Orr, 'Creation and Delivery of a Residential School Program for Geographically Dispersed Students', MC Journal 0401 URL = http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/stacks/serials/mcj/mcj-0401-orr-creation The Creation and Delivery of a Residential School Program for Geographically Dispersed Students by Debbie Orr, Trish Andrews, and Margaret Appleton MC Journal: The Journal of Academic Media Librarianship, v4#1, Summer 1996:85-105. Introduction As part of a post graduate subject offered in the Master of Science Communication program, the Central Queensland University (CQU) library decided to investigate the feasibility of students undertaking a residential school program without having to be physically present on campus. This project built on information from an earlier trial run by the library in 1992 which investigated access by electronic means to library resources for off-campus students and the ability of off-campus students to deal with the technology required for this access (Appleton, 1993). The project also reflected the Central Queensland University's Vision 97 statement. The statement enunciates a commitment by the university to "relatively open entry, distance education and multi-campus operation, integrated in such a way that all students have equality of opportunity and continuous access to learning experiences of comparable quality, and that this approach be implemented allowing for diversity rather than by enforcing uniformity" (Wilson, 1995). To implement this statement the university is examining the options for flexible delivery of programs and the utilisation of innovative technologies wherever possible. The virtual residential workshop made an active contribution to this commitment. In 1994, CQU library offered the subject "Science Information Sources" in the Master of Science Communication Program. This *Page 85* subject was offered through distance mode and was designed to give postgraduate science students an understanding of electronic information sources. Modules studied in the course covered an introduction to scientific communication and the body of knowledge in the sciences, the literature review, information management, copyright, telecommunications, database searching, the Internet, document delivery and the future of information dissemination. The modules were print based and there was an electronic mail list so that students could interact electronically. There was very little interaction via email. This may have been because the students did not know each other and were reluctant to post messages to people they did not know. It may also have been because they did not understand the potential of the medium and were not given sufficient incentive to use it. The subject contained a compulsory residential school where electronic databases were demonstrated, hands-on experience was facilitated, and the students were shown how to prepare, execute and evaluate a search strategy. Emphasis was placed on the creation of a group learning environment. Students were encouraged to share their topics and search strategies, and to comment on the work of others in the group. Evaluation of the 1994 on-campus residential school showed that students appreciated being able to share and discuss topics with peers, indicating that this was an important part of the course. *Page 86* Creating the Program In 1995, it was felt that the technology may be available to deliver a program without making it compulsory that the students travel to Rockhampton. A search of the literature revealed one interesting experiment run by the Open University, Milton Keynes, relating to a virtual summer school held in 1994. The Open University summer school enabled undergraduate students to electronically participate in a class from their own homes. They participated in group discussion, obtained one-to one tutoring, listened to lectures, conducted literature searches, worked in project teams, prepared individual and joint written work, prepared plenary session presentations and socialised with other class members (Open University, 1994). The discussion of the strategies for creating a group learning environment was useful in planning the virtual residential school at CQU. While it was important that the content of the workshop be delivered, it was equally important that a group learning environment be created and that the advantages of collaborative learning and interaction common to an on-campus workshop be enjoyed. It was necessary to explore teaching strategies which would provide direct peer interaction in a virtual setting and to trial and evaluate suitable software and hardware technologies. There were five students enrolled in the unit and it was felt that the small number would allow an ambitious and largely experimental workshop. Students were given the option of *Page 87* attending the on-campus residential school in person or joining the session virtually. Three students attended on-campus, one participated from Toowoomba and one from Canberra. Planning The planning team consisted of the Director of the Division of Library, Information and Media Services, librarians involved in the teaching of the subject, the library network manager, a member of the Information Technology Division staff, and a staff member from the Interactive Multimedia Unit of Distance and Continuing Education. This group met regularly over seven months and team members worked in two subgroups. The first group consisted of the subject specialists who designed and delivered the program. It also included an instructional designer, who advised on strategies best suited to the delivery of a program in a virtual setting. At this stage it was realised that there could be problems with equipment or making connections at specific times. A lot of time was spent identifying potential problems and making contingency plans should the program need to be altered at any time. The second group was