SEDA: LLS for Whose Benefit?

405 views

Published on

This is a presentation that considers for whose benefit are we providing Live Lecture Streaming over the internet. We have an earlier paper and recording of the HEIR conference session we gave about it available: http://nicholasfernando.com/?p=95

Find out more about the 16th Annual SEDA conference via the twitter hash tag #sedaconf16

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
405
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

SEDA: LLS for Whose Benefit?

  1. 1. Live Lecture Streaming <ul><li>For Whose Benefit? </li></ul>Dr. Janet Cole & Nick Fernando
  2. 2. “ Sustaining income – or raising it – depends on improving quality, access and student experience” (Browne 2010)
  3. 3. Background <ul><li>Summer 2010 - Large inbound level 4 cohort and no lecture hall big enough to hold them </li></ul><ul><li>Very heterogenous cohort (just like anywhere else) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Direct entrants from School/College </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mature Learners </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Compact Students </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Overseas Students </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Who are either </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Financially Self Supporting </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Financially Supported </li></ul></ul><ul><li>All of whom have different learning styles, preferences and modalities </li></ul>
  4. 4. What we wanted <ul><li>Provide a solution that didn’t involve wasteful use of the academic </li></ul><ul><li>Provide a solution that was scalable and cost effective </li></ul><ul><li>Implement something that could work in every lecture theatre </li></ul><ul><li>Offer flexibility for the students in terms of access </li></ul><ul><li>Utilise and leverage technology to support large cohort teaching </li></ul><ul><li>Be in step with a modern, technology and information driven culture </li></ul>
  5. 5. What we wanted <ul><li>Our ultimate goal was to provide a mode of teaching delivery that allowed us to: </li></ul><ul><li>Reach, Teach, Re-use </li></ul>
  6. 6. THE OPTIONS
  7. 7. Double Teaching <ul><ul><li>Simple solution – quickly implemented </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Can tweak second lecture through experience of the first </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Resource intensive </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inefficient use of lecturer </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inefficient use of teaching space </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Recorded Videos <ul><ul><li>Re-usable </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Flexibility of access </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Can be deployed in any lecture theatre </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Resource intensive </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Time delay between record à edit à upload </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>High degree of passivity </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Video Conferencing <ul><ul><li>Can transmit lecture from one space to another </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Can be more interactive than a recorded video </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lecture transmission point is immobile </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Expensive solution, that gets more costly with needed features </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. The Desirable Solution Main Theatre Facilitated Room
  11. 11. HOW DID WE GET ON?
  12. 12. Preferred Method of Attendance
  13. 13. Unexpected effects: Going Global Numbers are for unique streams over two 12 week blocks 49 45 22 33 3 4 9734 12 2
  14. 14. Countries Greece India Sweden United States Malaysia Cyprus Germany Pakistan Denmark Portugal Netherlands Poland Latvia Bulgaria Spain Norway Bangladesh Singapore Jordan Switzerland Italy UAE Mexico Mauritius Canada Chile Japan Croatia Finland Uruguay Russian Federation Macao
  15. 15. 86% Wanted Live Lecture Streaming implemented on other modules
  16. 16. FOR WHOSE BENEFIT?
  17. 17. The Academic <ul><li>Some Pros </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Doesn’t need to double teach large cohorts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduces disruption of lateness </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Greater flexibility = Greater Engagement = Increased Performance = Better module stats! </li></ul></ul>
  18. 18. The Academic <ul><li>Some Cons </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Lecturer needs to adapt lecture style </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Has to direct attention beyond the physical space </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Different dynamic with online participants </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Has to accept that their lecture is being broadcast and the ramifications of this </li></ul></ul>
  19. 19. The Student <ul><li>Flexibility with regard to viewing the lecture </li></ul><ul><li>Can still get involved even if late via web connected device </li></ul><ul><li>Modal learning preference – physical presence or disruption free audio/visual engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Revision opportunities for activities and assessment </li></ul><ul><li>Watching subsequently allows ‘re-experiencing’ of the lecture – easier to trace cognitive anchors* </li></ul>
  20. 20. The Student <ul><li>Lacks the live engagement of ‘being there’ </li></ul><ul><li>Possibility of disruption through technical issues* </li></ul><ul><li>Dependent on lecturer and operator ability to ‘connect’ the different environments </li></ul><ul><li>Is it what they paid for?* </li></ul>
  21. 21. SPACE, PLACE AND SOME REASONS WHY IT MATTERS
  22. 22. Space, Place and Presentation <ul><li>Space is the external environment and the dimensions that it occupies </li></ul><ul><li>Place is created by the objects and contextual cues created by inhabiting the space </li></ul><ul><li>Presence is our behaviour and interaction framed by our notion of Place </li></ul>
  23. 23. Dealing with Space, Place and Presence <ul><li>How do we: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Adapt collaborative and communicative teaching environments to meet a students learning needs? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adapt teaching styles for mixed ‘live’ environments? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>By the students being elsewhere to ‘see’ the lecture is this change of environment presenting a loss of learning dynamic to them and others left in the lecture hall? </li></ul>
  24. 24. Commanding a Presence <ul><li>“ Space, our place in it and the level of presence we have determine our level of comfort and capability. All those things link together and when they do, you get immersed and so do the students – you get into flow. But when you don’t have a strong presence in that space, and lack significant impact in that place, then its difficult and takes time to build up. It takes you out of your zone both for us and the students.” </li></ul>
  25. 25. Some Comments A bit more interaction with people who watch - often when questions are asked by students who are physically there, the question is not repeated by the lecturer and viewers don't know what was the question about. Interviewer: ‘so, the students presence changes the nature of the interaction and the nature of how the material is covered, and the timing of the coverage? … your presence changes the dynamic of the lecturers interaction with you?’ Student’s response: ‘Yes’ ‘… mixing two sessions (students in lecture hall and also in overflow room) is putting a load onto the lecturer to manage both scenarios at the same time… is too high a demand .’
  26. 26. Presence Space Place Immersion Flow

×