Experiences from the experiments at nith/nki

At the Norwegian School of Information Technology (NITH) two experiments with virtual classroom technology have been carried out at master’s degree level (Krogstie 2005) in connection with the Socrates Minerva project. The results open up for the possibility of using VCT to strengthen NITH’s potential as an IT university college, in that this technology makes cross-campus knowledge more feasible.

One of the aims of the Socrates Minerva project was to test and evaluate the use of VCT in the study programmes. Two experiments were carried out at NITH in 2004 by Assistant Professor Birgit Krogstie (2005), using Centra Software’s virtual technology and tested on master degree programmes in information technology. Results show that the crucial question is whether the virtual classroom gives sufficient framework conditions to carry out pedagogically facilitated teaching as a substitute for the traditional classroom, or whether it should be seen as a feasible supplement. The findings show that what students miss is the interactivity; the lack of collaboration between student and teacher as well as among the students is emphasised. The experiments were combined with questionnaires researching the students’ attitudes to VCT, and the results are summarised as follows in the final report (Krogstie 2005).

Strengths:

• Globalisation; saving time and costs;

• Flexibility; short-notice decisions, the possibility of being combined with other types of teaching (the flexibility is greater when students use their home-based computers rather than gathering in the college computer rooms);

• Efficiency; better planning and structure, storyboard;

• Access to a lot of content on the Web; this can be used for learning/teaching.

Weaknesses:

• Lack of human contact;

• Lack of co-students and student collaboration;

• Lack of interactivity, static and monotonous;

• Difficult to support problem-based learning;

• No possibility for “hands-on”;

• Vulnerable technology; a great deal of previous knowledge and preparations are required;

• High cost investments.

Figure 2: Experiences so far (Krogstie 2004)

The experiences gained from the experiments were later addressed as:

The main findings are:

• Testing of technical equipment and presentation approach/material is essential to the success of arranging the real course. Provided technical stability (particularly the sound quality), participants' virtual classroom tool training can be integrated into their first 'real' session with the tool

• The advantage of the flexibility offered by the virtual classroom partly justifies the sacrifice of the rich interaction offered in the ordinary classroom, but he virtual classroom is appreciated by many as a possible supplement to ‘the real thing’ and not as a substitute for the ordinary classroom

• A traditional lecture may be transformed from an ordinary classroom presentation to a virtual classroom presentation, keeping the original structure of the lesson. However, surveys and tests should be included at fairly short intervals throughout a session, and graphical materials are essential.

• Success is dependent on motivation: Both students and lecturers must accept the limitations and appreciate the opportunities of the virtual environment. The attention span seems to be shorter than in a real classroom.

Figure 3: Main findings (Krogstie 2005)

As this researcher has not participated in the experiments at NITH, Krogstie’s results and experiences are presented here with the purpose of illustrating some general features of VCT.

It appears from the results, shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3, that the VC sessions may be perceived as monotonous and boring. This often affects concentration, and the students also find that in reality there is little opportunity for interactivity through participation and discussion. Based on these experiences, the virtual classroom seems to give less benefit than participation in a physical classroom, unless the limitations of VCT are addressed properly and its opportunities appreciated and exploited.

The main question is what opportunities VCT gives for interactivity. And in order to make the pedagogical reflections on VCT concrete, it is important to address the issue of what distinguishes the physical classroom from a virtual classroom.

The following sections discuss theoretically, independent of the mentioned experiments, some pedagogical issues concerned with the opportunities and limitations that have to be addressed for VCT to become a good pedagogical tool.