1. Real Time Global Instruction in a Virtual Environment Barb Mann, Assistant Director for Public Services Julie Arnold Lietzau, Course Manager for UCSP 611 OCLS, April 29, 2010 © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

2. UMUC © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

3. Scenarios 1.Web conferencing for an online course 2.Web conferencing for one-on-one sessions with doctoral students in Taiwan 3.Group library instruction sessions for students and faculty 4.Focus groups with faculty for feedback on the library Web site © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

4. Literature Review Distance education began as correspondence courses-no real-time interaction Move to audio and video communication methods- opportunities for real-time interactions Three elements integral to educational process --cognitive presence --social presence --teaching presence © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

5. Literature Review “ Interaction is at the heart of the learning experience and is widely cited as a defining characteristic of successful learning…” (Baker, 2010, p. 3) © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

6. Literature Review: Benefits Anonymity provides a comfort level (Wu & Marek, 2009) © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

7. Literature Review: Drawbacks Technical difficulties Budgetary demands © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

8. Web Conferencing for an Online Course (Scenario 1) © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

9. Background UCSP 611, Introduction to Graduate Library Research Skills Piloted in 4 sections and offered in more than 15 sessions since then (spring 2008) Utilized Adobe Connect and Wimba 2 live sessions per course © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

10. “Nuts and Bolts” Used to model and reinforce learning for two major projects Specified learning outcomes Determine place in the semester/times Provided logistical and technical requirements Utilized software features to explain and demonstrate content Archived recording © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

11. Provided logistical and technical requirements © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

12. Demonstrate content Utilized software features to explain © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

13. Archived recording © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

14. Assessment Some sessions were assessed via a survey using Zoomerang Survey link was posted in the LMS classroom and some instructors e-mailed the link to their students Standard course evaluations reviewed for comments Project comparisons Pre- and post-test comparisons © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

15. Assessment Final project scores with Wimba sessions: 91% Final project scores without sessions: 86% Same instructor for all sessions Same grading rubric used for all sessions © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

16. Assessment Pre-test/Post-test data analysis (fall 2009) Overall final exam performance for students who had Wimba sessions: 88% Overall final exam performance for ALL students: 87% © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

17. Assessment Students in Wimba sessions scored higher on the following exam objectives: Formulating a research question Selecting the most appropriate source for research Evaluating material on the Web Recognizing when to cite-Web materials Identifying correct citation style Identifying correct search statements to locate needed materials © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

19. Assessment: Other Reasons for Participating “…to make sure I knew what was required for the project.” “…both, to learn more about library research and to interact with the instructor.” “…to become familiar with new technology.” © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

22. Assessment: Positive Feedback “ I strongly feel the online/live discussions were very helpful. It helps see what the other students are thinking and questioning. Plus it gives more details about the assignment than what is just listed on paper. I can't emphasize enough how helpful this was. ” © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

23. Assessment: Positive Feedback “I think this live chat was excellent because the instructor responded to everyone's question in a decent order and I would definitely agree to have these kind of live chats for all classes since most of the classes are online. Also, I could ask questions to problems if my classes were all online instead of face-to-face. I really appreciate this live chat because it really helped.” © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

24. Assessment: Positive Feedback “ Taking a class in an online environment, you do not necessarily get interaction with your instructor or your class. This gives everyone a chance to get together, ask questions, and get some personal/devoted one- on-one time with the instructor. We get the benefit of learning from the instructor, as well as questions from other students. ” © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

25. Assessment: Positive Feedback “I would like to see these become available for other classes and then posted, so if you are unable to attend the live session you can still view it at a later time.” © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

26. Assessment: Drawbacks “ I really don't see any drawbacks to the online discussion other than the standard challenge of making free time to attend the live session. This is sometimes complicated in different time zones when some people may still be at work.” “It requires that computer hardware and internet connections be in excellent working condition.” © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

27. Final Comments Course content reinforced and placed in context “I appreciated the live session very much. It helped me to understand the project! Also, it allows me to go back and review parts that I struggle with for the project. It is an excellent way to study because it is convenient and I just feel like I can study and learn anywhere!” UCSP 611 student, spring 2010 © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

28. Web Conferencing for One-on- One Sessions with Doctoral Students in Taiwan (Scenario 2) © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

29. Overview One-on-one research consultations with 20 first cohort DM Taiwan students Research Methods course requiring development of pre-dissertation research question and extensive literature review © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

30. “Nuts and Bolts” Determined learning outcomes Determined schedule of one-hour time slots for librarians and allow students to “sign up” for an hour Students e-mailed outline of topics to be covered ahead of the session Provided web-based digital learning materials and an assignment rubric for students to enhance learning and as pre-work Librarian spent one hour (sometimes longer) going over research process with student based on their research topic © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

