This article was downloaded by: [University of California Santa Cruz]On: 12 November 2014, At: 07:54Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK

American Journal ofDistance EducationPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hajd20

Looking at distance learningthrough both ends of thecameraJoan M. Whitworth aa Assistant Professor of Science in theDepartment of Physical Sciences , MoreheadState University , 123 Lappin Hall, Morehead,Kentucky, 40351 E-mail:Published online: 24 Sep 2009.

To cite this article: Joan M. Whitworth (1999) Looking at distance learningthrough both ends of the camera, American Journal of Distance Education, 13:2,64-73, DOI: 10.1080/08923649909527025

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08923649909527025

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of allthe information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on ourplatform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensorsmake no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinionsand views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed byTaylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be reliedupon and should be independently verified with primary sources ofinformation. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other

liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectlyin connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of accessand use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 07:

54 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATIONVol. 13 No. 2 1999

GRASS ROOTSWe receive many reports that describe particular distance educationprograms and projects, not all of which can be published. However,from time to time, we publish some of these reports in the GRASSROOTS section. The first article that follows describes the experienceof participating in distance learning for the first time, from the point ofview of both instructor and students. The second article describes theuse of an Internet tutorial in Web-based courses.

Looking at Distance Learningthrough Both Ends of the Camera

Joan M. Whitworth

Abstract

This case study follows an instructor and her students (thirty-threeelementary teachers) as they experience for the first time a gradu-ate-level science course delivered via compressed video technology.The study focuses on teacher learning and coping strategies. Datawere gathered from videotaped records of classes, informal inter-views with students and site facilitators, open-ended studentsurveys, and instructor and student journals. Findings are reportedin the discussion section of the study.

The development of new technologies is opening doors for populationspreviously unreachable by traditional education. Distance learning is onesuch vehicle for reaching students isolated by distance, geographicalbarriers, or life circumstances. It is more than a convenience for studentsin the service region of Appalachia; it is a necessity. Courses that arenormally inaccessible to the Appalachian population are now withinreach. However, the distance learning experience can be a mixture ofboth positive and negative experiences.

Most of the research on distance education provides "snap-shot" pro-files of student content learning and/or student attitudes; there are fewstudies that extend over the duration of an entire course. However, bothcross-sectional and longitudinal assessment of student participants and

64

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 07:

54 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

GRASS ROOTS

distance education programs are necessary to evaluate the effectivenessof programs and to provide guidance for future development (Westbrook1997; Biner 1993; Sachs 1993; Eagen et al. 1992). On-going assessmentof distant learner satisfaction can have far-reaching benefits, includinglower attrition rates, increased student motivation, and enhanced learn-ing (Biner, Dean, and Mellinger 1994).

The primary goal of this investigation was to chronicle the experi-ences of an instructor and her students as they experienced for the firsttime a course delivered at a distance using various technologies. Thepurpose was to provide a complete picture of the distance learning expe-rience, thus filling in many of the gaps left by "snap-shot" studies. Boththe instructor and the students had either no previous experience or verylimited experience at the beginning of the course with e-mail, the Inter-net, and supporting software. The challenge for the instructor was tolearn and utilize the technology without a reduction in course content.

Program Background

Distance education at Morehead State University has grown tremen-dously over the four years since its inception. Morehead's distanceeducation program, which operates via a fiber optic telecommunicationssystem, has expanded from one class delivered to seven sites (Fall 1995)to more than twenty-nine classes delivered to eighteen sites. It currentlyinvolves twenty-three faculty members and over six hundred students.

The university utilizes a fully interactive telecommunications systemthat provides full motion video (compressed) and audio transmission.On-campus and off-campus students interact using either a voice-activat-ed or a push-to-talk microphone. The instructor, aided by a sitefacilitator at the origination site, controls the delivery of course contentand communication among sites by using a touch-controlled computerpanel. All sites employ a site facilitator who operates the technology,acts as a liaison between students at the remote site and university facul-ty, and performs class management duties such as taking attendance,distributing materials, and proctoring quizzes and tests. The instructormakes periodic visits to each remote site to establish personal contactwith the students. Technologies present at each site include teacher andstudent cameras, a computer located at the podium for instructor use,student computers, an overhead camera for display of class materials,and a minimum of two monitors. All classes transmitted are videotapedand made available to students.

65

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 07:

54 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION

Methodology

Site. Morehead State University is a regional university that servicesthe Appalachian region of eastern Kentucky. Weather conditions and thelack of major highways in the region cause the area to remain isolated.The students were distributed among five sites—the main campus andfour public schools in the rural eastern part of the state.

