A Research Study on the Use of Wimba Classroom

Pilot Use of Wimba Classroom at USM Jalynn Roberts, Ph.D. Mary Nell McNeese, Ph.D. Amy Thornton, M.S.

Phased Pilot
Fall 2006 “Pilot”
1 course - managed outside of Blackboard
Spring 2007 Pilot - 12 courses
10 inside Blackboard; 2 per college as selected by Deans
2 outside Blackboard
Received all-day training by Wimba
Added more faculty in March by invitation
Summer 2007 - offered university-wide

Methodology
2 Survey Instruments
Instructors
Students
Responses
5 Instructors
19 Students

Skill Level With Computer Technology
Instructors
Very Proficient with desktop and web-based applications (40%)
Familiar with using a computer and office application suites, but not familiar with hardware technologies (60%)
Students
Very Proficient with desktop and web-based applications (52.6%)
Familiar with using a computer and office application suites, but not familiar with hardware technologies (42.1%)
Can use a computer to accomplish basic tasks (5.3%)

Course Taught/Taken Through Online Delivery – Fully or Partially
Instructors
3 or more courses (40%)
1 or 2 courses (60%)
Students
3 or more courses (57.9%)
1 or 2 courses (42.1%)

Previous Use of Collaboration Before Using Live Classroom
Instructors
Yes (100%)
Students
Yes (68.4%)
No (31.6%)

Type of Internet Connection Used
Instructors
Dial-up (0%)
DSL (60%)
Cable (20%)
LAN (0%)
Don’t know (20%)
Students
Dial-up (5.3%)
DSL (36.8%)
Cable (42.1%)
LAN (15.8%)
Don’t know (5.3%)

Describe Your Experience With Learning to Use Live Classroom
Instructors
Very Easy (0%)
Somewhat Easy (40%)
Neutral (40%)
Somewhat Difficult (20%)
Very Difficult (0%)
Students
Very Easy (57.9%)
Somewhat Easy (26.3%)
Neutral (5.3%)
Somewhat Difficult (10.5%)
Very Difficult (0%)

Features Utilized While Using Live Classroom
Instructor
PowerPoint (100%)
Text Chat (80%)
Voice Chat (80%)
Whiteboard (60%)
Application Sharing (40%)
Polling/Quizzes (60%)
File Sharing (40%)
Student
PowerPoint (100%)
Text Chat (84.2%)
Voice Chat (78.9%)
Whiteboard (57.9%)
Application Sharing (15.8%)
Polling/Quizzes (15.8%)
File Sharing (10.5%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for Text Chat
Instructors
Excellent (20%)
Good (80%)
Neutral (0%)
Fair (0%)
Poor (0%)
Students
Excellent (57.9%)
Good (31.6%)
Neutral (0%)
Fair (5.3%)
Poor (0%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for Voice Chat
Instructors
Excellent (20%)
Good (60%)
Neutral (20%)
Fair (0%)
Poor (0%)
Students
Excellent (26.3%)
Good (52.6%)
Neutral (5.3%)
Fair (10.5%)
Poor (5.3%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Whiteboard Feature
Instructors
Excellent (20%)
Good (40%)
Neutral (20%)
Fair (0%)
Poor (0%)
Did not use (20%)
Students
Very Useful (26.3%)
Somewhat Useful (36.8%)
Not Useful (0%)
Did Not Use (31.6%)
No Answer (5.3%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Application Sharing Feature
Instructors
Excellent (0%)
Good (0%)
Neutral (60%)
Fair (40%)
Poor (40%)
Students
Very Useful (15.8%)
Not Useful (0%)
Did Not Use (52.6%)
Did Not Answer (5.3%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Polling/Quizzing Feature
Instructors
Excellent (0%)
Good (60%)
Fair (40%)
Poor (0%)
Students
Very Useful (15.8%)
Not Useful (0%)
Did Not Use (63.2%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the File Sharing Feature
Instructors
Excellent (0%)
Good (40%)
Neutral (40%)
Fair (20%)
Poor (0%)
Students
Very Useful (10.5%)
Not Useful (0%)
Did Not Use (63.2%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Hand-Raising Feature
Instructors
Very Useful (40%)
Somewhat Useful (60%)
Not Useful (0%)
Students
Very Useful (63.2%)
Not Useful (0%)
Did Not Use (15.8%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Polling Feature
Instructors
Very Useful (60%)
Not Useful (0%)
Did Not Use (20%)
Students
Very Useful (68.4%)
Not Useful (0%)
Did Not Use (5.3%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for Accessing Archive of Previous Sessions
Instructors
Excellent (0%)
Good (60%)
Neutral (0%)
Fair (20%)
Poor (0%)
Did Not Use (20%)
Students
Excellent (21.1%)
Good (15.8%)
Neutral (10.5%)
Fair (0%)
Poor (15.8%)
Did Not Use (31.6%)

