1
|
- Video conferencing for less commonly taught languages
|
2
|
- Innovate with technology
- Collaborate, contain costs if possible
- Small, liberal arts colleges
- Strong focus on interpersonal contact, residential campus
|
3
|
- 1998-present
- Video conferencing as a SUPPLEMENT for less commonly taught languages
- Japanese
- Chinese
- Arabic as well as
traditional languages
- Class to class; person to person
- Extended to Five Colleges of Ohio
|
4
|
- H.320 or “traditional” systems
- Tandberg, with ISDN as backup
- Now, H.323 or IP-based systems
- Polycom iPower 9000, Viewstations, ViaVideo II
- 120 seat lecture hall, 20 seat classroom, desktops
- Allied technologies:
- VCR, document camera, networked computer, fax, speakerphone
- Internet2
|
5
|
|
6
|
- Successful supplement to face-to-face
- Different interactions: remote vs local
- High audio and video quality requirements
- Training for faculty
- In online pedagogy as well as technology
- Technology dissolves into background
- Combine with content access via CMS, or WebOffice (synchronized
browsing)
|
7
|
|
8
|
- Access to unique classes
- Pool under-enrolled classes
- Part of sabbatical replacement strategy
- Access to guest speakers
- Collaboration among separated students
|
9
|
|
10
|
- Major change in teaching style
- Often an administrative decision
- Association with distance learning
- Few “plan B” options
- Need new approaches to in-class assessment
- Costs
|
11
|
- Start small with early adopters
- Estimate $10,000 per end
- Provide training and close support
- Budget for costs to sustain face-to-face interaction
- Student production assistants in class
|
12
|
- More details on the collaborative videoconference program
- http://siddall.info/vc/
- Or contact
- siddall@denison.edu
|
13
|
|