Interactivity and Engagement in a Blended Class: Wimba Live Classroom

1. Interactivity and Engagement in a Blended Class: Wimba Live Classroom Wimba Connect 2008 March 2-5, 2008 Wyndham Orlando Resort Orlando, FL Robert Keel Teaching Professor Department of Sociology UM-St. Louis St. Louis, MO

2. UM-St. Louis • Publically funded metropolitan research university. • “The University of Missouri-St. Louis is the land-grant research institution committed to meeting diverse needs for higher education and knowledge in the state's largest metropolitan community. It educates traditional and nontraditional students in undergraduate, graduate and professional programs..”(UM-St. Louis Mission Statement, http://www.umsl.edu/services/academic/admin/mission.html)

3. UMSL Student Profile • 15,500 students (12,000 on-campus) • 64% of undergraduates are fulltime • 78% of new undergrads--transfers • Commuter campus: 20% residential • 26% minority student population • Middle/working class background • Median age: 27.3 • Netgen?

4. Developing a “Blended” Class • WWW (release .01) circa 1993 • MyGateway (Blackboard) circa 2000-2008 • Combined sections: In-class, online, day and evening • Asynchronous: discussion boards, lecture notes, group wikis • Synchronous: • Face-to-face • Wimba Live Classroom • Concern: student engagement and interaction • Focus: Access to the classroom anytime/anywhere and social learning

5. What is Wimba Live Classroom? • Online, synchronous presentation software • Duplex audio • Application sharing • Archiving • Tracking • Polls and quizzes • Check out the interface: MyGateway

6. Why Use? • Increasing channels of communication and interaction.1 • “Collaboration is increasingly seen as critical across the range of educational activities, including intra- and inter-institutional activities of any size or scope.2 • Accessibility and Flexibility • Why not? Irons, Jung, Keel, “Interactivity in Distance Learning: The Digital Divide and Student Satisfaction,” http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_3_2002/jung.pdf and Irons, Keel, and Bielema, “Blended Learning and Learner Satisfaction,” http://www.usdla.org/html/journal/DEC02_Issue/article04.html 2006 Horizon Report, The New Media Consortium, http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2006_Horizon_Report.pdf

7. Live Classroom Chronology • Began using Centra Fall 2004 • TA’s going back to FS 2003 • Issues with Centra • Switch to Live Classroom • Integrated into MyGateway • FS 2005 experimented with one class (student presentations) • Spring 2006 onward--used in all classes (blended model) • Issues: • minor technical difficulties • Benefits • TA use: review sessions • Student group use • In-class versus “Wimbians” competition

8. Getting Serious • Survey of students (SS06, FS06, WS07, SS07, FS07): • Online demographics • Perceptions of the usability and utility of Wimba Live Classroom • Perceptions of the usability and utility of wiki-based assignments • 716 students completed the survey • 13 classes: online and face-to-face • 50%-65% of students “internet only”

9. Student Online Access and Activity

10. Computers

11. Off-Campus Access

12. Time Online

13. Location of Wimba (Live Classroom) Use SS 2006-FS 2007, N: 716

14. Technical Issues SS 2006-FS 2007, N: 716

15. Using Wimba (Live Classroom)

16. Usefulness of Wimba (Live Classroom)

17. Distractions, Interest, and Effort

18. Distraction, Interest, and Effort (Distribution)

19. Distraction, Interest, and Effort 5 point Likert scale items, 1=strongly agree, 3=neutral, 5=strongly disagree SS06 N: 86, FS06 N: 186, WS07 N: 239, SS07 N: 46, FS07: 159

20. Wimba Utility: Learning

21. Wimba Utility: Learning (distribution)

22. Wimba Utility: Learning 5 point Likert scale items, 1=strongly agree, 3=neutral, 5=strongly disagree SS06 N: 86, FS06 N: 186, WS07 N: 239, SS07 N: 46, FS07: 159

23. Wimba Utility: Communication

24. Wimba Utility: Communication (distribution)

25. Wimba Utility: Communication 5 point Likert scale items, 1=strongly agree, 3=neutral, 5=strongly disagree SS06 N: 86, FS06 N: 186, WS07 N: 239, SS07 N: 46, FS07: 159

