Videoconferencing Out on a Lim

After listening to Gary Stager at the MACUL 08 Conference, I went up to ask him about the handouts from his session yesterday that I missed.  In the course of the conversation, he said to me,

“Why do people identify themselves with just one technology?”

He was referring to some of the ideas in the Web 2.0 session he did yesterday that I had missed. He didn’t mean to, but he challenged my own practice.

It made me think! (Which I think is the point of listening to Gary Stager.)

I like to refer to myself as a “one technology girl”, referring to videoconferencing. I try to keep my blog focused on videoconferencing. Every time I go somewhere or see something or learn something, I’m trying to see how it ties to videoconferencing.

I want to say, how can we make our videoconferences more constructive? But I feel like I’m coming at it from the wrong angle, by starting with the technology. On the other hand, it seems that videoconferencing is a perfect fit for social constructivist learning because it’s a communication technology. I need to keep thinking about this….

One of Gary’s points was “less us, more them.”

Some beginning thoughts are:

• what if the kids picked who they wanted to connect to instead of the teacher?
• what if the kids researched to find and request an expert to connect with them via videoconferencing?
• how often do we have the kids generate the activities and interaction?
• with the KC3 programs, do the kids decide how to represent the topic? do they decide the topic?
• what structures like MysteryQuest or Holiday Challenges could we create that are based on even more constructivist principles?

Gary also emphasized the importance of good prompts. We need more good prompts for teachers and students using videoconferencing. What tough questions could help them head down to a path of interaction with experts and/or peers?

These are just a few beginning random thoughts stirred up after listening to Gary today.  Off to the next session, but these ideas will keep simmering….

I’ve blogged about this Understanding and Troubleshooting H323 Networks workshop from the University of Wisconsin before here and here. It’s excellent. Now they are offering it again and this time via web/phone conference. If you can possibly scrape the dollars together, I highly recommend it for your networking and technical videoconferencing support staff. Even videoconferencing coordinators like me - educators turned MCU support - can gain something from the workshop, especially if you’ve done a lot of connections to sites outside your network and run into strange scenarios.

They don’t pay me, or even ask me, to advertise this workshop. I’m just sharing it with you because it was such a benefit to me.

If you are interested in doing collaborative projects, you may want to join my online class, Kid2Kid Videoconference Connections, starting up on February 11. Get assistance planning and implementing a videoconference collaboration from start to finish! Discounts available for bulk purchases. Click the link for more details. Hope you can join us!

I’m running the Planning Interactive Curriculum Connections class again. Here’s a comment you’ll enjoy. This from Karen Ennesser, Dowagiac Middle School, who participated in Eco-Conversations in December. Dowagiac Middle School is one of our RUS grant buildings too.

I personally feel that every school should use VC. The benefits to my special education and Title 1 students were absolutely amazing! They played a big part in drawing the backgrounds…and felt very successful! These students were on equal ground with the “A Students” and did a better job!! It had an educational impact on EVERY student that I teach!

I hear this often - the impact that VC (and even just technology in general) has on special ed students. We need to keep collecting these stories and comments on the impact that curriculum videoconferencing has on our students.

This evening I did an ASK workshop for my local teachers. I had two high school English teachers in attendance. They’ve come to other workshops on videoconferencing. One of them has done a couple ASK programs; the other wants to but hasn’t found the right fit yet.

After the workshop, we talked for quite a while about the situation in their school and their wishes for a videoconference for their curriculum. I realized again that we cannot just be frustrated with teachers who won’t use videoconferencing. We have to listen to their concerns and situations and see if there is an appropriate, helpful way to integrate videoconferencing in their curriculum. And if there isn’t, we should accept that!

Some of the concerns were:

• New schedule. The school switched this year from a block schedule to trimesters. This is a huge jump and is causing all kinds of frustrations.
• New curriculum. The updated state curriculum has ramifications for their curriculum. In addition, due to the trimesters they are teaching classes they didn’t teach before.
• Less prep time. With the new schedule and new curriculum, they are also dealing with less prep time! More preps of new classes crammed into a smaller amount of time.

With challenges like that, who would even consider using VC? However, these teachers see the value. They are struggling though to see how to fit it into already crammed schedules.

