Professional Development Synchronous Delivery Emergent Technology McLuhan’s Tetrad Innovation

1. WU 8841 Diffusion and Integration of Educational TechnologySynchronous Professional DevelopmentKalman Mannis

2. Digitally Delivered Professional Development, Provided synchronously • Professional Development • Synchronous Delivery • Emergent Technology • McLuhan’s Tetrad • Innovation • Diffusion • Communication Channels • Innovation-Decision Process • Stages of Change Definitions to Insure Common Understanding:

3. Innovation Analysisusing McLuhan’s Tetrad Web Conferencing: Synchronously Delivered Professional Development

4. Innovation Bias • Pro Innovation Bias Everyone in the meeting sees the same presentation as the presenter, including animations, video clips etc. The presentation is automatically scaled to fit each audience member's screen so everyone sees the entire slide without having to scroll. Small webinars and collaborative presentations show all meeting members video and audio in the meeting. The presenters see the audience video next to the presentation, and can use it with chat message feedback and spoken questions from the audience to pace the presentation similarly to face to face meetings. VIA3 (http://www.via3.com/Info/Products/Features/Presentations.aspx) Business success depends on human interaction. You can often get more done with a few minutes meeting face to face than you can in strings of emails or trying to explain things over a telephone. With VIA3 you can meet face to face any time with any of your online contacts. VIA3 (http://www.via3.com/Info/Products/Features/Default.aspx)

5. Innovation Decision Process • Diffusion • Consequences

6. Distance Professional Development for K-12 Districts provided synchronously: • Financial Considerations for providing quality P.D. without the need to send staff away from campus. Thus incurring travel expenses, and time lost to travel. • Staff’s desire to remain close to home to maintain domestic harmony. • Ability to encourage staff collaboration internally by providing the P.D. when multiple members can attend. • Encouraging collaboration of district team with distant colleagues. • Provide up to date information to staff on relevant issues and research. • Inefficiencies of travel • Protection from communicable diseases. • Fear of Travel long distances following attacks of 9/11 ( Mayrhofer, Back, & Hubschmid, 2004) • Globalization of experts Need Knowledge Stage

7. Distance Professional Development for K-12 Districts provided synchronously: • Emerging Technology’s affective barriers to implementation. • Authoritative pressures to implement the technology • Social pressures to accept the use of delivery format for Professional Development. • Institutional pressure for using the format. • Research on format successes Research

8. Development • Distance Professional Development for K-12 Districts provided synchronously: • Fiber Optic Backbone deployment • Software • VOIP • Connectivity/Bandwidth needs • Implementation samples • Pros and Cons of the format

9. Distance Professional Development for K-12 Districts provided synchronously: • First Adopters • Demonstration Locations • Mass Media advertising • Innovative advertising – podcast support (GoToMeeting.com) • Exploitation of format as a financial center. • Various pricing and delivery models. • Implementation as a delivery format for higher education and corporate distance training. • Archiving of meetings • Increase in collaborative productivity Commercialization Persuasion Stage

10. Diffusion • Decision Stage – Adoption/Rejection Communication Channels • Mass Media (Knowledge Stage) • Lack of centralized advocate • Interpersonal Channel (Persuasion Stage) • Perceived value • Organizational Resistance • Ease of Use • Affective Barriers

11. Data on ‘Ease of Use’ Variable to Adoption Wainhouse Research, 2009

12. Affective Barriers as a Variable to Adoption Wainhouse Research, 2009

13. Consequences Implementation Stage • As a product in the market since the late 1990s (WebEx, the first large scale provider of web conferencing was founded in 1996) implementation was first adopted by corporate and government entities. Web conferencing obsolesced video conferencing equipment by incorporating a web based platform and by placing collaborative tools into the hands of the user (WebEx, 2010). • Its use was boosted by the terror attacks of September 11th, especially for European companies and those who were required to travel to and from large metropolitan centers. (Mayrhofer, Back, & Hubschmid, 2004). • From 2002 – 2007 there was a 40% per annum on use of the products across the business, government, and education sectors. By 2009 the business model was earning nearly one billion dollars per year ((Mayrhofer, Back, & Hubschmid, 2004; Wainhouse, 2009). • In 2009 access to the internet during airplane flights provided an additional boost to productivity, collaboration and connectivity to members of private and public sectors (Web Conferencing Council, 2009).