Participants. The participating instructor was an Assistant Professorwho had been with Morehead State University for two years. The stu-dents included thirty-three elementary teachers enrolled in agraduate-level science education course, Science 690: Advanced Sciencefor the Elementary Teacher, which is a requirement for the Master'sdegree and the Fifth-Year Program.

Preliminary Data Collection. The week before classes started theinstructor began keeping an electronic journal to document the planningprocess of her first class, her feelings at beginning a new experience, andher first encounters with the facilitators at the distant sites. During thefirst class meeting, the students were surveyed regarding their previousexperience, if any, with distance learning, their degree of computer liter-acy, and their reasons for taking the course via compressed videotechnology. Students were also asked to keep electronic journals inwhich they made weekly entries concerning course content and theirexperiences with the distance education course.

Data Collection throughout the Semester. Both the instructor and thestudents continued making weekly entries in their journals throughoutthe semester. Each class meeting was videotaped by the site facilitator atthe campus site. At mid-semester the students were again given a surveythat asked for their degree of satisfaction with the method of delivery, theamount and kinds of technology they used, and any sources of frustra-tion they experienced. Furthermore, the students were asked to provideboth positive and negative comments about the course to their site facili-tator. The facilitators compiled the comments, removed all names, andforwarded them to the instructor.

End-of-Semester Data Collection. At the end of the semester the stu-dents completed the final survey and course evaluation and made finaljournal entries. The survey focused on technology and elements of thecourse that were specific to the distance learning setting, the students' sat-isfaction with the course, and their willingness to take another course viacompressed video or to recommend this delivery method to other students.The course evaluation form used in this study is the standard form used byMorehead State University to evaluate all courses at the university.

66

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 07:

54 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

GRASS ROOTS

Analysis of the Data

During the formal analysis stage of the study, data gathered frominstructor and student journal entries, videotapes of recorded classes, andstudent surveys were used to form a domain and preliminary taxonomicanalysis. The domains were then used to construct the descriptive frame-work of the case study.

The data were analyzed for reoccurring patterns among the sites, andcorrelation was investigated among the degree of student involvement,students' perceived knowledge of technology, and students' satisfactionwith the distance education experience. The pattern-matching strategywas expanded to include explanation building (Yin 1989). For example,when it was found that some students felt isolated from their instructorwhile others felt they received more instructor attention than expected,similarities and differences across the sites that might account for thediscrepancy were ascertained.

What emerged from this analysis is a collage of the first semester of adistance learning experience from the perspectives of both the instructorand the students. When possible, the words of the participants are usedto paint a picture of the distance education classroom that illustrates thedistance learning experience from both ends of the camera.

Discussion

Launching the New Semester. The instructor's first journal entriesrecord typical preparations for each class, which included: 1) planning atleast one week in advance and making up packets for each site; 2) mak-ing arrangements to have the materials sent to each site; 3) contactingeach site facilitator and discussing the next class; and 4) planning analternate activity in the event of technical failure and making back-updisks and hard copies of all presentations. Once the planning stage wascomplete, it was time to go "on camera." The following entry from theinstructor's journal details her impressions after the first encounter witha real distance learning class:

I felt good about the class, but I felt removed from my students.Unless I call on a specific site there is no feedback or response. I feltso alone and the equipment makes a physical barrier between myselfand the students in the room.

67

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 07:

54 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION

This feeling of isolation continued to be a problem for the instructorthroughout the semester. She had to make a concerted effort to commu-nicate with students and find ways to get to know them.

The students also had ambivalent feelings at the beginning of thecourse. They expressed appreciation for the opportunity to take Science690 at a location within driving distance of their home. Many stated thatif the course had not been offered through distance learning they wouldnot have been able to take it. Although many students were apprehensiveabout using computers, approximately one-third of the class was excitedabout the opportunity to learn to use the new technologies. Most studentswere reluctant to speak on camera and remarked in their journals thatthey were uncomfortable "being on camera," as expressed in the follow-ing student entry:

When I sat in on my first class, I was a nervous wreck. I didn't realizehow camera shy I really was. The whole time during our first meetingI kept saying to myself, "I'm never sitting in the front row again." Ifelt really uncomfortable with the idea that I was on television.

Visits to Remote Sites. The instructor made two visits to each remotesite: one early in the semester to introduce herself to the students andone late in the semester when the students made individual presentations.The instructor noted that after her visits the students were more willingto "come on camera" to ask questions or to participate in discussions.The students also increased e-mail discussions with her. Although theinstructor felt that these visits were extremely beneficial, they requiredextra effort and were sometimes frustrating. Since most of the distancelearning sites located in the public schools of eastern Kentucky are new,she found it necessary to determine the availability of equipment and thecompatibility of computer programs for broadcasting from a remote site.

