International
Journal of
Educational
Technology

Extending Learning Opportunities Through a Virtual Faculty - The Videoconference Option

Abstract

Background

In the mid 90s staff from Central Queensland University and Deakin University began informal discussions regarding the possibility of sharing course offerings in some way, as it was becoming recognised that smaller chemistry departments were losing their ability to maintain as wide a range of courses and specialist subjects as had been previously offered. The effect of economic rationalism and a change in government policy were beginning to have far reaching implications and these departments were looking for ways of maintaining their viability in the longer term. These informal discussions later formalised into an application for a Committee for University Teaching and Staff Development (CUTSD) grant to develop a ‘virtual faculty’.

In recent years the notion of the virtual faculty has become an accepted part of the educational landscape. The development of these faculties is usually driven by two major influences — competition and need. In a world increasingly driven by economic rationalism and globalisation, many educational institutions are seeking ways to remain viable and competitive, as well as to increase or even simply maintain their market share. Virtual faculties are seen as an achievable way of doing this and the emergence of the World Wide Web and videoconferencing as accessible technologies has provided environments that enable such activities. However, it is also true to say that the success of such faculties is uncertain and the high expectations of such ventures are not necessarily being met.

While the Web appears to be the most common choice for developing virtual faculties and universities, during initial discussions for this particular venture, the project team decided on videoconferencing as the most likely tool for establishing a virtual faculty. There were several reasons for this decision. First was the educational purpose and learning need. It was felt that videoconferencing allowed for in-depth, real-time exploration of difficult concepts in advanced chemistry subjects and specialisations that were best presented in a situation that would enable immediate questioning and feedback. It was also felt that other technologies, such as the Web, would not easily allow for this kind of interaction. Second was the availability of an appropriate technological framework. The two initiating universities have sophisticated, well-established videoconferencing networks used for teaching across their multi-site campuses. The other universities which had been approached regarding participation in the project had videoconferencing facilities which were suitable for use in such a venture. This familiarity with, and acceptance of, videoconferencing as a teaching and learning tool reinforced its choice as a suitable medium for establishing a virtual faculty. Additionally, this project was not considered to be a distance learning activity per se. It was seen as a flexible delivery extension of the participating universities’ core teaching activities and the need for face-to-face interaction was seen as paramount. Third was the relative knowledge the institutions had of using videoconferencing as a teaching and learning tool. While not all staff and students involved in the project had used videoconferencing for teaching and learning there was a general understanding within these institutions regarding videoconferencing and the ways in which it could be utilised for teaching and learning activities. Many students also were familiar with using videoconferencing and were not daunted by being involved in teaching and learning sessions using this medium. Fourth, the initiating universities had explored some alternative teaching and learning strategies suitable for videoconferencing and felt that the medium offered excellent opportunities for increasing student learning opportunities and extending staff skills in using technology as an effective teaching and learning tool. It was considered that the use of videoconferencing could also encourage a shift from didactic methods of teaching such as those traditionally used in science courses to more student-centred teaching and learning processes.

This paper explores the adoption of videoconferencing as a viable tool for creating virtual learning environments. Particular consideration was given to providing course options for students in remote and regional areas. It describes a national project that was undertaken to trial the concept and to examine the notion of inter-university collaboration at several levels across a number of institutions. The paper outlines the benefits and challenges of such undertakings and identifies factors for the successful implementation of videoconferenced virtual faculties.

Educational rationale

Students undertaking final year, honours or postgraduate courses in small universities may be disadvantaged because of the limited specialist expertise that is within their institution. In some cases, students are now unable to undertake an undergraduate program in certain disciplines that previously had been generally available at most institutions. This situation is increasingly becoming an issue as small departments are under threat and some courses or specialisations are no longer being offered because they lack financial viability. This problem has been recognised by the Federal Government and resulted in the Maintaining Student Choice program that was initiated in 1998. While this program concentrated mainly on the disciplines of Classics, Languages, Music, Maths and Physics areas, several universities are experiencing difficulties in continuing to offer a wide range of course offerings covering other discipline areas. A direct outcome of this loss or minimisation of diversity in course offerings is the difficulty regional and small universities have in enabling a range of postgraduate options.

Most regional institutions have foci of expertise, albeit though small, which, if combined, represent a formidable range of teaching talents. Collaboration between universities can also be considered as the only means of maintaining some courses in specialised areas where numbers are too small in one university to make the offer of such a course viable. The wide scale adoption of telecommunications technologies across Australian universities offers a viable avenue for linking together clusters of expertise to form a virtual faculty.

