http://tinyurl.com/s8324
While we were in whole group local discussion, one of our class members asked if there was research that videoconferencing affected student achievement. Since, as teachers, we are asked daily if our curriculum, plans, and objectives correlate to state standards, the Missouri Assessment Program (MAP), and student achievement, this question was valid to us all. Ruth Litman-Block replied affirmatively that there was such research. So when I perused the bibliography in order to summarize a daily reading, this article naturally jumped out at me.
The article was nicely organized with easy to read sidebars that encapsulated important information. The focus centered around three types of videoconferencing and the research that supports the fact that it does impact teaching and learning. In addition, the article provides a supplemental bibliography which can be consulted if necessary.
The three types of videoconferencing were defined as: desktop units, roll-abouts, and room systems, all offering connections via the internet, using a digital or analog phone line; a network within an institution; and dedicated cables, radio waves or microwaves.
Quality measures were addressed, such as audio quality, lack of bandwidth, deteriorating video, and slow connections.
The impact that videoconferencing has on students is that it allows students access to experts within a particular field and collaboration between other students and teachers and raising motivation by encouraging interaction and lessening isolation. Teachers can maximize this technological advancement by establishing outcomes before planning a program (just as one would write backward-design curriculum), advertising the motivational effect of this technology, and planning global experiences between other teachers and classrooms.
Another benefit that videoconferencing affords students is to practice social skills and their application. In addition, students who usually wouldn’t have access to specialized content, both for remediation and enrichment, can now access that expertise. Students whose communication and literacy skills might be delayed in a non-visual classroom setting may now excel. Videoconferencing lends itself to multicultural education where communities hampered by geography can now be exposed to many different cultures across the globe, connecting cultures that may have been isolated or connecting differing cultures that may have been sheltered.
Some obstacles and myths to videoconferencing were also presented in this article. Not all students will access this technology appropriately. Those students who don’t feel comfortable bridging a language gap may be intimidated by the techology. In addition, technological failures may bring about long wait times, and careful consideration to classroom management must be applied. Also, there is a variety of stimuli going on during the time of the conference; for some children, this stimuli may produce a very unstructured environment.
Becta is an British organization which has taken data collected from a two-year DfES study about videoconferencing in schools. From this research, Becta has identified issues warranting further study: 1. feelings of anxiety and epsiodes of antagonistic group behavior, 2. different impacts of the three different styles of videoconferencing on interactivity, 3. the potential of this technology in a larger-scale setting.
While this article was just the tip of the iceberg in terms of research, I do think it is productive to have this research at my fingertips when it comes time to asking my building administrator for time to plan and execute videoconferencing projects. In a district as large as the one in which I teach, I believe it is essential to have equipment in several centrally located positions so that many of our schools can access this technology without it being connected to the hassle of a field trip.
Jill Proehl,
Rockwood School District
CSD – St. Louis, Missouri