Most pedagogical frameworks and models, including Garrison, Anderson and Archer’s (2000) Community of Inquiry framework and Gilly Salmon’s (2003, 2005) ‘5-stage model’ for online teaching and learning, agree that the instructor needs to create, develop and maintain ‘social presence’ in the learning effort. Indeed, even Hranstinki (2008) argues that,
social support is desirable as a way to foster collaborative work and learning; it provides an environment where communication is encouraged; e.g., anecdotes and personal experiences encourage trust, which foster a receptive and creative learning environment.
Online learning efforts often rely mainly on the text-based asynchronous forums through LMS systems, blogs and wikis. Text-based communication has, however, an important handicap. As I argued in a previous assignment, online text-based communication provides no visual cues other than words or images and lacks the ‘sense of immediacy’ of ‘real-time, verbal, face-to-face mode of communication’ and therefore ‘presents a special challenge for establishing social presence’ (Garrison, 2011: 23). The literature reviewed for this task concurs that this drawback can be reduced through frequent synchronous meetings. Furthermore, Garrett (2011: 160) also notes that the synchronous meeting is, pedagogically, more versatile and closer to the face-to-face experience. He notes that
While many of the activities such as lecture, discussion, group work, examinations, student presentations, multimedia presentations, guest speakers, web-based searches/demos/discussion, and demonstrations can be attempted in an asynchronous environment, most are more easily and effectively accomplished in a synchronous environment that more closely approximates the traditional classroom.
Caladine et al (2010) also note that, through audio and video synchronous conferencing, there
is now scope for the empowerment of distance learners and an opportunity to offer a much wider choice of strategies intended to enhance and support learning … Indications from the research literature are exciting.
This research literature also reports that communicating in real-time at a distance has never been easier. This is confirmed by many practitioners, such as Villano (2008), who state that
mainstream technology has advanced and the cost of web conferencing has dropped … What's more, the innovations are infinite, and have uses even beyond eLearning or blended learning in real time.
There are many free and/or licensed platforms that can be used. Moreover, many applications are appearing on the Android and App Store market that make mobile conferencing through tablets, including iPads, and smartphones a convenient reality. These apps knock down the once insurmountable barriers for video conferencing use in education—barriers of student access, and technology that was cumbersome and expensive (see Garrett, 2011).
For example, with the free social app ‘ooVoo’ a teacher can hold a free group video chat with up to 12 students on 3G, 4G, LTE and/or Wifi. More popular apps, which are available across all computer devices and operating systems include Skype, FaceTime, and Google Hangouts. Unfortunately, the very versatile and robust Adobe Connect is no longer free. However, the newly launched appear.in (available at https://appear.in) seems to be a promising alternative (although still non-functional in Safari and can accept only 8 people [for free] in any virtual room).
The literature also indicates that the multiplayer virtual reality game Second Life can also used for real-time group conferencing, and learning. Though, students have to communicate through their avatars (see Kapp, 2007) rather than using their real faces. The game has been used and studied for many years now and has been adopted for many learning contexts, from K-12 to tertiary education. Its use in the training of nurses (see Blackburn, 2008) and the teaching of languages has been an outstanding success.
The reviewed literature however also indicates that despite the potential and successes of synchronous conferencing a significant barrier still exists, that of pedagogy. Caladine et al (2010), in fact, insist that
from a practitioners point-of-view, the challenge will come from the need to be flexible, adaptive and innovative. In other words, the need is to rapidly develop new understandings of pedagogies to best utilize the person-to-person interactivity of emerging technologies.
Moreover, there is agreement in the literature, that, for synchronous discussions to be effective and efficient, the pedagogical mindsets of both the educator and learners need to move away from the traditional ‘schooling’ model (where the transmission and passive acquisition of knowledge is the predominant educational objective). The educators and students must a progressive 21st educational paradigm where learning is mainly (but not exclusively) achieved through the collaborative construction of knowledge. Furthermore, as with any educational technology tool, the purpose for using synchronous discussion has to make sense. It has to fit in with the curriculum in a pedagogically sound way that supports learning and achievement of the course objectives. Yet, as Andrews and Klease (2002) note,
in many cases the use (of video conferencing) has not been informed by rigorous research leading to sound pedagogical practices. Video conferencing has frequently copied typical lecture style format of didactic lecture style delivery rather than exploring approaches.
These authors also report that, during synchronous sessions, students ‘find the talking head presentation to be undesirable’ (Andreas and Klease, 2002). They therefore argue that synchronous tools should not be used as a one-way medium, a format where the instructor can deliver information in real-time, but instead be viewed as a vehicle that allows for the exchange of information, for accommodating three or four-way (or more) conversations that build learning, ideas and learners’ motivation.
A final note: the synchronous communication medium should be reserved only for exchanges that support a course objective or other learning-related function (for example, for student encounters in a virtual office) that can’t be accomplished through asynchronous methods.
No comments:
Post a Comment