The use of virtual classroom software for flexible learning

Maneesh Mathur, Online Adviser, Learning Connection, University of South Australia [HREF1], Adelaide, 5095. Telephone: +61 8 8302 3487. Email: Maneesh.Mathur@unisa.edu.au

Ian Reid, Coordinator: Online Services, Flexible Learning Centre, University of South Australia [HREF1], Adelaide, 5095. Telephone: +61 8 8302 1286. Email: Ian.Reid@unisa.edu.au

Abstract

Flexibility in educational provision is one of the many benefits that can result from the use of the World Wide Web in higher education. Of particular concern is the need to blend face-to-face and technologically mediated experiences, and to provide the capacity to mix synchronous and asynchronous collaboration as part of a flexible learning program. This paper summarises the results of a pilot study that implemented the Centra [HREF2] Virtual Classroom tool at the University of South Australia, as a means to provide high quality and flexible learning experiences to students learning at a distance in conjunction with face-to-face interaction.

Introduction

A recent DEST report suggests there is much need for flexibility in high educational provision. Flexibility is all about passing the initiative to adult learners where they have the power to access learning material at any place and at any given time (Ling, et al, 2001). Also, adult learners often struggle to strike a balance between the workload they face in conventional university environment and their respective jobs (McInnis, James and McNaught, 1995, cited in Franklin and Peat 2001). These students often find themselves missing out on important teaching activities and hence pose a requirement to access learning material at their convenience. This requirement directly leads to the increased need for flexible delivery. The demand for flexible delivery is exponentially increased by Australian universities now collaborating with offshore institutions and offering their academic programs at the international level. Factors like economic pressures of running the conventional university environment, increased customer demand for better response rates and increased competition within universities (Franklin, and Peat, 2001) are forcing university strategists to look for online solutions (e-Learning) in order to meet these demands.

Martin and Samels (1995) argued that universities cannot afford to overlook the potential of information technology whilst delivering programs via distance education. Much research has gone into investigating the use of information technology in e-Learning (EL); it would seem that less effort has gone into analysing the effectiveness of EL in the overall learning process (Sweeny and Ingram 2001, cited in Ladyshewsky 2004). Ladyshewsky (2004) further stresses that a lot of the criticism which EL faces, is because of the inappropriate use of information technology. The usual practice is a mere posting of print material rather than creating learning material which has a pedagogical focus to it. When a technologically supported course is complemented with the right mix of asynchronous and synchronous online tools then student performance in EL delivery mode can be as good as what can be achieved by face-to-face delivery mode, if not better (Ladyshewsky, 2004). To cater for different levels of study skills and other economic pressures amongst adult learners, there is a clear need to mix face-to-face learning with online activities (Lewis, 1997, cited in Franklin and Peat, 2001). This concept leads to blended learning, also popularly known as distributed learning. Finn and Bucceri (2004, p. 2) define blended learning as:

… the effective integration of various learning techniques, technologies, and delivery modalities to meet specific communication, knowledge sharing, and information needs. It is a means to an end.

Arafeh (2004) sees distributed or blended learning as a theoretical shift where education becomes neither something which is undertaken in a specific demographic location nor as a distance mode. Rather it is something which is a combination of face to face delivery and EL.

Chen (2003) claims flexible delivery to be one of the implementation levels of blended learning with its main focus being on creating a technologically driven learning environment. King (1999a, p. 271) defines flexibility for adult learners as:

 …the provision of learning resources and the application of technologies to create, store and distribute course content, enrich communication, and provide support and services to enable more effective management of learning by the learner. In particular, the concept involves a view of learning in which a teacher does not predominantly mediate the student’s experience.

Flexible delivery forms the core of the Teaching and Learning framework at University of South Australia. Some additional institutional context of the University of South Australia is now provided, followed by a discussion of the application of the Centra virtual classroom tool, as a means to facilitate flexible learning.

Institutional Context

The largest university in South Australia, with over 30,000 undergraduate and postgraduate students on five campuses, the University of South Australia is truly a diverse and flexible institution. Through distance education, its regional campus at Whyalla, transnational teaching programs and development partnerships in many countries, and through its welcoming of large numbers of international students, the University provides a range of flexible learning options to a diverse student population. The University currently has over 10,000 students learning in offshore locations.

