Elluminate session

We just had our H807 Elluminate session.
I didn't want to pour my frustration into the forum.

The session started very good. We sorted some sound problems and then it worked quite well.
We had the micros open for everyone. We talk easily, arranged slides, adjusted pictures together, wrote some explanations. As long as the technology worked fine, it was fun.

But...
After sharing the screen I lost the connection for some minutes totally.
The system reconnected, but starting from then I had problems with ether the micro or the headphones. The sound went on and off for a while every 20 seconds. The sound was gone for about 2-3 minutes. When it came back the recording of the lost minutes started at the same time. So I had the privilege to hear two conversations in parallel. My technical problems disturbed the discussion immensely. For me it was frustrating. I could not follow the discussion. During the periods I had no problems my participation level went down, because I wasn't sure if I could end my sentence or hear the reply. Maybe a solution would have been to leave the session and come back in again as a reset. Next time I will try that.
It was also confusing that my menus had different languages. My drop-down menus are all in German and seemed a little different.

My conclusion:
It makes sense in a presentation modus, where travelling to a face-to-face meeting would be inefficient.
It seems to be a good tool, if you need to discuss certain topics and share documents or software.

For occasional use the technology is not yet reliable enough and the general literacy in using web conferencing tools is still low.
Both, technique and literacy, needs to develop to move the tool beyond 'can you hear me'. As Derek and Katherine discussed, it is very disturbing and frustrating if you mention an important point or express a good idea and there is no response. It does not make it any better if that was just caused by technical problems. It interrupts the flow and disrupts the conversation. Participants learn quickly and do not take the effort to really go into a discussion.

I would like to use the tool if I would have to work frequently with a group of people, which I could not meet otherwise. I would take the time to really understand the technology and its features as well as how to solve the common problems. It would be important to think about lost content and conversation rules to have less frustrating situations. When using the tool frequently the group would find out how to make most of its features.

For teaching or training, I would only use Elluminate if is used frequently. I am not sure if there would be a lot of interaction. The wide majority of users does not accept poor performance and is not prepared to solve technical problems. They will just not use the tool. Stability and quality of sound and system are most vital.
On top, tools need to be easy to understand and use (affordances) – we all expect plug and play. Only tools that offer very specific features that cannot be replaced with an easy application (e.g. graphic software, ...) make people take time to get to know the software in more depth.

Elluminate

Quick and easy introduction: A recorded Training session:
http://www.elluminate.com/Training/Documentation/Detail/66/?id=227 

Lesson learned: Describing a click takes many words and can make things appear more complicated than they are. Showing it on screen is much easier to understand.

Strength:

• Explaining the use of software in an interactive synchronous way.
• More commitment in a meeting compared to telephone conferences, as everyone sees the list of the participants.
• Working with groups in diverse places.

Weaknesses:

• Even though the features seem easy, it takes some time to learn to use them without irritating yourself or the students with the technical features.
• Technical aspects of access (line capacity, costs, company policy,...)
• It is likely that not all participants always have the same experience and capacity to use the tool. Sorting out problems will take some part in many sessions.

These types of software tools need some training and experience to be comfortable with. Otherwise sorting out the technique might overlay the purpose of the session.
I would choose it for groups that will stay together for a time. E.G. training that goes over some weeks or teams working in projects, departments...
I would not use it with occasional participants, where I have no information about their web conferencing literacy. 
I suspect from the feedback of some friends using web conferencing, that most web bases conference tools are primarily used to do presentations online. The interaction part is reduced to vocal feedback with some occasional chat text (advanced users).

Chronemics & a late replay to Sylvias comment on my video

Hy Sylvia,

I just read about chronemics in "Nonverbal Dynamics in Computer-Mediated Communication  ..." by Joseph B. Walther

And I realise that I totally lost it in the case of the video I made.

So here is my belated response with a directly linked to this weeks readings:

Your comment gave me a lot to think - so I felt not able to immediately give an appropriate feedback  - Since then I often came back to your reflections and I wanted to write a profound reply to your comment.

But as life goes - I was driven by the course and life outside H807 and never managed to come back to you, even though I wanted to.  

The article of Walther addresses this delay.

Walther (p.8)  " Failure to get responses may erode initial level of trust in virtual groups (Jarvenpaa, Knoll, & Leidner, 1998), and frequent messaging  is noted consistently as a critical factor  in  virtual  group  trust.

In my heart I know that these response time issues are facts. However, I think they add so much to the time pressure we all have already.

I have read somewhere that in Europe a response time of 2 days is acceptable in business – where as in Asia this time is down to half a day.

My personal approach is to ignore the pressure and answer in my own time. I have to admit, that I regularly excuse myself for delays in answering.