responsible for the technology and their tasks included selecting, testing, evaluating and despatching software and hardware. Several software packages were evaluated *Page 88* before identifying those which would meet the needs of the program. This group also ensured that all participants could connect to the library, and that when connected, the various applications functioned in such a manner that everything other than the content of the program was invisible. Training for the instructors was seen as a vital component of the planning. More than 30 hours were invested in training sessions. This included training in the use of teleconferencing in teaching, desktop videoconferencing and training in the use of Chat and Timbuktu. Simulated sessions were used to enable the instructors to become familiar and confident with the software and with teaching and integrating two physically separate groups. By the time the residential school was run all instructors felt comfortable with the technology and were able to concentrate on the delivery of the program. Hardware Desktop computers were considered and discarded because of the higher cost of freight, increased risk of damage during transport, complexity of assembly, and lack of portability compared with laptop computers. It was not possible to connect a video camera to an IBM notebook computer, so Apple seemed the obvious choice. Apple powerbooks have a high speed *Page 89* serial/printer port and Connectix make a camera to fit (QuickCam). The computers were fitted with 12MB memory, 320MB hard disk and an internal 14.4kb/s modem. External modems were not an option because the 520C's have only one serial port and this was to be used for the camera. A PowerMac 6100AV with 16MB memory, 500MB hard disk and a 15 inch monitor was purchased to operate as the server and instructor's computer. Software Software packages used in the workshop included CUSeeme (desktop videoconferencing), Timbuktu, NCSA telnet V2.6 and Chat. It was necessary to choose software packages which were relatively inexpensive and that could run effectively on low bandwidths. Using CUSeeme students could see real time pictures of each other and this was used during teleconferences so that students could see pictures of all contributors. The ability to see each other greatly improved group cohesiveness and interaction. The main function of Timbuktu was to enable all participants to connect to the instructor's computer and view a demonstration. It was also useful as a diagnostic tool. A few students experienced problems and the instructor was able to use Timbuktu to connect to the remote machine, view the activity on the screen, identify the problem and talk the student through the procedure. It was possible to both view the screen of the remote machine and to take control if the student could not complete an exercise. *Page 90* The nature of the workshop made it imperative that students have the facility to telnet to various online databases. NCSA telnet V2.6 was selected because it proved stable and it was possible to resize windows and use several applications simultaneously. One objective was to provide and maintain continuous communications when not using the mobile phones. Teleconferencing is expensive and it was hoped to trial alternatives. One option was to use a graphical multipoint conferencing package (electronic whiteboard), but a suitable product for the Apple platform could not be found. Peter Lewis' chat server was run on the host computer into which all participants could telnet. Every message sent to the chat server was viewed by all logged onto the server. It was planned to use this medium for some of the interactive sessions and to provide students with a facility for constant interaction and socialisation. Content of the Program The objectives of the program were designed to enable students to develop sophisticated database searching skills, to encourage the students to develop critical evaluation skills of the material researched, to enable the students to understand and perform some basic document delivery processes and to enable the students to institute their own effective current awareness schedule. Databases included those available through Firstsearch and the *Page 91* CD-ROMs mounted on the CQU server, while UnCover was used for document delivery purposes and to establish current awareness profiles. In the 1993 residential school the databases available through Dialog were used. The Dialog service offered command driven access to 450 subject databases and students were required to select relevant databases and search for information. Access proved expensive and there were difficulties ensuring students were familiar with the command language necessary to use the system. Firstsearch offered a menu driven interface to more than 50 databases and since many of these databases met the subject needs of the students they were considered more appropriate. A panel session was held on day one. The Director of the Library, Information and Media Services spoke on the changing role of libraries and access to electronic information, while two researchers described the research process and the use of electronic sources in their daily work. The inclusion of people actively involved in research made the process real and emphasised the relevance and importance of information retrieval in everyday situations. Delivery of the Program Day 1 began with an introduction and overview of the program, a getting to know everyone exercise, and an outline of the protocols for each of the sessions. This session was delivered using CUSeeme and a teleconference enabling all participants to see each other and to interact. *Page 92* Throughout the two days there were five database sessions and each followed the same format - a teleconference which enabled the facilitator to explain the nature, scope, functions and limitations of the database and a demonstration of