The University of South Australia is committed to student centred, resource-based, flexible learning systems which emphasise appropriate use of technology, student autonomy and independence and real world experiences as part of the learning process. Flexible provision for learning in the University of South Australia is inextricably linked within the conceptualisation of the University’s Teaching and Learning framework. The online environment is a central component of the University’s flexible provision.

UniSAnet is the online Teaching and Learning environment of the University that provides students with access to and choices about learning opportunities, and is available at anytime and from anywhere. It provides a low-cost, comprehensive and common medium for the presentation of subjects and courses that is scaleable to any number of programs and students. Teaching and Learning resources, email and threaded discussions, assessment devices, a portfolio tool, evaluation instruments and a range of administrative and support services are standard components.

Technological developments have been kept simple, and emphasis is placed on adding value to existing offerings. Thus, a basic platform has been established from which more comprehensive developments can be build, and the initial emphases have been on interactivity and accessibility to students. The University has also determined that all Teaching and Learning services will have a common front end, authoring and communications tools are consistent between and within courses, technical support is constrained to nominated authoring tools, and existing online initiatives have been migrated to UniSAnet.

The most recent addition to the suite of learning tools that comprise UniSAnet is the Centra [HREF1] virtual classroom tool. This was selected in response to a demand from academic staff for a richer synchronous tool than that already available. This tool provides both synchronous collaboration capabilities, but also the capacity to record events and thus provide asynchronous resources that can be accessed after the delivery of synchronous events. As has already been mentioned, however, it is not a tool that stands alone but rather is one of a number of tools available to teachers and learners to allow the flexible provision of educational opportunities.

What is Centra [HREF2]?

Centra is a virtual classroom software that is accessed via the web. It allows multipoint synchronous collaboration between individuals connected to the Internet. In other words, it allows teachers and learners to engage in a virtual classroom environment at the same time, wherever they are, as long as they are connected to the Internet. It operates successfully over modem and broadband connections. In particular it provides:

• Synchronous audio and video - Teachers and learners can speak to each other using synchronous audio (with each person having a headset connected to their computer) and video (eg, ‘webcam’) can be used to transmit video real time video
• File sharing (eg PowerPoint) - Files of any format can be shared. For example, a PowerPoint presentation can be given with accompanying audio of the presenter, a movie can be broadcast, etc.
• Whiteboard - All Centra users can use the whiteboard to draw, use text, highlight, share images, etc.
• Text chat - Collaboration with text. This is particularly useful as a fall-back if the other means of collaboration are not working.
• Surveys - Polling of users’ feedback, allowing the instructor to see the collated feedback. The presenter can then show this collation to the participants.
• Breakout rooms - A large group can be split into smaller groups, and the presenter can ‘surf' through these groups to monitor the activities.
• Application sharing - Any software running on the presenter’s computer can be shared with Centra users. The most common application shared is the web browser, to allow a ‘web safari’ of web sites.
• Classroom management tools - A range of tools that make the management of the virtual classroom environment possible, such as:
  • Put hand up
  • Agree / disagree
  • Applaud
  • Laugh
  • Provide and remove microphone
  • Allow multiple co-presenters
  • Step out of the classroom
• Mark-up - Images can be annotated with text and graphics.
• Asynchronous playback - All synchronous events can be automatically recorded for playback at a later date, allowing asynchronous use of the collaboration or presentation.

Possible applications of Centra for undergraduate teaching

Possible applications of Centra for the undergraduate teacher include the provision of real-time collaboration and allowing distant learners to access learning experiences. Real-time collaboration, such as that provided by Centra, allows a range of uses for teaching purposes. These include:

• Sharing information
• Giving a lecture presentation
• Collaboration in small groups
• Having meetings

Allowing distant or absent class members to access learning experiences can be particularly useful when temporary conditions prevent travel, such as when international security or health concerns exist. At the University of South Australia, where we seek to develop particular qualities in our graduates, the choice to use this sort of collaboration revolves around the particular graduate qualities that it can assist in developing. The following table provides some suggestions about the affordances of Centra and how these can be applied to particular Teaching and Learning arrangements. It is adapted from the teaching guide Graduate Qualities—Graduate Qualities associated with particular Teaching and Learning arrangements (UniSA, n.d.)

Table 1: Graduate qualities that can be developed through the use of Centra

Case Study: Using Centra virtual classroom software in transnational delivery.

