Video Collaboration Technologies ‐in Blended Courses—Student and

Faculty Reflections

Tanya Zlateva, Leo Burstein, Lou Chitkushev, Anatoly Temkin, Michael Hylkema

Outline1. Motivation for Using Video Collaboration in Blended

Courses (eLive)

2. The Multiple Faces of Video Collaboration Explored with Three Different Technologies

IOCOM: Multi-Point Video Collaboration for working groups of 5-15 students

ConfXP: Video Bridge Between Two Remote Classroom Audiences

DimDim through Met-Meet: Video Webinars, Live Video-Talk Show, Whiteboard Tutoring

3. Conclusions and Future Work3/27/2009 CET 1st Annual Instructional Innovation

Conference 2

Motivation for Using Video Collaboration

• Educational promise of online learning environments lies not primarily in their "any time any place" convenience but in the unprecedented richness of the medium—spoken and written word, voice, video, music, collaboration tools, among others

• Asynchronous components well established in distance delivery—chats, videos, simulations, animations, threaded discussions, webinars

• Missing: immediacy and dynamics of live video communication and the information from gesture, facial expression, body language

• Blended delivery—reduced face-to-face time supplemented with extensive online materials

• eLive format at MET: one on-campus class a month, i.e. 4 face-to-face meetings in a typical 14-week semester

• First blended program, Graduate Certificate in Digital Forensic, was launched in Fall 2007

3/27/2009 CET 1st Annual Instructional Innovation Conference 3

Motivation for Using Video Collaboration (continued)

• Challenge: maintaining learning momentum and the connection with the students during the three consecutive off-campus weeks

• Weekly synchronous video conferencing sessions especially attractive solution as it is closest to face-to-face communication

• Theoretical work shows the importance of distance for communication in general and learning in particular and of gives indirect support for the value of VC– Classic work by Tom Allen on communication patterns in the 1970s

showed that • frequency of communication diminishes with increased distance and that this

holds true for all types of communication (phone and e-mail) • important decisions tend to be made in face-to-face meetings

– Theory of transactional distance (Michael Moore, 1970s) in education focuses on teaching and learning strategies that shorten the distance between learners and teachers.

3/27/2009 CET 1st Annual Instructional Innovation Conference 4

Criteria for Technology Choices• Functionality in addition to audio/video:

presentation tools, whiteboard, chat• Minimal installation/training requirement for

students and faculty• Ability to access from any location, e.g. from

home, work, etc.• Low cost (open source, SaaS)• Availability of support, especially important for

piloting emerging technologies

3/27/2009 CET 1st Annual Instructional Innovation Conference 5

Comparison of Technologies and Recommended Use

3/27/2009 CET 1st Annual Instructional Innovation Conference 6

Technology Features Client side reqs

Capabilities Cost Best Suited For:

IOCOM Multipoint

• Multiple participants

• Multidirectional

• 100 Kbs (DSL+)

• client software required

• Voice & video• Slide pres. • Desktop

sharing, • Chat, etc.

• Proprietary• ca. $100

per student per semester

• service

Interactive group discussions og 5-15 participants

ConfXP Video Bridging with or w/o Classroom Presenter

• Several (2-5) rooms, possible

• multiple cameras,

• high quality audio/video

• 1-2 Mbs/room

• Corporate sites

• high-speed broadband client software

• Very high quality voice+video

• Annotated slide pres.

• Desktop sharing

• Chat, etc.

• Open source,

• Free• Internally

hosted

• Remote Classroom Audiences

• Joint Seminars/ Meetings

DimDim through Met-MeetVideo Webinar

• Few (2 optimal) presenters,

• Large number of listeners

• >= 56 Kbs; • no client

software, browser based

• Audio/video• Slide pres • Chat, etc.

• Open source,

• Free• Internally

hosted

• Video Webinars• Whiteboard 1-

to-1 Tutoring • Live Video-Talk

Show

Technology Characteristics

3/27/2009 CET 1st Annual Instructional Innovation Conference 7

IOCom• Usage: Brainstorming sessions or situations where all attendees should be viewed and heard

simultaneously.• Large number of simultaneous audio / video streams including support for multiple feeds from

single host (two camera's for example).• More involved client installation required.• Whiteboard, desktop sharing, shared presentations, and multimedia (recorded videos, audio files,

etc.) sharing.• Rooms can be created for recurrent use.

