Chris Lott echoes my feeling about lectureware.
Video Camera Off; Teaching On
I’ve yet to see even a single example of a live distance learning event– teaching session, presentation, panel– where the video of the speaker(s) that was piped through alongside the web page activity, visuals, or even bulleted-list PowerPoint slides made an iota of positive contribution to the experience. I don’t care if it’s the Elluminate Video window, Adobe Connect, IM video, or a highly polished and produced second stream… it adds up to nothing.
Go read the whole thing. It’s worth it.
September 25th, 2007 at 6:33 PM
This is interesting. I have never been on the receiving end of such a lecture, however, I have a very good friend who told me about some experiences in his doctoral program in which the class was watching one of these presentations. He is a very creative individual and placing himself just out of view of the camera, he would make some type of paper sculpture out of whatever materials he could find and would write things on poster board and hold up in front of the class. The people in the class were laughing and the speaker would stop and ask what was so funny. That story didn’t mean that much (except that it was funny) to me then, but now that I understand a little more about distance education and these video feeds (and the goals of them), I see that all the planning, expense, and technology put into trying to make it as effective as face to face are just as Lott says….energy that would be better spent transforming the educational experience.
September 25th, 2007 at 7:16 PM
I wonder if there have been any studies conducted to show the effectiveness of using lecture ware in a distance learning course. The companies who make this kind of software should provide some conclusive evidence for their product to reveal its value. I never saw the value in using something like that and obvious somebody else has, otherwise they would stop making it. So, what is it about lecture ware that people find appealing. You could save a whole lot of money, energy, and time trying something else other than recreating the face-to-face classroom.
September 25th, 2007 at 11:52 PM
Oh the obvious answer is that it “replicates the classroom experience.”
Of course, it doesn’t, but the administrators who buy it dont konw that and the majority of the teachers who use it don’t realize it either.
Web cams and video have their place, same as audio, but it’s NOT in “replicating the classroom experience” because they can’t.
September 26th, 2007 at 12:22 AM
[...] Video camera off; Teaching on (comment) Filed under: EDUC 685, Uncategorized — by gnewsome @ 12:22 am http://durandus.com/phaedrus/2007/09/25/video-camera-off-teaching-on/ [...]
September 26th, 2007 at 1:38 PM
I think this further goes to show that no matter how much technology advances, we still can’t replace a living body when it comes to teaching….that’s not to say that in some cases it wouldn’t be just as effective…I’ve seen classes where you could have proped a broom up in the chair and students would have learned just as much…..but in the case of a genuinely gifted educator, there’s no comparison. I think all people on some level or another need that interaction with another person, not a machine. While we can probably save some $$ by installing these type facilities where one person can lecture to hundreds of people in hundreds of places as once, it still cannot compensate for the lack of aliving body in the room.
September 26th, 2007 at 4:11 PM
Jeff? I’m not sure you’re thinking that one thru.
Are you suggesting that *I* am not a living body?
Or that I’m somehow less effective than I would be if I were teaching in the room with you in KY?
Are you perhaps suggesting that you and I are not having an interaction?
September 26th, 2007 at 7:37 PM
I really liked this reading this piece. However, I do have one complaint. I wish Mr. Lott explained how he thought this transformation could occur. He spent nearly the whole article discussing how video is erroneously used, but doesn’t offer any suggestions on how to use it more effectively. I like mulling things over as much as the next person, but there comes a point where I’d prefer seeing new theories instead of restatements of existing problems. Otherwise, I come away feeling like I’ve just left a bad committee meeting, and all I have to show for it is dates and times for more meetings.
September 26th, 2007 at 7:56 PM
We’ll get there.
September 28th, 2007 at 8:31 AM
I agree, I haven’t seen a whole of good ones, but have seen some. I think we just need to look at lecture ware as a supplement and try to stop trying to make it a replacement for the real thing. It is not a replacement for the real thing, we would all be joking ourselves if we actually thought that.
However, it does have it’s place. I could be used for review or supplemental information, like for extra credit, who has time for that? But also for tutorial factor as well. I don’t think we need to throw it out all together, just put it in the proper place.
September 28th, 2007 at 11:50 AM
I would argue that the very platform that makes lectureware possible, also provides the capacity for superior replacement.
Here’s he analogy:
If I need to get from Denver to NYC, and I can fly for less than it would cost me to drive — all other considerations being equal (that is, i’m not stopping to visit Aunt Mary in KC or taking in the Indy 500 on the way) — then why would I drive.
Lectureware is driving. Why dont you want to fly?