2. Students’ Perceptions of Videoconferencing as an Education Strategy Houghton, C., Smyth, S., Cooney, A., Dowling, M., Kelly, M., Kelly, J., Cantillon, P. School of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland, Galway

3. Presentation: Background and Context Aim of the Study Research Methodology Key Findings Conclusions

4. Background VC facilitates live synchronous two-way information to be shared across two or more locations. Advent of VC technologies offers new opportunities but simultaneously challenges educators to learn how to use this technology effectively to teach students. Increasing use of distance learning in nurse education, VC is being considered - valid alternative to FTF teaching approaches.

5. Literature Review: Benefits Positive outcomes for VC in nursing, medical & allied health professional education. Little difference in outcome for students in terms of knowledge, performance & competency levels when compared to traditional & FTF teaching approaches Satisfaction correlated with convenience, accessibility and reliable technology

6. Literature Review: Challenges Poor video and audio quality and time delay can hinder interaction. Difficult to interpret and nonverbal communication Feelings of isolation at remote sites Anxieties - reduced among staff if technology training is made available

7. Literature Review: Challenges VC less suitable for psychological or emotional discussions Participants may also feel self-conscious using VC Students can feel camera shy & be less willing to speak out in front of the groups.

8. Aim of the Study: This research explored the implementation of videoconferencing (VC) as an education strategy across a variety of postgraduate programmes in a school of nursing and midwifery. The perspectives of the students, both on- site and at remote sites, and lecturers were examined.

9. Methodology Design: Qualitative descriptive design Setting: A school of nursing and midwifery that implemented videoconferencing across a range of postgraduate programmes Participants: Students who had learned through videoconferencing (n=13) and staff (n=3) who had taught using this method Methods: Semi-structured focus group interviews Analysis: Morse’s (1994) analytical framework, advocated within qualitative descriptive research by Thorne et al. (1997), was used to guide the data analysis. Ethical approval: Granted from the University Research Ethics Committee

10. Findings – Four themes! Comparisons with the Traditional Methods Technology & Set up Inclusion and Discussion Style of Lecturer The main difference - VC for the remote students was preferable to travelling considerable distances to the University. This theme reported some challenges - time delay, seating arrangements for classes. Some were related to the lecturers’ lack of familiarity with the VC technology. This theme illustrated participants’ perceptions regarding whether students at the remote site felt isolated from the lecturer and discussions during class. The style of the lecturer was central to how positive the VC experience was for students.

11. Theme 1 - Comparisons with Traditional Methods Students at remote sites found VC preferable to travelling “You were talking some days going out of the house at 6am and you might not be back until 7pm depending on what time you are out of college and then the traffic in [University City]… This [VC] is by far better, it makes it more interesting. It makes you more willing to learn because you know you are not too far” (FGA) However, students found not being in the same room as the lecturer a disadvantage. “You could still ask the question. The only thing maybe you couldn’t do is go up and ask the lecturer when class is finished if you had something you weren’t confident to ask out in front of everyone you could go up to them” (FGA)

12. Theme 2 - Technology and Set Up The students noticed the lecturers’ lack of familiarity with the technology. “I don’t think the lecturers really knew how to use it…The people who set it up didn’t seem to properly know how to work the technology…. they probably spent about five minutes trying to move a chair so the lecturer could see them” (FGB) The students at the remote site found the time delay problematic as it made asking questions more difficult. “I noticed with the one when the lecturer was coming from [name of college]. Like a transatlantic call there was where someone would start to say something and someone would say and then it all got a bit [Confused] you know” (FGC) Room Set up!

13. Theme 3 - Inclusion and Discussion Off site students feeling isolated. For onsite students: “It was like being on the Eurovision. At one stage “anything from [remote site]?” I suppose for them it’s to remember to refer back to us which may sound a bit selfish, the rest of the class has to wait until we check with [remote site] but maybe they just at the end give that extra little time and say to us “is there anything you want to say?” which they did a lot of the time” (FGA)

14. Theme 3 Some students reported feeling a bit self conscious about asking questions & creating a discussion in front of students at another location. “I think it would have been easier if you knew the people in the other room. I know we kind of knew the girls although we had met them once and I was kind of “do I know her?” I was dawdling around the place probably but I think it would be easier to ask questions maybe if you kind of knew the other group. Cause you are nearly thinking “what are they thinking of us” a small bit” (FGC) Student participants agreed that it was beneficial to have met the students beforehand in a FTF context prior to the VC experience. “Because we all had to introduce ourselves in the classroom, so we all had to stand up and introduce ourselves…it wasn’t as daunting as they already knew who we were, what area we worked in so it wasn’t….” (FGA)

15. Theme 4 - Style of Lecturer The style of the lecturer was central to how positive the VC experience was for students. “We were very lucky with [lecturer]…it was very engaging, she looked at us, she spoke to us, it was two way” (FGC) Lecturers giving eye contact, asking questions, creating discussion… Absence of these affected quality of experience for students

16. Conclusions Provides learning opportunities across diverse geographical setting Lecturers familiarity with technology important. Training needed Code for when to speak. Reduce impact of time delay Room set up important. Consider roving camera Connectedness. Meeting prior to VC experience. Team building exercises. Muting microphones

17. Thank You! References available from: siobhan.smyth@nuigalway.ie Catherine.houghton@nuigalway.ie