Virtual Classroom Participants’ Views For Effective Synchronous Education Process

Year 2013, Volume: 14 Issue: 1, 290 - 301, 01.03.2013

Selçuk Karaman Melike Aydemır Sevda Kuçuk Gürkan Yıldırım

Abstract

Virtual classroom (VC) is the preferred application in distance education since it provides simultaneous interaction and a communication environment between the student and the instructor. The aim of this study is to determine the key components which make VC sessions effective in terms of environment and method. Determination of these components and their effects through experiences of VC is important to improve the design and management of VC sessions. In this case study, VC experiences at theology bachelor’s completion degree distance education program are examined. Semi-structured interviews were performed with 20 participants (8 instructors, 10 students, 2 technical staff) of this program, which had regular VC sessions. Data were analyzed by using content analysis. This study reveals that VC sessions should be well planned and includes interactive activities in addition to good technical support. The instructional techniques that are of importance for VCs are considered to be active participation of students, summarization of material, attraction of students' attention and high association with real life.

Keywords

Synchronous Learning, Virtual Classroom, Distance Education

References

• Abdous, M., & Yoshimura, M. (2010). Learner outcomes and satisfaction: A comparison of live video-streamed instruction, satellite broadcast instruction, and face-to-face instruction. Computers & Education, 55(2), 733-741.
• Anderson, L., Fyvie, B., Koritko, B., McCarthy, K., Paz, S. M., Rizzuto, M., Tremblay, R., & Sawyers, U. (2006). Best practices in synchronous conferencing moderation.
• Teaching & Learning in Medicine, 19(1), 4-8. Clemens, L., Starke-Meyerring, D., & Duin, A. H. (1999). Book review: Creating the virtual classroom: Distance learning with the Internet. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 13(1), 101-102.
• De Vries, Y. E. (1996). The interactivity component of distance learning implemented in an art studio course. Education, 117(2), 180-185.
• Dudding, C. C., & Justice, L. M. (2004). An e-supervision model: Videoconferencing as a clinical training tool. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 25(3), 145-151.
• Engle, J. P., & Parent-Stevens, L. (1999). Developing web-based lecture notes and conferencing for an on campus course in nonprescription drugs. American Journal of
• Pharmaceutical Education, 63(4), 421-426. Guichon, N. (2010). Preparatory study for the design of a desktop videoconferencing platform for synchronous language teaching. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(2), 169-182.
• Kidd R.S., & Stamatakis, M. K. (2006). Comparison of students' performance in and satisfaction with a clinical pharmacokinetics course delivered live and by interactive videoconferencing. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 70(1),.
• McBrien, J. L., Jones, P. & Cheng, R. (2009). Virtual spaces: Employing a synchronous online classroom to facilitate student engagement in online learning. The International
• Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(3), ISSN 1492-3831.
• MacIntosh, J. (2001). Learner concerns and teaching strategies for videoconferencing.
• The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 32(6), 260 -265. Marjanovic, O. (1999). Learning and teaching in a synchronous collaborative environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15(2), 129-138.
• McAlister, S., Ravenscroft, A., & Scanlon, E. (2004). Combining interaction and context design to support collaborative argumentation using a tool for synchronous CMC. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(3), 194-204.
• Moore, M. G. (1994). Audioconferencing in distance education. The American Journal of
• Distance Education, 8(1). Retrieved from http://www.ajde.com/Contents/vol8_1.htm#editorial Newman, C., Martin, E., McGarry, D. E., & Cashin, A. (2009). Survey of a videoconference community of professional development for rural and urban nurses. Rural Remote Health Journal, 9(2), 1134.
• Ng, K. C. (2007). Replacing face-to-face tutorials by synchronous online technologies:
• Challenges and pedagogical implications. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(1), 1-15. Schullo, S., Hilbelink, A., Venable, M., & Barron, A. (2007). Selecting a virtual classroom system: Elluminate Live vs Macromedia Breeze (Adobe Connect Professional). Journal of
• Online Learning and Teaching, 3(4), 331–345. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/documents/hilbelink.pdf Sims, R. (2003). Promises of interactivity: Aligning learner perceptions and expectations with strategies for flexible and online learning. Distance Education, 24(1), 87-104.
• Telles, C. (2008). A step-by-step guide to videoconferencing. Nurse Educator, 33(4), 168- 1
• Tipton, P. H., Pulliam, M., Allen, S. H., & Sherwood, C. (2011). Lessons learned: Pointers for successfully teaching via videoconferencing. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 6(1), 27
• Yang, Z., & Liu, Q. (2007). Research and development of web-based virtual online classroom. Computers & Education,48(2), 171–184.