26. Wimba Utility: Enrollment and Retention

27. Wimba Utility: Retention (distribution)

28. Wimba Utility: Retention 5 point Likert scale items, 1=strongly agree, 3=neutral, 5=strongly disagree SS06 N: 86, FS06 N: 186, WS07 N: 239, SS07 N: 46, FS07: 159

29. Selected Comments: Benefits • “Wimba was great for listening to lectures later on in the archives.” • “Overall the best part of the course was the use of the wimba, it enabled me to not have to be at the campus to attend the lecture.  I really appreciated having it as a resource. • “Using wimba is a good tool to review, lecture, and to clarify things..” • “I did not use Wimba live to attend the class but I am glad it was available. I have used it to play back for attendance credit only. I would like for this feature to be added to other courses at UM-StLouis.” • “The flexibility and convenience of Wimba allowed me to attend EVERY class. In a traditional classroom course, I would have missed at least 4 classes.” • “I think that all courses should have the wimba archives available!!!  I travel a lot and it was great to have a class that I could be out of town and still attend.” • If it weren't for WIMBA I would not have been able to take this class.  I have taken other "on-line" courses at other colleges and hated them.  The archived "live" classes were great.

30. Selected Comments: Benefits Part 2 • “With the use of these technologies it has become easier to balance my schedule than it ever was before.  I really enjoy the opportunity to attend class through wimba.  It offers many students better opportunities to learn because sometimes a student might not be able to attend class but if they have the opportunity to attend from home they can still benefit from that days class without having to miss anything.  I would like for almost all classes at UMSL to incorporate the advantages Wimba provides.” • “The availability of being able to attend class whenever I had time made my life much easier because I work full time, go to school full time, and am a full time mother. This kind of flexibility in attending class, and doing the work when it fits into my schedule made my things so much nicer, I would definitely sign up for any other courses that were offered in this format.” • “The use of wimba to review achives was sooo nice. It made me not stress about missing classes due to illness. I wish there was this feature in ALL my classes. It would really benefit my learning process.”

31. Selected Comments: Problems • “I hate wimba.” • “Wimba and wikis were so confusing at the beginning.  I fell behind the first three weeks trying to learn how to get around on the online system.  I also had to spend extra money to get my computer set up to go online.  Now it's a piece a cake, but it was really frustrating at first.” • “The use of wimba and wiki certainly have problems to work out. Had I not had trouble listening to archives...I would have been more pleased with the features. As they are currently, however, they take up more time trying to use them than they are worth trying to convey information. If they were improved they might be more useful to students.”

32. Selected Comments: Problems Part 2 • “Just because UMSL offers Wimba and Wiki does not mean every student wants to use it.  Students also have lives, each student is not :fresh" out of high school and adding these programs makes it that much harder when you have a full time job, kids and try to attend school all at the same time.  Not everybody can handle the internet.” • I don't think that watching courses on Wimba should be a requirement for students that are registered for Internet sections of a course. Wimba should be an available tool for those that want to use it, but as a requirement, it made even completing an Internet course on my own weird schedule difficult. I sign up for Internet classes because of the odd and changing hours I works, so having to work around an application like this was, at times, difficult. • “Wimba still has some technical glitches that need fixing.”

33. Issues from My Perspective • Technical issues (bandwidth, microphone, video) • Archive labeling • Screen space—application sharing vs. PowerPoint • Online chat during class—difficulties in paying attention to online and in-class students, yet “social learning” • Students resistant to use of microphone (tech issue), now camera. • User (instructor) error ;-)

34. Conclusions • Students clearly appreciate the flexibility and accessibility • Using Live Classroom works well for traditional classes, as well as distance/online • Students are learning to use archives as a resource • If nothing else, students think they do better (learn more) • The more these tools are used, the more students want them • Tools like Live Classroom are key in improving student engagement and retention

35. Where to Go From Here • Video integration (talking head or class) • Integrating online activities and group work—breakout rooms seem easy to configure. • Developing archive library • Wish we could edit archives • Integrate with podcasting (issue of tracking) • Working from home (or the beach ;-) say, now that I am here in Florida……

36. Contact Robert Keel Teaching Professor Department of Sociology UM-St. Louis rok@umsl.edu 314-516-6052 http://www.umsl.edu/~rkeel