So I asked some questions. I think the most important question was, “what do you already do to teach that curriculum”? In this case, British literature. In the course of the conversation, I discovered the students act out scenes from Shakespeare’s play. Voila! Here’s a perfect way to insert a videoconference. The students will already act out scenes. Just add a videoconference to up the ante with an outside audience. We’re hoping for UK or Canada when we get around to scheduling this. The students will already be practicing the performance.

We also discussed how stressed and freaked out high school kids are when they do collaborative connections. It’s really hard for them. I remember an 8th grade class last week in an ASK program. I overhead a kid saying, This is really creepy, before they muted the microphone. Creepy! How do you get kids to overcome their fear and concern about the videoconference? It’s different with high school kids! There’s this whole “body image” thing going on that’s really tough for kids.

So in our discussion we came up with this idea for an agenda:

• Introductions
• Insults - both classes prepare 5 Shakespearean insults for the other class. The two classes share insults back and forth - one from each class at at time. This should break the ice and get them laughing and more at ease.
• Scenes. Then the classes share scenes from a Shakespeare play. We’ll have to see how long the scenes are and how many can be shared in one class period.
• Question & answer. It’s critical to include the “fun” questions. They want to know about each other: what they do for fun, what music they like, etc.

What do you think? How do you listen to the teachers you serve?

It’s time to think about signing up for my online classes if you want to participate in the next couple months.

Interested in using videoconferencing to enhance your curriculum? Want to do more classroom to classroom connections with ideas & support? Interested in research supporting curriculum-based videoconferencing? Try one of these classes.

• All classes are open to everyone, and usually attended by participants across the country, and even sometimes internationally.
• All of the classes are instructor led and based on discussion and interaction with the other participants.
• Bulk discounts are available. Feel free to use this flyer for advertising.

Planning Interactive Curriculum Connections
An introduction to videoconferencing, content providers and projects.
Dates: January 28 – February 22, 2008
Time commitment: Plan to spend about 3-5 hours per week on the course.
Cost: $150 (bulk discounts available for group purchases)
Target audience: Designed for teachers, media specialists, and distance learning coordinators.

Kid2Kid Videoconference Connections
An in-depth six week class focusing on collaborative projects. You’ll receive assistance creating, advertising and implementing a collaborative project with another classroom.
Dates: February 11 - March 21, 2008
Time commitment: Plan to spend about 3-5 hours per week on the course.
Cost: $200 (bulk discounts available for group purchases)

BCISD Cancellation Policy: Refunds for any workshop will be made only if the BCISD is notified two (2) business days before the start of the activity.

Registration: Register with our registration secretary by calling (269) 471-7725 ext 149. Payment by credit card is preferred; however school P.O.s are accepted as well.

Check out the course web sites for additional information. We’d love to have you join us for either of these exciting courses!

How do you make sure videoconferencing really meets the curriculum? Do your teachers use VC “just for the fun of it?” or do you have some strategies to make sure videoconferences meet curriculum goals?

Here are a few of the ways we help our teachers do curriculum-based videoconferencing.

• Provide resources that connect videoconferences to the curriculum, i.e. our database with Michigan Curriculum correlations, grade level guides, and designed projects.
• Funding requires connection to curriculum. Our mini-grant forms require that teachers describe how the program fits their curriculum, and how they plan to prepare their students.

In addition, teachers often modify official “matching” projects like Monster Match and Read Around the Planet to meet their curriculum. This fall, a 7th grade art teacher participated in Monster Match with an art twist. The project was originally designed for K-2 classes, but the art teachers realized the value of the project for art instruction. In another match, one of our 5th teachers put a strong math twist on the project. The students had just finished MEAP testing, and every direction for their monster was given with math references. Finally, last year one of our 5th grade classes was matched with a UK school for Read Around the Planet. They were studying the revolutionary war, so they presented about that to the UK school. What an interesting discussion that was!

If teachers know their curriculum well, and have someone to help them tweak programs and projects for their curriculum, it’s very likely that the programs will meet curriculum goals and be a success.

Do you agree? What strategies do you use to ensure “curriculum videoconferencing?”

October 17, 2007, I did a workshop on Collaborations Around the Planet and Read Around the Planet for ESC 11’s Conference. Thanks to Google Alerts, I found out the video recording of the workshop is online. Feel free to use it if you want.

Hayden, K. L. (1999). Videoconferencing in K-12 education: A Delphi study of characteristics and critical strategies to support constructivist learning experiences. Unpublished Ed.D., Pepperdine University, Malibu, CA.