Conference XP• Usage: Bridging / Linking 2 or 3 rooms for large room based collaborative meetings.• High quality audio / video.• Support for multiple feeds from single host (two camera's for example).• Group Chat functionality.• Presentations in two modes.

– Basic: Present slides, anyone can annotate.– Advanced: Present slides, annotations submitted, polls, save slides w/ changes, whiteboard.

• Simple client installation process (Windows only); other platforms can be supported with Access Grid.

DimDim through Met-meet • Usage: Highly attended webinar with one way audio / video.• Limited support for additional “presenters” with audio / video.• Integrated public and private chat features.• Whiteboard, Desktop sharing and powerpoint / pdf sharing.• Shared Internet browsing.• Runs in web browser (no install required) and therefore multiplatform.• No persistent rooms. Rooms are created on the fly.

Demo Setup

• Tablet #1: – internal + external webcams, – wireless headset, – connected to projector and room speakers; – internal mic.

• Tablet #2 (outside of the room): – presenter webcam, – wireless USB headset, one network cable.

3/27/2009 CET 1st Annual Instructional Innovation Conference 8

Demo 1: IOCOM—Multi-Point Video Collaboration

3/27/2009 CET 1st Annual Instructional Innovation Conference 9

Scenario

•T2 (Mike): waits in the Test room.•T1 (Leo): Start IOCOM client, check audio, go to Vista, go to IOCOM, enter test room•T2: Mike introduces himself•T1: Bring in piano lesson

– Sessions can be recorded– Recorded sessions can be brought into live

sessions– Show video of 20-point conference.

Student and faculty reflections:

• Rich functionality • Light client accessible from home• Complex technology requires

–more support –training of staff, faculty, and students–worthwhile for group project discussions

Demo 2: Video Bridging With Conf. XPScenario:

• T1: Start ConfXP, check a/v, enter BU venue.• T2: joins• T1: Present infrastructure slides

– Annotations on slide1.• Whiteboard: instructor pose problem• Student Submissions• Quick Poll

3/27/2009 CET 1st Annual Instructional Innovation Conference 10

Student and faculty reflections.

•High bandwidth requirements Access from corporate sides•Stable application sharing •Integrated with Classroom Presenter--a tablet-based interaction system

slide sharing student submissions, instructor feedback, corrected student

submission promotes active learningCarla Romney used extensively in MET SEP classroom classesWith ConfXP it can be taken globally, e.g. international programs

Video Bridging with Conf. XP (cont.)

• Low cost solution• Internally hosted virtual infrastructure • Open Source software, • no licensing costs

3/27/2009 CET 1st Annual Instructional Innovation Conference 11

Internet 2

met-reflector.bu.edu

Demo 3: Met-Meet — Video WebinarScenario:• Startup (met-meet.bu.edu)

– Tablet1 – (disconnect webcam2), start browser, go to met-meet, start meeting “CET”.

– Tablet2 – start browser, go to met-meet, join meeting “CET”.

• T1: Annotated Presentation: Load infrastructure slides, draw on a slide2. Show three types of Q/A

– Public Q/A– Private Q/A– Mediated Q/A

• Whiteboard demo: 1-t-1 tutoring– T1: give T2 control– Fda demo

3/27/2009 CET 1st Annual Instructional Innovation Conference 12

Student and faculty reflections.

•Extremely easy access, browser based /no client software•Robust application•Limited Functionality•Other Uses: Live Video Talk Shaw

Met-Meet (Cont.)

• Low cost solution:• Open Source (DimDim-based) software, no

licensing costs • Internally hosted virtual infrastructure

3/27/2009 CET 1st Annual Instructional Innovation Conference 13

MET Virtual Data Center

Webcasting Infrastructure

Internet

Browser

Video

Control Panel

Presenter using

Tablet PC

Assistant

Questions & Feedback Chat

Slides

Video Recording

Station

Slides

Mic

Audio

Ongoing Bi-Directional Chat

(Text)

Presentation and

Responses (Video, Voice, Slides)

Video

RoomRemote Participants

Summarized Questions and

Comments from Listeners

(Voice)

Closed-Loop “Video Chat”

Future Work

• “Package” IOCOM and MET-meet to position them as tools that can be used in blended and online MS programs

• Systematic evaluation of technologies by students and faculty, followed by continuous improvements in capabilities, training, documentation, support.

3/27/2009 CET 1st Annual Instructional Innovation Conference 14