31. Issues Language Technology © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

32. Assessment Comments on standard course evaluations Zoomerang survey for students in the course Debriefings (faculty and librarians) © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

33. Assessment Highlights © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

34. Assessment Highlights © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

35. Assessment Highlights © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

36. Assessment: Anecdotal Comments Anecdotal comments” “It's helpful. Thanks for the considerate arrangement.” “Thanks to my librarian. He has been very helpful.” “The potential to use technology tools in interactive learning.” © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

37. Group Library Instruction Sessions for Students, Faculty and Staff (Scenario 3) © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

38. Group Sessions Group sessions since 2005 –Hoovers, Business Source Complete, Academic Search Complete, e-reserves, NetLibrary, and RefWorks Attendance consistently increasing Web4M, Adobe Connect, Wimba © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

39. Examples of Student Sessions Business Source Complete Academic Search Complete RefWorks Hoover’s © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

40. Examples of Faculty/Staff Sessions Hoover’s/ReferenceUSA RefWorks NetLibrary E-reserves © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

41. Positive Feedback: RefWorks “I thought the presentation was excellent. It makes using RefWorks a lot easier and saves on time.” “I found the presentation to be very useful.” “The demonstration cleared up several questions that I had; Seeing someone else do it makes a difference.” © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

42. DM Taiwan RefWorks (1st cohort) Database Searching/RefWorks (2 nd cohort) Determined learning outcomes Created content in collaboration with faculty Sent hand-outs Worked out technical logistics © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

43. Library Instruction  Wimba sessions as part of library instruction  Fair to high attendance  Positively received  Faculty members attended  Sessions were recorded © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

44. Focus Groups with Faculty for Feedback on the Library Web Site (Scenario 4) © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

45. Background Re-design of ILS Web site to make it more user-centered Conducted focus groups to obtain feedback Virtual mechanism needed to reach out to global constituencies © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

46. “Nuts and Bolts” Used Zoomerang to obtain volunteers and UCSP 611 faculty members signed up Discussion focused on three main questions and were asked utilizing Wimba polling feature Follow-up questions were notated via PowerPoint and viewed on Wimba whiteboard Chat feature was used as communication method Facilitator and note taker used audio function to keep discussion flowing © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

47. “Nuts and Bolts” Chat transcript and separate polling transcript were captured © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

48. Conclusions © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

49. Findings Summary “…students indicated that they would rather take an online course that uses synchronous web conferencing lectures than an online asynchronous text-based lecture course…” (Skylar, 2009, p. 82) Student and faculty feedback overwhelmingly positive © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

50. Findings Summary Provides greater opportunity for interaction between faculty and students Further research needed to measure the benefit including empirical findings © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

51. Lessons Learned Technical issues Working with faculty Language barriers Time zone differences Cultural differences © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

52. Questions to be Addressed What are the pedagogical expectations of students? How is the impact on student instructional needs measured? How is faculty buy-in obtained, especially as they are already having to understand the pedagogy of teaching online as well as learning how to use the LMS? © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

53. Questions to be Addressed Should this technology be required for some courses? © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

54. Final Quote “I am going through your lecture at this time. Wow! That is really incredible. I can listen to the lecture at any time that is convenient and/or as many times as I would need. I like this!” UCSP 611 student, U. S. Army, stationed in Baghdad, Iraq spring 2009 © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

56. Presentation Based On: Lietzau. J. A., & Mann, B. J. (2009). Breaking out of the asynchronous box: Using Web conferencing in distance learning. Journal of Library & Information Services in Distance Learning, 3(3/4), 108-119. © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

57. References Baker, C. (2010). The impact of instructor immediacy and presence for online student affective learning, cognition, and motivation. The Journal of Educators Online, 7(1), 2-28. Barker, B. O., Frisbie, A. G., & Patrick, K. R. (1989). Broadening the definition of distance education in light of the new telecommunications technologies. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(1), 20-29. doi:10.1080/08923648909526647 © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

58. References De Freitas, S., & Neumann, T. (2009). Pedagogic strategies supporting the use of Synchronous Audiographic Conferencing: A review of the literature. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(6), 980-998. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00887.x Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000), Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105. © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau

59. References Moore, M. G. (1980). Independent study. In R. D. Boyd & J. W. Apps (Eds.), Redefining the discipline of adult education (pp. 16-31). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Skylar, A. (2009). A comparison of asynchronous online text-based lectures and synchronous interactive Web conferencing lectures. Issues in Teacher Education, 18(2), 69-84. © Barb Mann, Julie Arnold Lietzau