Author: Katherine L. Hayden
Title of dissertation: Videoconferencing in K-12 education: A Delphi study of characteristics and critical strategies to support constructivist learning experiences.
Publication year: 1999
Database source: Dissertation Abstracts and it used to be partially published online. Access it from the web archive.
My Codes: VCContentProviders, VCProjects, VCCourseDelivery, VCImplementation, VCExperts

Main Point: The dissertation identified characteristics of videoconference sessions that support constructivist learning experiences. It also focused on critical support strategies necessary for successful K12 videoconferencing. These characteristics were identified by interviewing a panel of experts.

Methods:
A Delphi study was used to identify characteristics of constructivist learning in videoconferencing.

The participants were from three areas: teachers with prior use of technology in K12 classrooms (stakeholders), experienced users of videoconferencing (experts), and educational consultant or visionaries (facilitator). (p. 73). A purposive sample was used.

They communicated via email and web-based questionnaires in three rounds of surveys, each building on the previous one. In the rounds, the participants identified characteristics and then rated them. The process was conducted over a four month period.

They were not required to have knowledge in constructivism, but were given a list of terms and experiences to work from: themes from the literature on constructivism (p. 65):

• student-centered activities
• active participation by students
• deep understanding of concepts
• access to primary sources of data
• performance-based assessment
• group situations / collaborative work
• teacher as facilitator

The responses were analyzed using the content analysis method.

Hayden also checked several variables to see if there was a difference between the participants and their responses (age, gender, experience, etc.) One area that was significant was prior experience with videoconferencing, (p. 99). “The group that indicated prior experience using videoconferencing in K-12 education had higher constructivist point totals indicating higher perceptions of constructivist methodology statements.” This is really intriguing considering the Sweeney research results. It does seem this constructivist theme is emerging. Is it because I’m only reading the most interesting studies first and I’m definitely a constructivist? Is that why I enjoy VC so much?

Definitions:  The definition of videoconferencing as two way seeing and hearing came from the PacBell site (now AT&T). So it appears that definitions in my dissertation could possibly come from sources such as a blog entry defining projects and collaborations.

Both room based and desktop based videoconferencing were included in the study.

Findings:
The results identified 20 characteristics of videoconferencing that support constructivist learning. They are online at the web archive. They fit into four themes: connections, questioning, learning, and interaction. p. 136 The researcher found it interesting that the traditional “talking head” of videoconferencing did not emerge in the study.
The results also identified 10 support strategies, that are online at the web archive too. They are organized into six categories: people (a  site technician or coordinator!!, access, hardware and software, materials, staff development, and cost. The researcher suggested that one person could play several support roles: Technician, leadership and management. p. 139

Lit Review: This lit review is organized more closely to how I want to organize mine.

In the lit review, Hayden reviews the history of educational technology and how it often made little long term impact on the classroom.  p. 15 Teachers who used radio, film or instructional television used it “occasionally as a replacement for direct instruction.” p. 15. The reference is to Tyack and Cuban. Hmmm. Does that sound like the use of content providers to you? An occasion replacement for regular insturction?! Interesting, isn’t it. Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

Do the lessons learned in college course delivery studies apply to K12 curriculum videoconferencing?

p. 47 Hayden describes how schools have used Internet projects in the classroom, and that they aren’t in the research literature, but there are several educational technology journal articles referencing them. This may be the way to describe how VC is used, even tho’ there is little research specifically on K12  curriculum videoconferencing type applications. It may also be useful to look at the types of projects she references to see how they correspond with the types of VC projects we’re doing. I know a lot of the ideas in my Projects Booklet are from internet based projects and Webquests.

p. 48 Hayden also gives an overview of how CUSeeMe was used in classrooms with Global SchoolNet. Research seems applicable to H323 videoconferencing as well. Certainly we can learn from their lessons. GSF projects have some key elements: interactivity with experts & peers, authentic projects with student-centered learning, online assistance with curriculum and finding partners. Read Around the Planet helps with finding partners, and other tools also do this. It’s a critical piece to collaborative projects.

p. 51. The lit review covers the resources available to help teachers in using videoconferencing, limited to basically the PacBell and Global SchoolNet sites. Remember this was in 1999. If I include a section like this, there are a lot more resources to refer to! Note also that there is a reason Lora Smith received the recent CILC National Distance Learning Awards. This site has been the starter/foundation for many of us as we got started with videoconferencing.