The Return to Campus. After the first round of visits to remote sites,which lasted four weeks, the instructor returned to the campus site. Shsfound that being on the road had its effects on the campus-based class, asevidenced by the journal entry she wrote upon returning:

March 12th I was back at Morehead. I felt that much of the good rap-port I had established was beginning to erode. They now felt like anew class. The ones that I communicate with on e-mail still seemclose, but those who won't do it seem removed.

68

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 07:

54 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

GRASS ROOTS

The instructor worked on regaining her rapport with the on-campusclass, encouraging them to discuss various aspects of the class via e-mailor telephone. However, she was only on campus another three weeksbefore her next round of off-site visits was scheduled. She felt that shenever attained the same degree of student-teacher rapport as with her tra-ditional classes.

Mid-Semester. At the conclusion of the first half of the semester theinstructor again related that the hardest part of teaching at a distance washer feeling of isolation. She felt that the equipment (document camera,control panel, monitors) acted as a barrier between her and the students.As she became more familiar and at ease with the technology, she madean effort to use the portable microphone and move around the room.

Some students voiced their own feelings of isolation from the instruc-tor and other class members, a sentiment evident in this student'scomment on the end-of-semester survey: "I don't think you know me aswell as you would have had we been in a traditional setting." Anotherstudent made a similar statement expressing feelings of isolation, saying,"I enjoy getting to know everyone in class and have not been able to doso through distance learning."

In addition to the lack of rapport and the feelings of isolation, theinstructor reported other difficulties associated with delivering a coursevia compressed video. Each class had to be well planned and organized,especially with the hands-on science activities that were an integral partof the class. Discussions were hard to initiate, and the instructor felt thatit took longer to "do things" via distance learning. She had trouble per-ceiving how the class was proceeding at remote sites. Since each sitewas voice activated, if everyone at a site was quiet, the site was not dis-played. There was also additional wait time between her questions andstudent responses at the remote sites.

These problems were not without solutions. The instructor learnedfrom each situation, made adjustments, and devised a system for plan-ning classes and delivering materials to the sites. She constructed a set ofnotecards with student and site names that she used for calling on stu-dents in an attempt to involve as many students as possible in each class.She also learned to talk more slowly and wait for student responses.

Student Presentations. Student presentations not only gave studentsthe opportunity to demonstrate mastery of the subject, but also providedthe experience of being on camera and using the equipment, whichhelped students overcome their "stage fright" and gave them a newrespect for the instructor. One of the instructor's journal entries explains

69

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 07:

54 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION

some of the difficulties involved in managing student presentations. Inaddition to watching and grading students' work, she also had the chal-lenge of monitoring the broadcast.

I had to be on my toes at all times watching the monitor and makingsure that what we were doing was being broadcast. Displaying hand-outs under the document camera; having a group of students workunder the document camera; and making sure no water or other mate-rials come close to any of the equipment is a real challenge. . . . They[the presentations] don't quite have the same impact as if you [the stu-dents at the remote sites] were actively participating.

Despite the instructor's reservations, several students indicated that thepresentations were a valuable part of the class and worth the extra effort.

Student Satisfaction. Student satisfaction with the class was closelyrelated to the number of students at each site. Students attending siteswith three and four students stated that they had established a closeworking relationship with the other students at their site:

This class allows for a lot of cooperative learning. We depend on our-selves and each other. This is a student-directed class. There are onlyfour of us but I feel that we are closer than any of my other classes.

However, students at the site with the largest enrollment—thirteen stu-dents—did not report the same feeling of closeness with other students.

Epilogue. At the end of the semester, the instructor voiced her enthusi-asm about the capability of distance learning to "open doors," especiallyfor the population she needs to reach—teachers in Appalachia. In herfinal journal entry, the instructor weighed the difficulties and benefitsderived from delivering a course via compressed video technology:

Teaching via compressed video is very demanding—both in time andin effort. It is worth the investment for the teachers that we need toreach. One of the problems in education is that once teachers are outin the schools, they shut their classroom doors and are isolated fromtheir peers . . . . Distance education via compressed video is one medi-um that can bring teachers together. I've always felt that the strengthof this class is not what they gain from me, but what they gain fromone another.

70

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 07:

54 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

GRASS ROOTS

A student survey at the conclusion of the course indicated that stu-dents shared much of the enthusiasm of the instructor and were generallypleased with their experiences in distance learning and Science 690. Allthose surveyed indicated that they would take another distance learningclass, and all but one student would recommend distance learning to oth-ers. Students gave the following reasons for enrolling in a future distancelearning course (in rank order): 1) it was close to home/work andrequired less travel; 2) previously unavailable courses are now accessi-ble; 3) they enjoyed working with other students in smaller groups; 4)they had the opportunity to learn new technologies; 5) they had theopportunity to share/learn from other students (teachers) at differentlocations; and 6) they were more involved in their own learning and,therefore, able to learn more.