Description of the Project

Using Chemistry as a test vehicle, the project aimed to examine the role of inter-university collaborative teaching via videoconferencing. This project was seen as a crucial test of inter-university cooperation and a key option in enabling smaller universities to maintain vigorous, high quality degree programs in the face of competing demands on finances in a climate of increasing budgetary constraints.

Universities that had been targeted for initial discussion prior to the grant application were those in regional areas or other areas where they were wishing to maintain current levels of course offerings. These institutions included the University of Tasmania (UTAS), the Northern Territory University (NTU), the University of New England (UNE), the University of South Australia (USA) and the two initiating Universities, Central Queensland University (CQU) and Deakin University (Deakin). After considerable discussion, and for a variety of reasons, some of the institutions decided not to participate further at this stage in the offering or receipt of units through the virtual faculty. The development of the virtual faculty eventually involved commitment from four institutions: CQU, Deakin, NTU and UTAS.

The project was intended to enhance the learning experiences of final year, honours and postgraduate students through access to additional specialist expertise and a wider group of students. However, the units actually offered in the project were aimed at final year and honours students.

To test the success of a virtual faculty the consortium intended to develop five demonstration modules comprising content delivery and discussion/problem solving activities. The detailed topics were selected by the consortium after examination of their collective needs and available expertise. In the initial phase discussions identified one demonstration model as chemometrics which was seen as a key subject area for all institutions and currently not available at all the participating universities due to budgetary constraints and staffing shortfalls. However, this option was not pursued in the project as other areas assumed higher priority. Other subjects also considered were molecular modelling, polymer science, environmental chemistry, chemical toxicity and chemical hazards. After careful consideration by all participating universities of all possible units available for offer, the final subject areas selected were molecular modelling, specialised organic synthesis and group theory.

It was agreed by all participating institutions that cross-accreditation of the offerings was not an issue as all the subjects offered were part of nationally accredited degree programs. Assessment tasks were developed and marked by the staff member offering the subject regardless of where students were enrolled. The students retained their enrolment at their respective home universities. According to individual university’s course structures, subjects were treated either as Chemistry core subjects or as electives. In either case, they contributed fully to the students’ course of study.

Support Technologies

While videoconferencing was the medium of delivery, other technologies were used to support the learning activities. These technologies included email, Web and print technologies. One of the challenges faced in developing virtual faculties is that of establishing ease of communication. Students often feel a little inhibited (Comeaux, 1995, Klease, Andrews & Druskovich, 1996) in being relaxed and at ease both with the lecturer and with students at other locations. For this reason, as well as the ease of use, e-mail was used for student-to-student contact and student to lecturer contact. While not all took advantage of this option, those that did felt that the use of email to communicate helped to minimise the difficulties of not knowing the lecturer. These students also felt that it helped them to interact more easily with the other students.

The Web was also another tool that was used to help establish familiarity with other participants in the project. Placing staff and student photographs and biographical data on a web page was effective in encouraging this familiarity. Although videoconferencing enables staff and students to see each other, faces are often indistinct—particularly in large rooms and this makes it difficult to refer to specific individuals by name. Both staff and students felt that the ability to know your class was an important feature of the interaction. This was facilitated by having the photographs and other relevant information on the Web. This helped staff to identify individuals at remote sites and refer to them by name. Both staff and students felt that the more they knew each other, the easier it was to participate in virtual classes.

The Web was also used as a source of information for students. Course information, (structure, assessment details, contact information, etc) but not content, was also placed on the Web for ease of access by all students. This removed any concerns the project team had about students receiving insufficient and inconsistent information about the various units being offered in the virtual faculty.

As well as being used for communication between project participants, email was used significantly for project management. Organisational aspects were discussed and finalised using email and occasionally phone calls where clarification was required. On the whole, however, email was a very adequate means of maintaining regular contact, sharing information and arranging and finalising organisational requirements. Videoconferencing was also used for project management, project planning and project evaluation. While email was an excellent medium for getting things done there was a need for occasional real-time interaction to thrash out ideas, reach consensus where required and to interact as a whole group.