But on the other hand I never mind if someone does not send a message for ages – I am prepared to accept many different reasons for that. I am just happy to hear from them again – or I send a message to trigger some conversation.

Is that OK in todays CMC? Among good friends- maybe;  in business – no way.

Size matters in communities

Martin Weller argues in the article “The distance from isolation", that communities are the logical conclusion in e-learning. He uses the three features "openness, robustness and decentralisation" to underpin the theory.

I have discussed with my husband this idea and we came to the conclusion that there is one important point missing: It is size of the group of potential contributors.

Contribution to communities is a motivation matter. We all experience all the time that many people use a resource but only a very small group contributes in one or the other way. The nice thing about communities is that you can but don't have to contribute. Some people are motivated for long time, some just for a short time or occasionally. Only a high number of potential contributors insures a significant amount of contribution takes place. And here we see the crucial the difference to learning communities. There are usually not enough voluntary contributors over time to give the community enough momentum to fly.

Another issue we see is, that without some clear guidance of teachers, learners might spend much more time researching and collecting quality information on a subject. A matter of reducing the amount of information and complexity.

We are not at all sure if  this is just our mindset and we are not able to think in other learning dimensions. It will be very interesting to follow the development. It will be a challenge to even do that - because if there is a change, it might happen outside of our radars, when the digital natives use other channels of communication.

On the other hand - as long as teacher education does not change significantly - how shall the learning socialisation of the children change that radically?

Reference: M.Weller, “The distance from isolation",  The Institute of Educational Technology, The Open University, Milton Keynes,  United Kingdom

Using new tools - Influance of affordances

I need to list the new tools I have discovered in H807. Thanks to all fellow students for sharing.

I have used some of the tools already and some I want to use in the future.
Making the list makes me think of affordances - If I look at the tools I have used and  the ones I want to I can see the influence of affordances:

If I had a clear task to fulfil and a tool that specifically offers this feature, I used it immediately like podbean or the no23 recorder. 
A movie created with the more advanced tool xtranatural waits for its premiere.  Its because the tool needs some more time to explore  - I created a dialogue, but somehow didn't manage to publish it immediately and didn't take the time to come back to it. But it is still on my mind and I am curious to explore it further and solve the problem.
moodle and eluminate didn't manage to make me feel I could use them right away. There are some promises which make me curious.  However, there is a dilemma with those tools. I want to know what they can do before I invest time. But I suppose that I first need to invest time to get a good impression of what they can do. I even might have to get some training experience before I can really judge, how I could use them.  

v  http://www.podbean.com/
You can create a personal blog which allows you to upload mp3 files (not necessary if you already use a blog where you can upload mp3)

v  http://www.no23.de/no23web/
A free download for recording mp3 files.

v  http://www.xtranormal.com/makemovies/
I love the idea of making movies. I want to use it for intercultural case studies. It helps a lot if you are  good in imagining and writing dialogs (I need to work on that to part)

v  http://screenr.com/
You can record what you do on the computer screen and your voice. The result is  a screen movie. Especially good if you need to explain for example how to set up an account or entering a space with passwords, without actually doing so.

v  http://www.doodle.com/ or  http://www.planiteasy.de/Meeting planners, if you have no other reliable tool (a tip from my husband)

v  http://www.slideshare.net/
Sharing slides: I have no use for itt at the moment, but I will keep it in mind.

v  http://www.elluminate.com/
Eliminate is a collaboration and conferencing tool. Seems good but heavy - I need to find use for it and try it.

v  http://moodle.org/
A virtual learning environment (VLE) and a course and content management system (CCMS). I will definitely explore it.  But again, I need to deliberately take some time to do so.

Affordances and communication technologies

Affordance is connected to readability. As I am someone with low reading and writing speed, it is extremely tiring for me to read running text especially on the screen. That’s why I like to use colors, structure and pictures a lot. It helps me structure my ideas and I intend to make reading easy for others.

My favorite definition is :

Affordance: … in the context of HCI as indicating the easy discoverability of possible actions”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affordance, accessed 9.3.2011

My work might often appears to be a bit short and superficial (It does to me, as there is so much more in my head). It also might not always be suitable to show what I have learned or thought through. But I just realized that I like to read and give just prompts for ideas. It is freedom for reflection. Call me a bullet point addict.