When students were asked what they valued most about Science 690,they were evenly divided between the hands-on science activities and theuse of technology. The distance learning feature most valued by a major-ity of the students was the opportunity to share with the learners at othersites. This answer ranked above the convenience of taking a course closeto home/work or taking a course normally unavailable.

The least valued features were those not associated with the distancelearning aspect of the course. Student opinions were divided amongassigned readings, the textbook, and lab reports. Although early in thesemester students stated that the one distance learning feature they didnot like was being on camera, by the end of the semester only four stu-dents listed this as a problem. Thirteen of the thirty-three students citedtechnology problems, especially sound quality, as a major problem.Other concerns listed (in order) included: the amount of time wastedwhile setting up student presentations; not enough courses offeredthrough distance learning; and less teacher contact than in traditionalclasses. The number of students expressing concern about the amount ofteacher-student contact declined as the semester progressed. Studentswho actively used e-mail to send assignments and correspond with theinstructor felt they had more interaction with the instructor and feedbackon their assignments than in traditional classes.

Recommendations

All of the students came away from this their first experience withdistance learning feeling that the educational experience was enriched bytheir involvement with technology and collaboration with teachers from

71

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 07:

54 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION

different locations. This sentiment is illustrated in the following studentcomment from the end-of-semester survey:

I feel I've learned just as much material and actually gained moreteaching ideas than I would have in a traditional class setting by lis-tening to and watching the presentations of other teachers from somany different places. The class has made me become a more inde-pendent learner—a goal I strive to have my own students achieve. Ithas made me become a better listener and helped make me moreresponsible for my learning.

Distance learning is not without its problems. It is very easy to get"caught up" in the new technologies, which results in a class that is driv-en by the technology. Teaching students how to use equipment andsoftware packages can often take too much time away from course con-tent. This problem can be alleviated through separate workshops andhelp sessions focusing solely on the technology that are supported orsponsored by the college or university. When planning instruction, theteacher should first set his/her content goals and then determine how thetechnology can help to achieve those results.

As with any job that involves equipment, there is always the possibili-ty of a technology failure. Experience has shown that the likelihood ofsuch an occurrence diminishes with the quality of the equipment. Theproblems associated with the system in this study mainly occurred atsites that economized by purchasing less expensive microphones, moni-tors, and cameras. But even with quality equipment, problems can occur.Therefore, it is essential to have a back-up plan and an alternate lessonthat site facilitators can deliver to students.

In a learning situation in which the instructor is not physically pre-sent, it is easy for both the students and the instructor to feel isolatedfrom each other. This problem can be alleviated by the use of Internet orsoftware programs that allow for class conferencing, discussion groups,and/or virtual chat room features, along with the use of e-mail.

The delivery of materials to and from remote sites must be consideredbefore planning a distance learning class. The available delivery systemfor physical documents—whether it be the U.S. Postal Service, UnitedParcel Service, or Courier—will have a direct effect on the class activi-ties, the assigned work (e.g., portfolios, resource notebooks, etc.), anddue dates.

72

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 07:

54 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014

GRASS ROOTS

Distance learning requires hard work and commitment on the part ofthe instructor, students who are willing to give it a chance, and a supportsystem from the post-secondary institution that sponsors it. Teachingfrom a distance is challenging, but it also has its rewards. Enriching theexperiences of teachers can only benefit the children they serve and helpto bring about the equity in education we are striving to attain.

References

Biner, P. M. 1993. The development of an instrument to measure studentattitudes toward televised courses. The American Journal of DistanceEducation 7 (1): 62-73.

Biner, P. M., R . S. Dean, and A. E. Mellinger. 1994. Factors underlyingdistance learner satisfaction with televised college-level instruction.The American Journal of Distance Education 8 (1): 60-71.

Eagen, M. W., M. Welch, B. Page, and J. Sebastian. 1992. Learners' per-ceptions of instructional delivery systems: Conventional andtelevision. The American Journal of Distance Education 6 (2): 47-55.

Sachs, S. G. 1993. Supporting compressed video. In Compressed video:Operations and applications, ed. S. T. Hakes, S. G. Sachs, C. B. Box,and J. Cochenour, 180-198. Washington, DC: The Association forEducation Communication and Technology.

Westbrook, T. S. 1997. Changes in student attitudes toward graduatebusiness instruction via interactive television. The American Journalof Distance Education 11 (1): 55-69.

Yin, R. K. 1989. Case study research: Design and methods. NewburyPark, CA: Sage.

73

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 07:

54 1

2 N

ovem

ber

2014