While videoconferencing is acknowledged for it’s ability to enable a whole class consisting of groups of students at a number of different sites to interact, it is also recognised for it’s weaknesses in enabling the presentation of complex graphics or written materials such as complicated chemical formulae and structures. As a result of materials of this nature having to be sent using a document camera/visualiser the details of complex materials can be very difficult to discern at receiving sites. For this reason print copies of overhead or PowerPoint slides and other related materials were provided to all students. This also encouraged student participation, as they were not concerned with copying (often inaccurately) this complex information. Having the materials in front of them, they could then focus more on the interactional aspects of the videoconference class. The other shortcoming of videoconferencing in respect to sending graphics and written information, is that only one form of communication can be conducted at a time. The lecturer and materials from the document camera cannot be seen at the same time. Thus having the copies of diagrams and other graphical information meant that the students were able to view and interact with the lecturer throughout the class, minimising the need to switch between lecturer and document camera.

While not used in this particular project it is recognised that a parallel computer link could be utilised to run CD packages and other software. This can further (and sometimes more effectively) illustrate some of the complex and difficult points under discussion thus assisting students to develop a clear understanding of these issues. Such an approach has been effectively used in intra-university videoconference classes.

The above diagram demonstrates ways in which multiple resources can be successfully integrated into a multi-point videoconference, as discussed earlier. Technologies were selected for their particular strengths in enhancing the learning experience.

While videoconferencing was the major mode of interaction for exploring class materials, multimode delivery was extremely beneficial in addressing the range of educational purposes and needs, including the social aspects of learning.

Evaluation

Evaluation was seen as being central to the project and both formative and summative evaluation practices were used. The formative evaluation, in particular, was used to shape the direction of the project and several changes were implemented as a result of these processes. The summative processes at the end of each set of subject offerings also had a formative aspect as they encouraged reflection on the experience to date, and provided valuable information for future directions. The final summative evaluation conducted at the conclusion of the project enabled the entire undertaking to be viewed in context and provided evidence that the overall virtual faculty project was successful.

The evaluation sought to find answers to the following questions in particular, as well as to evaluate the project as a whole.

• To what extent does a virtual faculty using videoconferencing enhance the learning experience?
  
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of a virtual faculty using videoconferencing as a learning environment?
  
• What are the most appropriate forms of learning best mediated via videoconferencing?
  
• In students' opinions what features make the video conferenced virtual faculty attractive as a mode of learning delivery?
  
• What professional development for staff and students is required to effectively implement a virtual faculty using videoconferencing?

Evaluation was carried out through surveys, observations of the teaching and learning sessions, student focus groups, staff reflections, and staff interviews. A survey was conducted at the end of each set of subject offerings and provided both demographics and perceptions of being involved in a virtual faculty. Students focus groups were conducted three times throughout each set of subject offerings—in the early stages of the semester, about half way through and at the end. Except for one face to face focus group with students at the University of Tasmania, all these activities were conducted using videoconferencing. The one face-to-face session occurred because project team members were conducting a staff development exercise at the University of Tasmania and students took advantage of the opportunity to talk to the instructional designer directly. The instructional designer conducted the focus group sessions as that person was perceived by the project team to be neutral. This was also the perception of the students who were quite comfortable in discussing both the strengths and weaknesses of the virtual faculty project, whether it was face-to-face interaction or across the videoconferencing network.

Concurrent with the focus groups, informal interviews were conducted with lecturing staff. These interviews provided invaluable information as they highlighted not only the strengths and weaknesses of the virtual faculty but also provided insight into the lecturers own developing experiences of using videoconferencing as a teaching and learning tool. These findings formed the basis of a discussion by team members via videoconferencing and resulted in adjustment and refinement of the project.

Staff reflections were ongoing and were spontaneously communicated to the project manager by email throughout each set of subject offerings. Reflections were also provided by staff at the end of each set of offerings and at the end of the project.

Informal chat sessions also took place between students and participating lecturers, helping to shape the teaching and learning activities.

While assessment and the way in which it was handled was an important aspect of the project, assessment results were not used in any quantitative way to evaluate the learning in comparison to other methods of teaching and learning. The rationale for this was that the focus was on the processes and feasibility of developing virtual faculties rather than on comparing one form of teaching and learning with another.

Discussion of the Evaluation Outcomes

In general, students supported this innovation in teaching and learning and the opportunities it provided. Students appreciated the opportunity to expand their general knowledge of the discipline and their specific knowledge of highly specialised areas of chemistry. Students were willing to deal with the problems of time difference in order to take advantage of this opportunity, which, on this occasion, resulted in very early classes. Additionally, they liked the experience of interacting with a wider peer group and of learning from each other’s different knowledge-base and backgrounds.

