and/or weather intervene. All in all, technology creates many challenges that threaten to increase the distance (psychologically and pedagogically as much as geographically) between students and the instructor. Can this distance be minimized? Is distance technology still worth using? Our experiences scream a resounding, "yes". As a word of caution, however, our experiences suggest that such decisions must be both preceded and followed by a careful consideration of what one wants to teach, the potential limitations brought on by the utilization of technology, and creative methods by which the success of students can be maximized. References
|