the database using Timbuktu. After each demonstration students were asked to complete an exercise. Any student who had problems completing an exercise or connecting to the necessary database was asked to telephone the library. The instructor could then connect to their machine, view the screen using Timbuktu and talk the student through the problem. It was also possible for the instructor to take control of the remote machine and to further demonstrate a particular procedure. Some of the exercises were generic, while others allowed the individual to pursue their own topic. At the conclusion of the program students and instructors commented upon the effectiveness of Timbuktu as an instructional and diagnostic device. Since all participants viewed the demonstration on an individual screen, there was none of the problems associated with some people not being able to see. All participants watched the demonstration in complete comfort. During the demonstrations particular lines on the screen could be emphasised by the use of a highlighter, while a pointer drew attention to smaller segments on the screen. This attention to detail is often hard to achieve on a large screen, just as large numbers are difficult to arrange comfortably and to ensure that everyone can see. *Page 93* Workbook The delivery of the program was supplemented by a workbook, which outlined the program, defined exercises, provided space to write answers and make notes for the interactive sessions and included instructions regarding the logon and use of the various databases. The workbook proved to be a useful and effective adjunct to the residential school, as it provided a working document which could be kept for future reference. It was also seen as a valuable backup resource. Had any of the equipment failed, the students could have continued working through the exercises. Copies of the workbook were issued to the students one week prior to the residential school. Creating Synchronous Distance Learning In delivering the program, it was important that all participants, both on and off campus had equal opportunity to participate in input sessions and all instructors were acutely aware of meeting the needs of all students. Particular attention was paid to the development of protocols which ensured that no participant was disadvantaged. For example, it was stated in the introductory session and reiterated in the workbook that during an interactive chat session individuals could not send contributions electronically until requested to do so. The instructors ensured that each individual *Page 94* was asked to send his/her contribution and that no one was given too little or too much time. Instructors also spent considerable time ensuring that all students were actively participating. Students were frequently questioned as to whether or not they could hear the question or the contribution, whether or not they wished to comment on it and if the images on the screen were clear. If necessary, instructors reiterated questions and comments, moved the cameras so that images could be improved and asked on-campus participants to move so that everyone could hear. Instructors were careful to ask all participants questions, so as not to be perceived to be favouring or ignoring one group, and to vary the order of questions so that individuals would not feel that they were always asked last or were being singled out in any way. Close attention was paid to all explanations during the demonstrations. Participants were given plenty of time after each step to ask questions and to interrupt the demonstration with suggestions. In a traditional classroom students can raise their hands and ask for explanations if they don't understand a concept. In a virtual session it is more difficult to attract the attention of the instructor and the instructor must recognise points which may need further clarification and give participants the time and opportunity to interrupt. *Page 95* The aim was to develop one cohesive group where individuals, regardless of geographic location participated, interacted and shared ideas. Evaluation sheets at the conclusion of the workshop indicated that group cohesion was successfully achieved. Developing Interaction Although the transmission of images through CUSeeme was slow and it sometimes gave distorted pictures, it was successful in assisting students to become acquainted with each other. Group cohesion was definitely maximised by being able to put faces to names and voices. After the introductory session all students were comfortable and happy to communicate with each other. Chat facilitated continuous communication between the students and was excellent as a communication device. Instructors were careful not to cut off spontaneous discussion between remote students, even if it wasn't work related. As students became more comfortable with each other and with the technology they were using breaks to socialise via chat. They also used the camera to transmit images of their surroundings and one participant showed some photographs. This socialisation led to collaboration and sharing of ideas during sessions - a quality we had feared may be difficult to engender in an electronically mediated teaching environment. The evaluation sheet questioned students as to how easy or difficult it was to interact with other students and asked them to gauge this level by comparing the virtual residential program *Page 96* to a traditional residential program. One off-campus student commented, "In some way I felt that the interaction was maximised and therefore perhaps greater interaction was achieved than in my experience with 'traditional' residential schools. This may be due to the fact that the virtual school demands a certain structure/formality/commitment to work effectively." Evaluation of the Program All students listed positive comments about the program and many of the suggestions were incorporated into the