Background

The School of Computer & Information Science at University of South Australia, in collaboration with Hong Kong Baptist University offers a Bachelor of Computing (e-commerce) program to offshore students. The teaching methodology for this program is to segment each course material into 8 modules, which are then presented across 8 face to face lecture sessions. Each course is further supported by a set of face to face tutorial and practical sessions. Learning material for a particular course is provided to students in the form of learning/study guides as well as making material available on the web. As the program is conducted primarily through distance, day to day support is achieved by conducting asynchronous online activities like email, notice board and discussion boards. To simulate a real time helpdesk session, 2 hours/week of synchronous chat sessions are also dedicated to each course.

As found out in one of the studies by Sorg, and McElhinney (2000), text based synchronous tools like chatting cause a considerable amount of frustration amongst distance education learners. The usual problems faced by learners are keyboard skills, management of technology and tracking multiple conversations. In our university, a need was felt to incorporate an online tool which would not only take care of above said problems but would also provide a solution towards achieving a higher degree of real time collaboration. This in turn would achieve richer cognitive responses from students and result in effective group work and critical thinking. As brought out in the previous section, Centra was an obvious solution to achieve these objectives. This case study is a pilot investigation to identify the role of Centra in distance education and university online environment.

As this was a pilot study, volunteers from offshore students were requested. This resulted in 4 Hong Kong based students who agreed to test and evaluate the use of Centra in distance education. The methodology required students in Hong Kong to logon to Centra from their respective home computers, whereas the course coordinator would lead the presentation sitting in Australia. Two sessions, each of one hour duration were conducted over a period of two weeks. The following table lists out activities usually conducted by students in a distance based learning process. It also identifies the tools which facilitate these activities, limitations students perceive while using these tools and how the use of Centra hopes to overcome these limitations.

Table 2: Advantages of Centra in distance based learning process

Analysis of Centra Tools

The results of the pilot study are now presented. The use of each Centra tool is also discussed.

Synchronous Audio/Video

Audio combined with video conferencing was received well by the students. Collaboration between the facilitator and students was found to be richer, as less time was spent on keyboard and more on exchanging ideas by voice. The speaking environment was also very controlled, where a need to ‘track multiple conversations’ was avoided. ‘Raised hand’ by prospective speakers was required to be initiated before they were allowed to speak. This resulted in avoiding lot of unwanted conversation. Answering ‘yes/no’ or ‘agree/disagree’ was made easy by using class management tools like ‘Tick’ and ‘Cross’.

Centra uses packet switching technology for its Audio/Video conferencing. Hence the weakest link in communication would be the learner with slowest network bandwidth. This had a direct impact on how the facilitator could speed the flow of presentation. Video was also identified as a big drain on bandwidth. It was suggested that use of video should be limited to the start or finish of the class.

File Sharing

The facilitator was able to share different types of files as part of his presentation (Agenda). With Centra it is possible to upload agenda (*.saz) files on to clients’ computers before the start of the presentation itself. During conduct of the actual presentation, the facilitator can then control the presentation slides which are now sitting on client’s computer, hence saving a huge loss on bandwidth.

Whilst organizing a presentation, facilitator found the enrolment procedure to be most frustrating. There was no provision for the system to directly pick up a complete class list. Rather, enrolment of students had to be done on an individual basis based on their respective email ids. It was suggested that the system should be able to talk to the Active Directory of university email system, thus making the class lists available for enrolment purposes.

Whiteboard

Often in presentations; a need was felt to narrate concepts on fly, for example drawing of diagrams, keeping note of important topics as dot points etc. This was wonderfully achieved by using the electronic whiteboard. Discussion on the whiteboard was saved as a screen shot and made asynchronously available to students for their future reference.

Though the tool was very useful in exchange of ideas and real time collaboration, a considerable time lag was noted between the typing/drawing on whiteboard and its actual appearance on screen. It was also noted that if too many students are given simultaneous permissions to write on whiteboard, then it can lead to unwanted cluttering. Hence a controlled granting of write access was ideal.

Text Chat

Text chat was tested as a fall back mechanism. The performance of this tool faired equal to any another text based communication tool. A few extras in it, like limiting the audience with whom students could chat was an added bonus. This prevented students from chatting amongst themselves.

