From eSchool News: Videoconferencing in education segment aired on today's CBS Early Show -
CILC coordinates content providers that appeared on the show
I'm always amazed at how long its taken for video conferencing to take off - but I'm also aware of some of the bigger roadblocks that still haven't been tackled. Back when I worked at the Center for Excellence in Education at Indiana University we had a set of video phones which were used to demonstrate the potential of point-to-point, casual video conferencing. The phones always got "oohs" and "ahhs" from our guests because they seemed so futuristic...that was more than 10 years ago! We also had a plethora of other video conferencing technology that we demonstrated which was more or less the same type of stuff that is still available to educators today: various types of computer-based conferencing technology and programs as well as some of the higher end audio/video systems delivered by TV via highspeed Internet connections.
In the beginning its all about technology...the whiz and bang! However, being able to do something and actually doing something productive with the technology often end up being very different things. I've worked on a few videoconferencing projects that have given me some insight.
First, my experience helping to develop content for Turner Adventure Learning's early virtual field trips. The field trips were very engaging experiences (high end productions in exciting locations like Kenya or Los Alamos National Laboratory, concurrently multi-cast to schools around the US, bundled with a rich set of resources and lesson guides to aid students and teachers before, during, and after the multi-day experiences) but logistically challenging for schools to coordinate and often under-utilized by educators. For many of the participating schools it proved to be just as difficult to arrange day-long videoconferencing programs as it was to arrange local field trips offsite (what with a new set of legal issues and budget cuts). I couldn't find any active info about the program (just dead links and references from webpages created in the mid 90's) but my understanding was that the model was not profitable and the program was subsequently abandoned.
If its hard to create a financially viable model for delivering quality video conferencing to many consumers at the same time, its somewhat understandable that one-to-one videoconferencing hasn't flourished yet either. I worked on another project, funded by the US Department of Education, to link teachers in three school districts via distance learning technologies (Internet and high-end video conferencing equipment) to create instructional units and provide collaborative experiences for students. Sadly the video equipment was rarely utilized during the program, and often only used to facilitate administrative meetings rather than meaningful educational experiences. Only a few sites and a few teacher-participants at those sites found ways to use the equipment in a more meaningful fashion - often with the help of outside agencies such as the Chicago Consortium for Higher Education (that served as a clearinghouse/contact site to connect educational content providers with educators). The equipment wasn't utilized more often, in part, because so few of the participants had had meaningful personal experiences with videoconferencing to serve as a foundation on which to create/explore potential experiences that could be equally meaningful for their students, access to ready-made conference experiences or experienced providers, nor the time to create extensive plans and possibly resources on their own - plus come up with a "plan B" in case the technology malfunctioned.
Organizations like the CILC, referenced in the linked article, do a fantastic job of providing quality videoconferencing programming. Their successful examples of the educational potential for videoconferencing give me hope for the future use of educational video, but also highlight the importance of organizations that can facilitate the process of identifying providers and organizing quality programming.
No comments:
Post a Comment