  Here is my colourful, structured, bullet point-ish reflection for "Affordances”

	e-mail	blog
How does the technology itself shape that communication?	Communication stile: Asynchronous, one-to-one, one –to–many, Necessary skills: Written, tipping, use of some text processing software Access to computer and internet is necessary Some minimum technical requirements certain rules are necessary, like: acceptable and unacceptable phrasing when and whom to put in copy	Communication stile: Asynchronous, one-to-many, Necessary skills: Written, tipping, use of some text processing and blog software. Access to computer and internet is necessary Some minimum technical requirements certain rules are necessary, like: netiquette
What are the technologies good at?	Fast but asynchronous exchange of information,  questions, easy decisions One to one discussion (not critical)	Reporting on ongoing subjects Showing pictures, links Express opinion Describe experiences Keeping people updated (RSS) Getting public feedback Group discussions to some extent
When are they a poor medium for communication?	Discussion, group communication Matters that need complex description. Dealing with critical issues For people who have problems with reading and writing	Keeping secrets Store content on local PCs Share off-line Leading a discussion of equal participants For people who have problems with reading and writing

Is “affordance” a useful concept?	I read about it in English and German, but I found it difficult to grasp the notion. The German translations are “Aufforderungscharakter“ (prompt character) or „Angebotscharakter“ (offering character) . After reading some entries and blogs I start to get an idea. Affordance: "… in the context of HCI as indicating the easy discoverability of possible actions” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affordance, accessed 9.3.2011 It is useful to think about affordances when talking about usability, user-friendliness and intuitive use.
Is behaviour shaped by the affordances of the technology?	The affordances different person perceives will vary, depending on their professional background, ICT proficiency , learning stile , attitude towards innovation, time resources Yes, my behaviour is shaped by the affordances of a product. I need to see what I can do with it to judge what I can use it for. I am pretty creative so I often find use for things, even though I might not use it for myself, I see what others can do with it. Unfortunately, I often see more than there is. I often stretch programs too far or I am disappointed because I couldn't actually do what I thought I could.
Other explanations for any behavioural	If affordance is “… discoverability of possible actions.” That is not the only part influencing my behavior. It’s not only possible actions but possible outcome, which is way more important to me. However, I often suspect my husband to be more interested in what one could do with the technology than what to use it for.  I am tempted to say that this might be a matter of gender.
Would I recommend the use of affordances to assess the use of a new technology?	Yes, I would suggest thinking about the term in the context of  usability. The term affordance is a bit academic though and not very clear for HCI in my opinion.

Analysing wikis

Below I reflect on the questions given (bold). 

1.    An analysis of the social values wiki users adopt.

Wikis are a great way to collect and share information in a group.
Communication in e.g. project work can be difficult. Social values are:

·         less time necessery for face-to-face meetings

·        numbers of contributing  persons can be very high

·         easy documentation and peer assesment

Here a wiki is very helpful. It can save time for travelling and meeting, documentation, revision process. It easily can show the status of a group work.

It’s a bit less easy to keep the history of a document alive, though.

Some rules for contributions, discussion style and approval procedure need to be set to have a certain quality level for the input as well as a behavioural codex for discussions.

It can be difficult, if a wiki is accessible from outsiders of a workgroup. If the participants are not free to contribute and trusted, that will hinder good contribution.

2.    A discussion regarding the relationship between these social values and the features of the wiki technology itself.

The only wiki I really know is Wikipedia. I found working with a wiki at the beginning of the course H807 very stimulating to use it for work.

Are such technologies finding new ways of conducting behaviours that were already in operation, or are they promoting new types of behaviour?

In my opinion, Wikipedia  has spread a certain behaviour that was formerly a behaviour of a small group of academics and publishers.

The discourse about entries in some public encyclopaedia was formerly perused by this small group. Now a much wider group of people, not necessarily academics, is involved in discussions about how and what to write to a certain subject. The discussion behind the scene was and is fierce. However, now the discussion is more public and more people are involved. Some of them are experts some want to be and some are not.  There is a higher need to moderate those public discussions.

Using wikis, if you have not the trait to do it, can be a challenging experience. Publishing text is not everyone’s comfort zone. It might change people’s behaviour or make them reluctant to use the technology.

Are the technologies used uniformly, or do different communities use the same technology in different ways?

There are people with very different focus using e.g. for Wikipedia:

·         Some want to share their knowledge

·         Some want to be a part of the new hype

·         Some feel obliged to give back if they use e.g. Wikipedia

·         Some want to express themselves through the medium

·         Some replace parts of their social life with virtual interaction

·         Some want to clarify or inform to specific topics

·         Some want to state their opinion

Wikis can be used for group work in more or less public settings, for business or private purposes. A wiki can be public to only the authors or to a wide interest group or to public.

Are internet technologies different in any respects from other technologies?

Internet technologies are in certain ways different from other technologies:

They can spread very fast. The first design is often time consuming and costly. But there is almost no cost for reproduction. Constant updates are a part of the innovation progress as well as of marketing. This high speed of versions has influenced the innovation and marketing of electronic hardware and other products.