Focus group feedback by polling

This polling tool was used to get users’ feedback. In the present context it was used to understand the learner's response to use of Centra tools. Results of the focus group showed that Centra was well accepted by students, in lieu to the normal text based chatting tool they were initially using. Some of the questions put forward to them and their responses are shown in the table below.

Table 3: Learners response to use of Centra tools

Breakout rooms

Students were divided into two breakout rooms with each group being allocated a topic to discuss. The activity was designed to simulate a typical face to face tutorial room. The facilitator did not find discussions amongst the students to be very encouraging. The reasons for lack of collaboration amongst students in these breakout rooms are not clear. Possibly, the new technology could have scared them off or maybe it was a cultural issue. This needs to be investigated further.

Application Sharing

This particular tool was most accepted of all. In a particular example, one of the students was having problems in drawing workflow diagrams. With the help of ‘Application Sharing’, student was able to demonstrate his work to other users in real time. Instantaneous corrective directions were given to him and problem was solved. Students found collaborating via this tool not only useful but also very easy. Though the students again complained about the time lag, it was more of a bandwidth issue rather than a technological one.

Conclusion

The increased need of flexibility within the Teaching and Learning framework of University of South Australia brought about the implementation of Centra virtual class room in a learning environment which constituted of both face-to-face as well distance based contact hours. Findings from the case study can be summarized as below:

• There is strong evidence that distance students would prefer Centra virtual class room above normal text based chat tools.
• Centra presentations and the pragmatic use of its tools can result in a high degree of collaboration combined with critical thinking and productive group work.
• Present networking capabilities are still not up to the mark and undermine the capability of Centra virtual class room.
• Students preferred Centra in a support role only. They preferred face-to-face interaction over any mode of online interaction.
• There is a need to customize Centra software to organizational needs. Use of ‘off the shelf’ product may result in human hurdles which would be difficult to overcome.
• First time users still face technology management issues. A brief introduction document listing out ‘Start up’ procedure may solve this issue.

References

Arafeh, S. (2004). The implication of information and communications Technologies for distance education: Looking toward the future, American Institutes for research, viewed 31 March 2005, <http://www.sri.com/policy/csted/reports/sandt/it/Distance_Ed_Lit_Review_FINAL_6-9-04.pdf>.

 Chen, D. (2003). ‘Uncovering the Provisos behind Flexible Learning’, Educational Technology & Society, 6(2), 25-30, viewed 31 March 2005 < http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/6-2/3.html>

 Finn, A. and Bucceri, M. (2004). A Case Study Approach to Blended Learning, Centra Software, Inc. viewed 18 February 2005, <http://www.centra.com/products/moreinfo.asp?mproject=Q1_2005_Web_Whitepaper>.

 Franklin, S. and Peat, M. (2001). ‘Managing change: The use of mixed delivery modes to increase learning opportunities’, Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 17(1), 37-49.

 King, B. (1999a). Distance education in Australia, in: K. HARRY (Ed.) Higher Education through Open and Distance Learning, World Review of Distance Education and Open Learning (London, Commonwealth of Learning/Routledge).

 Ladyshewsky, R. K. (2004). ‘E-learning compared with face to face: Differences in the academic achievement of postgraduate business students’, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 20(3), 316-336.

 Ling, P., Arger, G., Smallwood, H., Toomey, R., Kirkpatrick, D., and Barnard ,I. (2001),  The Effectiveness of Models of Flexible Provision of Higher Education, viewed 26 March 2005 <http://www.dest.gov.au/highered/eippubs/eip01_9/default.htm>.

 Martin, J. and  Samels, J. E. (1995). ‘The near and far of distance learning’. Trusteeship, 3(2), 26-31.

 Sorg, J, Judith and  McElhinney, J (2000). A Case Study Describing Student Experiences of Learning in a Context of Synchronous Computer-mediated Communication in a Distance Education Environment, Ball State University, viewed 28 March 2005, <http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/23/eb/09.pdf>. 

 UniSA (n.d.). Graduate Qualities—Graduate Qualities associated with particular teaching and learning arrangements, University of South Australia, viewed 28 March 2005, <http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/learningconnection/staff/svcs/tchngdes.asp#gq>

Hypertext References

HREF1

http://www.unisa.edu.au/

HREF2

http://www.centra.com/

Copyright