It is worth noting here that multi-point videoconferencing is most effective with small groups of students (20 to 25 across 3 or 4 sites) as stated by Mason, (1994) cited in Burke, London and Daunt (1997)

'small learning groups...show much higher levels and quality of interaction than large groups using the same technology. (p.27)'

Small groups enable the opportunities for peer and lecturer interaction, as described above, not possible with larger groups. Peer and collaborative learning are considered to be critical elements in effective learning and the students participating in this project indicated a strong preference for this approach to learning The virtual faculty retained a direct link between teacher and student and between students. This encouraged the direct probing and questioning which is crucial in senior level studies. Additionally, smaller group sizes better support the redesign of curriculum necessary for effective use of technologies such as videoconferencing.

Students felt that lecturer familiarity with, and understanding of, videoconferencing as a method of delivering teaching and learning was essential to the success of virtual faculties such as this. Students commented that they least preferred videoconferenced classes where the lecture was the major teaching and learning activity. In other words students find the talking head presentation to be undesirable. This finding is not a new one (Commeaux, 1995; Schiller & Mitchell, 1993). As already indicated, most students, particularly those who have had previous exposure to videoconferencing, quickly recognise its capacity to allow for interactive learning and generally express a preference for this. This sentiment is supported by other research (Schiller & Mitchell, 1993; Musial & Kampmueller, 1996; Klease, Andrews & Druskovich, 1996).

All students commented that staff needed to develop new skills to use this medium effectively. The need for staff development in using videoconferencing and other communications technologies is one strongly supported by proponents of educational technologies such as Bates (1995), and Laurilard,(1993). Laurilard, in particular, notes that videoconferencing lends itself to a lecture format and considerable effort is required to rethink teaching and learning for this medium. Staff need both time to develop new skills and understanding as well as professional support such as educational design assistance to help them exploit the characteristics and strengths and weaknesses of these new environments. Further to this comment, the evaluations demonstrated that the more staff used this medium the more competent they became, particularly when they adapted their teaching style to a more interactive one. This was also a finding of previous research by Klease, Andrews and Druskovich (1996).

The observations of the classes indicated that familiarity with the medium helped the students to be relaxed and participate in this teaching and learning environment. This observation was endorsed by the students in the focus group sessions who commented that the more they were familiar with the medium, the less of an issue it was for them. The familiarity also made them feel more at ease in participating and interacting with groups at other sites. Burke, Lundin and Daunt (1997) also found that students quickly adapted to the medium and appreciated the benefits it offered for interacting and communicating. Further to becoming familiar with the technology, there is also a need to prepare students for new teaching and learning techniques. Many students who have experienced the traditional lecturer/tutorial mode of learning may have little experience with more interactive approaches to learning and need to develop skills in these new learning environments, as well as be provided with a clear understanding of what is expected.

All students strongly endorsed the use of videoconferencing to create a virtual faculty, although there were differences in how the students perceived the class. Students from both Darwin and Hobart expressed a strong interest in getting to know the other students. They wanted to feel like a whole class and to know the students individually on a personal basis. Students at Deakin felt that this familiarisation was unimportant. They viewed the class as a short-term event and felt no need to personalise the interaction between students. They were, however, quite at ease in sharing ideas and discussing issues with class members, regardless of location. This lack of need to feel part of a virtual class possibly arises from Deakin students’ considerable previous experiences and involvement in cross-campus teaching and learning activities using videoconferencing.

On the other hand, all groups of students expressed the need for familiarity with the lecturer and wanted to be recognised as individuals rather than just identified as a location. It was requested that sites not be referred to as the Darwin students or the Deakin students. Students further commented that if they knew the lecturer they felt considerably more at ease with interacting, asking questions and generally participating in the teaching and learning sessions. Again, this is in agreement with other findings (eg Bourdeau, Oueillet and Gauthier, 1998). Where it was not possible for lecturers to visit students they suggested that other types of ice breaking activities, such as informal get to know you sessions through videoconferencing would at least create some level of mutual understanding, easing the way for more class-based interaction.

The students need to be personally recognised by lecturers was also seen as an important issue by staff involved in the project. One staff member commented that in order to develop an "effective teacher-student relationship, each student must be recognised and treated as an individual, not a member of some mass audience ... and therefore requires more effort on the part of the teacher". This also underscores the importance of staff development. The sense of having a class was one that some lecturers experienced difficulties with. The normal noise and general activity that goes on in a face-to-face classroom is noticeably absent and one lecturer described this as teaching into a void. He found it difficult to gauge where the students were at and to adjust his teaching accordingly. Other participants in the project also echoed this sentiment. This could also be seen as an example of the need to change teaching and learning activities to better fit the mode of delivery.

