A Research Study on the Use of Wimba Classroom

A Research Study on the Use of Wimba Classroom - Presentation Transcript

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

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