Internet technology seems harmless at first, as there is no noise and moving parts. The interaction with other parts of the internet / ICT is not transparent for the ordinary user and can be used for fraud and other immoral or criminal behaviour.

Can you think of an example when a technology has changed your behaviour?

I can think of a few:

E-Mails have changed my behaviour. I use the phone less. I rather send e-mails for information or questions. If I take the phone today I need an immediate answer or the more personal connection.

Digital photos have changed my behaviour. Before digital photos, I sorted my photos and made albums. Now, I keep photos digitally and have almost non in paper. I do photo albums only seldom. If I do one, I upload it on the internet, to get a printed book.

Internet shopping has significantly changed my behaviour. I buy a lot online, from groceries, books, cloth to washing machine and present vouchers.

Classroom Etiquette

Here is a little podcast, definitely related to learning:
Please follow the link to Podbean and start the the recording.

Classroom Etiquette

I hope you like it.

A video says more than 1000 pictures??

Having read so much about the use of podcasts and audio-visual communication, I thought of having a go
myself (uhh new territories..). 

Collaborative teaching and video-conferencing in Classics, Swansea University

Video-conferencing is used to support and deliver modules in classics.

Three Universities in Wales collaborate: Swansea University, University of Wales and Cardiff University  

Seminar-like modules are presented by one university. It’s up to the departments
and staff to use video-conferencing or not. A minimum of one module per university is agreed. Students from all three universities can take part.

The universities have invested in commercial conferencing systems with technical support by the supplier. A Blackbord site is used for delivering material for the video-conferencing sessions.

Introduction sessions are held for staff new to the technology.

Benefits:

·         draw on external resources

·         enriched syllabus

·         introduction of leading scholars in the field

·         teaching as part of a wider team

·         clear cost-saving benefits

·         video-network encourages politeness and staff to think about their dress sense

Drawbacks:

·         initial period of adjustment to using the video-conferencing network

·         a training issue for staff doing classes occasionally

·         small groups of students can feel isolated

·         increased use of the network for meetings can cause difficulties to book regular slots

My View:

Improving the process of collaboration between the Universities with this new means was an innovation in their context. Students and staff profit from it. Having clear cost savings on top of a generally appreciated approach is more than most innovations in e-learning I came across can claim for.

However, I expected something different: I was hoping to find a case study describing two or more teachers holding lessons using a modern web based conferencing tool.

Does anyone have an example or experience?

Feeds available!

I got it. I was working on an old version.
Now I am up to date with the right settings for feeds!

Use of podcasting in Philosophy, University of Glasgow, Susan Stuart

Susan Stuart is a lecturer for philosophy in Glasgow.

This case study describes how she included new technology to enhance learning experience for her students and teaching experience for herself over the years.

Her greatest success is the recording of her lectures about Kant as podcasts (mp3 recording) and making them available for her students online.

The students value those podcasts very highly as a revision tool. Colleagues and other lecturers have adopted this method because of its success. Policy within the university has changed to support podcasting and e-learning. The perception of e-learning seemed to have been given a positive image. So the idea was implemented, used and appreciated widely which makes it an innovation.

My view:

The innovation of Susan Stuart is rather small. Just recording and uploading does not seem to be too exiting.

However, the additional resource was highly appreciated by the students. I guess that Susan Stuart is a brilliant lecturer. Philosophy needs the discourse about ideas. This cannot be provided by books or any online tests. Podcasting is the perfect way to document these discourses.

Susan Stuart made an innovation for her classes, which is a model for other similar settings.

The Virtual Farm, University of Edinburgh

The 'Virtual Farm' project aims to provide e-learning resources to optimise the use of the real-life educational farm resources (animals, agricultural practice and records).
The Virtual Farm is embedded in 'The Virtual Veterinary Practice' a bespoke VLE to support students doing a Bachelor of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery at the University of Edinburgh.

The program connects the resources on the real farm by employing a multitude of media and data systems. There are data collecting systems, video and webcam, blogs and wikis. Discussion forums connect with the farm workers and other students. The animal adoption provides a more emotional connection. All those information augment the courses in the university. Additionally, students have insight in the systems their future clients use. Through the newsletter and other input, they follow farm life over the year. Students learn how to handle IT and use statistics.

The project is widely appreciated and supported. The author of the report sees a significant increase in quality of education. Spin-off projects and plans for connection to direct physical/ professional practice are evidence for the success of the approach. Drawbacks seem manageable. A certain amount of time, motivation and money is needed to keep the Virtual Farm running. Some technical problems and privacy related concerns needed to be addressed.

My view:The Virtual Farm appears to be a creative and truly innovative approach. In this blended approach I see a great catering for the distance problem and the lack of having “the real” experience. But there is even more in it as it reveals more opportunities for learning and research in the veterinary medicine.