14. Consequences Confirmation Stage • Adoption of the evolving tool is still a factor across the private and public sectors. Major barriers are affective and ease-of-use obstacles (Wainhouse, 2009). • White papers by the Web Conferencing Council (2010), discuss the pros and cons of the top 10 (according to their rubric) web conferencing providers. A quick analysis of the topics covered refer back to ease of use, customer service, and security as key distinctions between companies. This level of discussion would indicate that the tool has reached a level of integration into the business and public cultures. They are at the point of minor difference. The pressure appears to be driven by Increasing Return (Thornburg, 2008), where competing companies are vying with each other for predominance. Web Conferencing Council’s 2009 Ranking of top 10 Web Conferencing Companies (pg 8).

15. Commercialization/Implementation Sample Case Studies • USTREAM • ELLUMINATE • GOTOMEETING • WEBEX • VIA3

16. USTREAM

17. CITRIX – Go To Meeting

18. WEBEX

19. VIA3

20. Discussion

22. Gartner's Hype Cycle • There are five distinct categories that occur in the emergence of any new technology: • Technology trigger. A breakthrough, public demonstration, product launch or other event that generates significant press and industry interest. • Peak of inflated expectations. a phase of overenthusiasm and unrealistic projections during which a flurry of publicized activity by technology leaders results in some successes but more failures as the technology is pushed to its limits. The only enterprises making money at this stage are conference organizers and magazine publishers. • Trough of disillusionment. The point at which the technology becomes unfashionable and the press abandons the topic, because the technology did not live up to its overinflated expectations. • Slope of enlightenment. Focused experimentation and solid hard work by an increasingly diverse range of organizations lead to a true understanding of the technology's applicability, risks and benefits. Commercial off-the-shelf methodologies and tools become available to ease the development process. • Plateau of productivity. The real-world benefits of the technology are demonstrated and accepted. Tools and methodologies are increasingly stable as they enter their second and third generation. The final height of the plateau varies according to whether the technology is broadly applicable or only benefits a niche market. • The Gartner Hype Cycle places technologies and the strategies they enable into a natural and recurring life cycle.

23. Comparison of Case Study Companies

24. References • Citrix Brochure. (2010). Corporate Brochure. Retrieved from: http://www.citrix.com/site/resources/dynamic/mediaResources/CitrixBrochure.pdf • Citrix About. (2010). The virtual computing revolution. Retrieved from: http://www.citrix.com/lang/English/aboutCitrix.asp • Coleman, D. and Young, J. (2004). Critical Factors for Adoption of Collaborative Technologies . Retrieved from: http://collaborate.com/white_papers/mem/white_papers/new_CriticalFactorsforAdoptionofCollaborativeTechnologies082404.pdf • Mayrhofer, D., Back, A., and Hubschmid, R. (2004). Web-Conferencing software tools: A comprehensive market survey. St. Gallen, Switzerland: Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik. • Nilsson, A. and Greenburg, A. (2009). Ease of use in web-conferencing: Why it matters. Duxbury, MA: Wainhouse Research. Retrieved from: http://www.wrplatinum.com/Downloads/9854.aspx • Think of it. (2004). Conferencing on the web. Available: http://www.thinkofit.com/webconf/index.htm 8 January 2004]. • Thornburg, D. (2008) Red queens, butterflys, and strange attractors: Imperfect lenses into emergent technologies. Retrieved from: //sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/courses/14936/crs-wueduc8812-3730077/red_queens,_butterflys,_ and strange_attractors.pdf • USTREAM. (2010). About USTREAM. Retrieved from: www.ustream.com/about • Web Conferencing (2010). Wikipedia: Webconferencing Companies. Retrieved from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_conferencing • Web Conferencing Council. (2010). Top 10 web conferencing vendors for 2009. Retrieved from: http://webconferencingcouncil.com/Whitepapers/Web%20Conferencing%20Council%20Top%2010%20Web%20Conferencing%20Vendors%202009.pdf • WebEx. (2010). Company Overview. Retrieved from: http://www.webex.com.au/companyinfo/company-overview.html