Audio Quality During Voice Discussions
Instructors
Very Clear (0%)
Somewhat Clear (100%)
Neutral (0%)
Somewhat Unclear (0%)
Very Unclear (0%)
Students
Very Clear (5.3%)
Somewhat Clear (57.9%)
Neutral (5.3%)
Somewhat Unclear (21.1%)
Very Unclear (10.5%)

Overall Usefulness of Live Classroom
Instructors
Very Useful (80%)
Not Useful (0%)
Students
Very Useful (89.5%)
Not Useful (5.3%)

Level of Technical Problems With Using Live Classroom
Instructors
Very Severe (0%)
Severe (0%)
Moderate (60%)
Minimal (40%)
Non-existent (0%)
Students
Very Severe (5.3%)
Severe (10.5%)
Moderate (42.1%)
Minimal (31.6%)
Non-existent (5.3%)

Technical Support Services Used
Instructors
24/7 Phone Support (20%)
Website Support (0%)
Learning Enhancement Center (80%)
Didn’t Require (0%)
Learning Enhancement Center Staff (20%)
Graduate Assistant (20%)
Students
24/7 Phone Support (5.3%)
Website Support (5.3%)
iTech Helpdesk (21.1%)
Didn’t Require (42.1%)
Learning Enhancement Center Staff (0%)
Instructor (52.6%)
Another Instructor (5.3%)

Quality of Technical Support
Instructors
Excellent (40%)
Good (20%)
Neutral (0%)
Fair (20%)
Poor (0%)
Did Not Use (20%)
Students
Excellent (26.3%)
Good (21.1%%)
Neutral (0%)
Fair (0%)
Poor (5.3%)
Did Not Use (47.4%)

Description of Technical Difficulties - Instructors
Three instructors reported that they experienced audio issues, especially when students tried to transmit to them audibly. The problems ranged from being garbled to being totally inaudible.
One professor mentioned the inability to show copyrighted video, but also that Wimba was looking for a way to resolve that issue.
One professor said that he/she was kicked out of the sessions for no reason, and that some students experienced the same difficulties.
Better troubleshooting tips are needed for students.

Description of Technical Difficulties - Students
Accessing archived sessions was time consuming and sometimes impossible.
Problems with logging into the system.
Seven students reported issues regarding the audio. These issues included clarity, voices fading in and out, and a total loss of audio at times.
Speed of connection was an issue for one student. This student said he/she was about five minutes behind during some sessions.

Additional Comments - Instructors
All of the comments mentioned the reliability of Wimba, and that the program’s potential will not be realized until the aforementioned technical issues are resolved.
All of the instructors agreed that while they did not experience any major issues with Wimba, it will be a valuable tool once its reliability issues have been resolved.

Additional Comments - Students

Analysis

Analysis
A majority of both instructors and students reported high levels of satisfaction with the text chat, voice chat, whiteboard, and hand-raising features.
Most instructors reported good and fair levels of satisfaction regarding application sharing, polling/quizzing, file sharing, and accessing archives. A majority of students reported that they did not use these features.

Analysis
Most instructors and students reported minimal to moderate levels of technical difficulties with Wimba Live Classroom, and most of those technical difficulties regarded the quality of audio.
Overall, both students and faculty reported high levels of satisfaction with Wimba Live Classroom, and both groups believe it enhances the online classroom environment.

Further Research
Current Survey will involve 17 institutions from:
Mississipppi
Tennessee
Utah
15 Community Colleges and 2 Universities
Current Survey is undergoing the Institutional Review Board process and will hopefully be administered at the end of the spring 2009 semester.

Contact Information
Mary Nell McNeese
[email_address]
Amy Thornton
[email_address]
Jalynn Roberts
[email_address]
Presentation is available at:
http://instructtech.wordpress.com

http://instructtech.wordpress.com	294
http://www.slideshare.net	3
http://translate.googleusercontent.com	3
http://www.kyvs.org	1
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com	1

A Research Study on the Use of Wimba Classroom

by ahornton

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

5 Embeds 302

Statistics