revised program for 1996. Two students suggested that the residential school be held at the beginning of the semester or before the semester started, while another student advocated several short training sessions throughout the semester. Regarding the content, suggestions included a request for a session on Netscape, instruction on how to search other library catalogues and more searching using the Dialog databases. Responses on the presentation of the content were positive. Students found the demonstration, followed by structured exercises and discussion effective, and since the exercises were scheduled around a break they could have a reasonable amount of time away from the computer screen. All students experienced frustration with the technology at some point during the program. On the second day one of the off-campus students was unable to successfully access CUSeeme and *Page 97* reported feeling very isolated when she could not see what was going on and did not feel part of the group. All participants commented upon Chat and how it proved to be a poor instructional tool. It was planned to use Chat for the interactive sessions. However, when it did not prove conducive to interaction, sharing of information and discussion, teleconferencing was used for most of the sessions. The problems with Chat centred around the fact that only one person could type a response at the one time and if he/she was a slow typist, had a lengthy reply or needed time to think about the response, the remainder of the group were left waiting. Also, whereas, many people tend to explain and reiterate when they present material orally, they tend to condense and abbreviate when the same material is written. Therefore, a lot of description and reasoning was lost. It was difficult to remember the topics presented by all participants. There was no common space for writing (as would be offered with a whiteboard facility and audiographics software), so it was difficult to refer back to contributions. Although there was scope for improvement, all students were enthusiastic about the program. One students commented that the big pluses were not having to travel, organise accommodation, being able to work in his/her own private space, to organise things the way he/she wanted them, yet still being able to interact and learn within a group. *Page 98* Future Programs (BIG plans for the subject) Despite some problems with the 1995 residential school program, all participants felt that the technology offered many benefits in the delivery of distance education programs. It was possible to reduce student feelings of isolation and to provide a facility for discussion and collaborative learning. Students were able to interact with each other and with the lecturer and it was possible to give immediate feedback on specific student enquiries. This year it is hoped that in the delivery of the subject more of these advantages will be enjoyed. The modules have been rewritten and reordered so as to alter the print based focus favoured in previous years. The Library Network manager has been included on the teaching team and will be responsible for the delivery of module 1. Module one will outline the advantages associated with communicating electronically, describe the software which will be used throughout the program and will provide detailed instructions on how to connect to the library. Actually connecting to the library has in the past, been the most difficult objective to achieve (Appleton, 1993) and these difficulties will be investigated early in the semester. It is hoped that the expertise provided by the network manager can reduce these difficulties. Throughout the first fortnight of the semester each student will be contacted to ensure that he/she knows how to use the software and can connect to the library. Solving problems of connectivity on an individual basis early in *Page 99* the semester should reduce student feelings of frustration and enable everyone to participate in the course fully. Workshop one By this stage it is hoped that all technical problems associated with connecting to the Library will be solved and that the technology will become secondary to the objective of creating an appropriate teaching / learning environment. Students will be asked to introduce themselves and be given an overview of the day's program. A staff member will then demonstrate how to use Netscape, allowing time for students to complete an exercise, facilitate a group discussion of the exercise and answer any questions. An understanding of Netscape is seen as imperative, as it will provide access to extensive resources. It will provide an alternative facility for students to access some of the readings and will enable individuals to access the catalogues of others libraries, give students the facility to access the CQU library web page and subsequently access selected databases and enable the students to download software. Since Timbuktu worked well in 1995, it will once again be used to demonstrate the use of databases. It is hoped that a electronic whiteboard facility and audiographics software that operates on the selected platform will be available. Student contributions and strategies can then be stored, referred back to and developed throughout the session. The potential to print out contributions and post reports to individual students would also be appreciated. *Page 100* The first workshop will also include a panel session. Experts in the field of science will be asked to discuss how they use electronic information in their daily work. The panel session will be delivered via a teleconference and CUSeeme and this will enable all participants to see panel members, to ask questions and discuss important issues. Although it hasn't been decided who will participate on this panel, there is scope for involving experts remote from the University. Previously the expense associated with travel, time away from work while