Collaborative projects such as this provide an additional aspect of staff development. These projects enable staff to share ideas and current thinking which feeds back to the students. As this knowledge and information is coming from a broader base than a single lecturer the students’ learning environment is enhanced. Exposure to different experts and a variety of teaching styles means that staff will become cognisant with a range of different techniques that can be used successfully in their own teaching environments for these and other students.

This project provided an excellent opportunity for staff to extend or develop their skills in videoconferencing teaching and learning. This environment, like most technologically mediated environments is a new one, requiring a different approach to teaching and learning than that used in most traditional, face-to-face Chemistry teaching and learning environments. While some staff involved in the project had used videoconferencing for teaching and learning activities on previous occasions, for others it was a new experience. Those with previous experience gained greater expertise, understanding and confidence in using the medium, while those new to using videoconferencing had the opportunity to develop their skills in a supportive environment, using constructive feedback from both staff and students to refine their teaching and learning strategies.

The students and staff from the various universities involved in the project demonstrated high levels of willingness to take on the duties and responsibilities required to establish the virtual faculty. This could be seen as a reflection of the benefits they perceived in participating in such an activity. Students demonstrated (and expressed) a willingness to endure inconvenient times and timetable clashes in order to participate in what they considered a unique and valuable opportunity to broaden their educational understanding of their discipline. Staff were enthusiastic in attempting to meet the learning needs of both on-site and remote students. This included offering additional tutorial support to that originally allocated. Additionally, staff were concerned with the need to get to know remote students as individual class members. Both staff and students from participating institutions acknowledged the enhancement of teaching and learning opportunities provided by such virtual faculties.

One area of comment by staff was the need for long-term forward planning. The need for sharing of resources, identifying course offerings, staff availability and complex timetabling issues requires considerable forward planning (preferably 12 months in advance). In the case of this project, staff felt that the short time frames created difficulties in identifying suitable subjects for offer thus limiting the choices available to students.

The reflections from staff, along with the informal discussions, confirmed that such ventures also require high level support from institutional management if they are to be successful. The sharing of resources such as videoconferencing, which are often in high demand, as well as timetabling across a number of institutions, can be problematic. Success of these projects requires institutions to place these ventures high on their strategic priorities and to make available the resources necessary to ensure successful outcomes. Staff also agreed that these ventures required considerable collaboration at the day to day level. Agreement on course content, accreditation, assessment and credit value is essential if these kinds of activities are to succeed. It was felt that the success of this particular project related directly to the high levels of collaboration and cooperation at all levels within the participating institutions.

Conclusions and Recommendations

The project was successful in establishing a virtual faculty and demonstrated that such an approach does provide a range of benefits to both staff and students. Students had the opportunity to enhance their learning through a wider variety of course offerings and opportunities to learn from a wider group of peers. Staff benefited from the opportunities to develop their skills in teaching with technology and also through broadening their professional knowledge through interaction with a wider range of colleagues.

In developing learning environments such as this the following guidelines are recommended—

• A long lead time is required (at least twelve months) for planning, allocation of resources and adequate development of the project.
  
• In order for these ventures to be successful in the longer term, they need to be in line with the strategic directions and priorities of participating institutions.
  
• It is important to develop collaborative links at all levels of the organisations that have involvement in the activities.

While the numbers involved in the project were relatively small, this concept, if adapted across several regional and remote universities and for a range of disciplines, could provide enhancement of the learning program for significant numbers of students.

Acknowledgments: The authors acknowledge the support of CUTSD funds for the development and completion of this project.

References

Bourdeau, J., Ouellet, M., & Goutheir, R. (1998). Interactivity in Videoconferenced-based Telepresentations. in Proceedings of ED-Media/ED-TELECOM 98 World Conference on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia & World Conference on Educational Telecommunications. Freiberg, Germany.

Comeaux, P. (1995). "The impact of an interactive distance learning network on classroom communication" Communication Education, V. 44.

Schiller, J.,& Mitchell, J. (1993). Interacting at a distance: staff and students perceptions of teaching and learning via videoconferencing. The Australian Journal of Educational Technology 9 (1).