Great Quotes:
‘If a picture is worth a thousand words, then videoconferencing is worth tens of thousands of words. “  Newcombe 1997, but the source document is no longer online.

Background/Why It’s Important
p. 1-2 Hayden begins that background of the problem by arguing that business is using electronic communication tools and finds that they are a valuable tool for today’s work. (references from 1996 and 1997). Therefore the schools cannot ignore what is happening in the world. These arguments are similar to those I made when writing our RUS Grant. I’m sure there are more recent references that can be used to make this same argument.

p. 3-4 Hayden argues for the benefits of VC in education, including global resources, visuals, the personal touch, real-world learning, and educators visions of learning in the future.

Why we need VC coordinators in the school
p. 5 referenced Zhao - teachers need support to adopt new technologies otherwise there won’t be a widespread impact on education.

p. 15 Nonuse or infrequent use of early technologies was due to various problems, including access to training and resources. Another Cuban reference.

Limited support is one of the reasons teachers cite as an obstacle to using technology. (Hancock & Betts)

p. 58 “Site mentors” can provide support for professional development. Need to look into this research and how it applies to videoconference coordinators.  Hurst, Sprague, Polin (can’t find the reference).

Implementation
Cuban’s (1986) areas of concern for the implementation of technology are still critical issues today: “cost of equipment, maintenance and upgrades; access to technology, curriculum fit, training and support.” He also suggests two other areas that should be addressed: “teacher beliefs about teaching and learning and teachers being included in decision making relating to technology.”

p. 55 e-rate is referenced as a reason the cost of access to VC may be coming down. I think this is true - we couldn’t do IP based VC without good Internet connections. Of course now we want/need fiber! Will it ever end?!

Constructivism & Social Constructivism
p. 6 Many references used to make the point that technology is probably best integrated into student-centered constructivist learning environments. This theme is starting to come through loud and clear in my reading. We wonder why teachers don’t integrate videoconferencing in their curriculum or even try it. Could it be that they don’t believe that learning can happen in social constructivist environments? If that is true, then how do we teach them a new way? I think Jazz makes a few dents in this problem.

p. 23 & 24. Hayden describes how constructivism reforms are making inroads into educational practice and why they are desirable. I wonder what current research is saying about constructivism in the light of No Child Left Behind and the current testing environment? And how does that impact our emphasis on interactive videoconferencing?

Hiltz 1997 found that students who used group learning with online communication tools had higher grades. The social interaction was a key part of the educational process. Interesting, but it’s college level and it’s in a web based asynchronous environment. Do those principles apply to real time videoconferencing as well? Another study would be appropriate to find out if that is true.

p. 41 has a great chart I wish was online on the Internet so I could link to it to show you. It has videoconferencing activities, and how an instructionist teacher or a constructivist teacher would interpret it. I.e. “bring people together from remote locations” means “my students can display their work for another class” to an instructionist teacher, and “my students can collaborate with remote learners” to a constructivist teacher. Hmm. I’m thinking of the popularity of Read Around the Planet. Maybe another reason this project works so well is that it is not too far of a jump for an instructionist teacher to integrate into their learning. It’s relatively easy to put together a presentation to share with another class. The Q&A section is the start of interactive social constructivist experiences - something simple and easy to do.

“New technologies foster the kind of active, collaborative learning that constructivist advocate.” Collins p. 64. This is certainly true for videoconferencing, and especially Web 2.0 plus videoconferencing (see this example and this example).

Training/Professional Development
p. 57 The one day workshop focusing on how to use a skill or program vs. how to use it in the classroom is rarely effective.

p. 58 In technology PD, “the most important staff-development features include opportunities to explore, reflect, collaborate with peers, work on authentic learning tasks, and engage in hands-on, activte learning.” Sandholtz 1997 p. 142. Sure sounds like Jazz to me. These quotes correspond to my variable of what type of training the school VC coordinator received.

Relevance:  This study focuses on K12 education, unlike many that focus on higher ed course delivery. It also supports the constructivist learning that is critical in successful content provider programs and collaborative projects.