travelling and accommodation precluded extensive use of this facility. However, the technology now allows experts to present their material and participate in a session without being physically present. Although the delivery of the content is perceived as important, it is vital that the group get to know each other and that there is sufficient time and incentive to establish rapport between all participants and lay the foundations for a semester of interaction and collaborative learning. There will be another workshop in September. In the interim students should correspond with each, share ideas and discuss topics via electronic mail. Instructors will also post suggestions and comments to students electronically and hopefully break down any inhibitions associated with group collaboration via an electronic medium. *Page 101* Workshop two This workshop will be held in week 10 and will concentrate upon developing sophisticated database searching techniques and introducing document delivery systems and current awareness options. By week 10 students will have sufficiently progressed through their course to understand the nature and scope of the various databases. They will have conducted some preliminary searches and be ready to examine and improve their search strategies. They should also have enough experience to comment upon the techniques of other students and discuss issues in a collaborative and progressive manner. Having had time to search several databases, retrieve and evaluate abstracts, it is logical that document delivery and current awareness options are introduced at this stage. The primary focus of this workshop will be discussion of issues related to the retrieval of information rather than manipulation of software. That is, the medium should be totally transparent. Study Materials Although the unit is still largely print based, the coordinators are looking at appropriate methods of electronic enhancement. It is assumed that the unit will emerge as a blend of material converted from traditional courses and new and different approaches that are specific to the computer environment. (Rowlett, 1996) Sections which incorporate instructions, provide *Page 102* extensive background reading, outline minute detail or will be used as reference tool throughout the course will be supplied in print. The course also incorporates a lot of areas, which are best suited to a handson method of instruction. Wherever possible these components will be identified, demonstrated during a workshop and students given the opportunity to develop their skills through practical exercises and discussion with peers. In 1994, the National Library of Medicine and the Health Sciences Communications Association offered an experimental, online, virtual workshop that used several Internet information services to offer a learning experience entirely online. This workshop was designed without constraints on time, and in a way that let participants access multiple online information resources at their own pace and in any order. (Locatis, 1995) The CQU subject will probably remain instructor centred, but many of the ideas for generating student involvement via the World Wide Web could be incorporated. For example, students could be asked to use hypertext markup language to produce work which could be viewed and critiqued by other students. Certainly, the World Wide Web will open new avenues for sharing and group collaboration. Conclusion The results of the virtual residential workshop indicate that students do want to learn by collaborating and interacting with peers, and would prefer to persevere with technology that is not *Page 103* yet perfect in an effort to discuss topics and participate in tutorials. It was also demonstrated that while the hardware and software may not be invisible, they are not so distracting that computer manipulation became the primary focus of the course and overshadowed the content. Although the technology is still being developed, it has the potential to change the way in which distance education is delivered and to reduce many of the problems of isolation and frustration experienced by some remote students. References 1. Appleton, M. (chief investigator). 1993. Library Services for remote postgraduate distance education students. A report to DEET. Rockhampton:UCQ Library. 2. Appleton, M. 1995. Compilation of Virtual Residential Workshop Evaluation Questionnaires. Central Queensland University. Rockhampton: Central Queensland University. 3. Division of Library, Information and Media Services.1995. Virtual Residential School Project Report, Central Queensland University. Rockhampton:Central Queensland University. 4. Locatis, Craig, Keven Siegert, and Karen Adsit. 1995. "The NLM/HeSCA Virtual Workshop Experiment", MC Journal: The Journal of Academic Media Librarianship 3(2):32-43. *Page 104* 5. Rowlett, Douglas. 1996. "Making the break : Moving from the classroom to cyberspace via distance education", Teaching in the Community Colleges 1(2). 6. Rural, Social and Economic Research Centre. 1995. Student experiences of distance education at Central Queensland University. Rockhampton:Central Queensland University. 7. Virtual Summer School [Report] Milton Keynes, Open University, 1994. [http://hcrl.open.ac.uk/virtualsummer.html] 8. Wilson, G. 1995. Vision 97 Statement. Central Queensland University. Rockhampton:Central Queensland University. Debbie Orr is Off-Campus Services Librarian at Central Queensland University. Trish Andrews is Flexible Learning Advisor at Central Queensland University. Margaret Appleton is Associate Librarian-User Services at Central Queensland University. MC Journal: The Journal of Academic Media Librarianship ISSN 1069-6792 v.4#1, Summer 1996 July 1996 This article copyright (c) by Debbie Orr, Trish Andrews, and Margaret Appleton. All Rights Reserved. All commercial use requires permission of the author and the editors of this journal. *Page 105*