Two weeks ago I finished up the last session in a new professional development series I offered to my videoconference coordinators. I wanted to offer this as another alternative for meeting the “long course” requirement for the videoconference coordinators in my RUS grant buildings. I’m requiring the videoconference coordinator to take one of my online classes PICC or K2K, or the summer weeklong Jazz class. However, for the videoconferencing coordinators who have hourly contracts, taking an online course or a summer course is very difficult. They needed a class that could be done during their working day. So was born the “Supporting Videoconferences” series of classes. Each session was offered at least twice and via videoconference. We tried to keep the number of sites to five or less to increase interaction. Here’s an overview of the sessions:

Scheduling
I used to do all the scheduling for our schools, but they are using it so much we can’t keep up anymore. When we missed out on NASA programs two times for middle schools last year because we were so slow to process our scheduling pile, I knew something had to change.

The scheduling workshop covered which programs should be scheduled through us (ISDN, mini-grants, and programs we offer) and all the details of how the whole process happens. Using our district VC calendars (hosted in a Filemaker Pro database), the coordinators can see the status of all requested programs.

Then we talked about how to schedule with content providers. My schools do their own scheduling with providers when the program is free, or when they are paying for it themselves (which is almost never!). So we walked through how to use NASA’s scheduling system with the online calendar.  We also looked at how the Cleveland Zoo’s online scheduling system works with the specific dates and special registration link for each program. We also discussed how to schedule with a content provider that prefers email or phone contact. Including all the necessary details - teacher contact info, grade level, number of students, tech contact info, tech details, billing information, all the times & dates you can do - in one email makes it a lot quicker to schedule.

Finally, we discussed scheduling projects with other schools. A few of my videoconference coordinators are now capable of finding their own partners for projects. We talked about the various ways to find partners.

Also most of my districts still have just one or two T1s coming to us and then out to the Internet, so they can only do one videoconference at a time. We use the district VC calendars to make sure we don’t schedule a program on top of another one.

Mini-Jazz Sessions
The next session in the series was a mini-jazz session. I’ve blogged about these trainings before. Basically they consist of a quick intro activity that gets everyone on camera presenting, an overview of appropriate curriculum videoconferences for that grade/subject, and some brainstorming of projects. Then the work of making them happen afterwards! This September I offered a K-2 session, middle school science and middle school social studies. The Eco-Conversations we did this month were a result of the middle school science session.

Document Cameras and Laptops
The next session was an overview of the new equipment that was delivered in September to the RUS grant buildings. They received an Avermedia QuickPlay for hooking up laptops, a Lumens Digital Visualizer document camera, and a DVD/VCR combo. We hooked everything up, practiced with all the buttons, showed best (and not-so-best) practice. Everyone also shared how they had seen others use document cameras in a videoconferencing, any scenarios they had last year when they wished they had a document camera, and any ideas they had for using it this year.

Troubleshooting
In the troubleshooting session, we started with everyone sharing horror stories. What’s the worst thing that’s gone wrong in a videoconference? Then we walked through a HELP Troubleshooting handout that I made this fall. We tried to “break” and experience as many of the problems as we could and then fix them again. We also talked about the “yellow button” on the Polycom remote that tells the stats of the call and discussed what it means to have packet loss. We practiced changing the speed of the call and dialing at different speeds. And we discussed how to deal with echos, what causes them, and some possible solutions to share with your partner school.

Sharing experiences
Most of the earlier sessions were in September and October. Then the first week in December, we finished the series with a sharing session.

• Scheduling. Everyone shared what they had scheduled and how it went. We learned that persistence is a key skill for scheduling!
• Scheduling. We talked about Read Around the Planet and how to prepare for registration.
• Mini-jazz. We shared the status of ideas, and experiences from the sessions that happened.
• Document cameras. Everyone shared how they used it. Some shared examples as well. Jane Markle, Sylvester Elementary coordinator, shared how she used the document camera’s freeze and capture options to capture the pictures from a book to read to the students in the library. Daniel Daniel, art teacher at Coloma Jr. High, shared some student artwork.
• Troubleshooting. Everyone shared how they used their new troubleshooting skills.
• Content providers. Everyone shared content providers they connected to this fall (or past spring), and what they liked about the program.
• Projects. We closed with sharing collaborative projects that occurred this fall or are planned for the winter/spring. Much discussion around Monster Match, which was a huge success in October.

I shared this here so I have a record of it later! And also because it might be helpful to you as you plan training for your teachers and videoconference coordinators!