Tag Archives: Collaborations

Lit Review: Lights, Camera, Action: Videoconferencing in Kindergarten

Yost, N. (2001). Lights, Camera, Action: Videoconferencing in Kindergarten. Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference.

Author: Nancy Yost
Title of paper: Lights, Camera, Action: Videoconferencing in Kindergarten.
Publication year: 2001
Database source: ERIC (at the end of the PDF)
Name of journal: n/a
My Codes: VCProjects

Main Point: Daily desktop videoconferencing between two kindergarten classes resulted in greater weather understanding for students, as well as greater understanding on time, distance, and understanding other children.

Method: A description of a project, not a research study.

Desktop videoconferencing was used to connect two kindergarten classes, one in Pennsylvania, and one in Illinois. The classes reported local weather to each other daily for a six week period. They would share the weather and then visit for a while. Sometimes they asked questions of the other class for their daily graph. Each daily VC was 10-20 minutes long, in a three hour half day kindergarten.

Other Internet activities were: the “meteorologist” classroom job included checking out a weather cam of personal choice, visiting a local TV station to learn about weather reporting, and practiced weather reporting within the classroom. I linked the site they used, which still exists, but most of the links are broken.

Findings:
The author felt that the learning that came from the questions and understanding the other children was worth the time committed to the daily videoconference. The project focusing on weather grew to be an interdisciplinary project in several curriculum areas.

It’s interesting that the last two studies I’ve read are from university laboratory schools. I wonder if there is a difference between students in university lab schools and “regular kids”.

The planning started with a common long term curriculum within the classroom: weather reporting. It’s important to start with existing curriculum.

Author/Audience: The author was from a university, and was presenting this paper to an educational technology audience. The lessons were used as a demonstration for preservice teachers as well.

Relevance: This is K-12 project that fits my definition of curriculum videoconferencing. Right on target.

Lit Review: Distance learning among Mexican and Texan children.

Cifuentes, L., & Murphy, K. (1999). Distance learning among Mexican and Texan children. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 94-102.

Authors: Lauren Cifuentes and Karen L. Murphy
Title of article: Distance learning among Mexican and Texan children
Publication year: 1999
Database source: Wilson Select Plus. Also available through SpringerLink.
Name of journal: Educational Technology Research and Development
My Codes: VCProjects

Main Point: While students may not understand a distant culture or distant students, with well designed collaborative videoconference activities over a sustained amount of time, shared understanding can be gained.

Background:
The authors reference Moffett (1994) to emphasize that students need to develop relationships with people from diverse backgrounds in order to become more tolerant and respectful citizens. They reference Cummins & Sayers (1995) to suggest that collaborative learning has the potential to transform students’ perspective “from parochial to global.” A peek at the description of Cummins & Sayers’ book on Amazon.com sounds very intriguing. I wonder if their vision from 1995 holds up in 2007 with the advent of H.323 videoconferencing and Web 2.0.

Methods:
This was a qualitative study that used content analysis and observations.

Two classes in Mexico City connected with two classes in College Station, Texas over a whole school year. Now that’s an extended collaborative project! Interestingly, the “activities were designed in response to Postman’s (1995) narratives that learners should share in order to achieve the diesred ends of education” including “stewardship of Earth, religion, democracy, diversity, and language.”PDF p. 2. The classes met mostly with videoconferencing, but occasionally via email. The student collaborative experiences were designed for “social construction of meaning (PDF p. 2).

First the two classes received two hour writing workshops, and students learned about poetry written about other places. Then the students wrote an “I am” poem describing what it might be like to live in the other country (Mexican students about the US; US students about Mexico).

Data collected included the poems, the lesson plans, and researcher observations and questioning during the lessons. Content analysis was conducted on the students’ poems.

Findings:
PDF p. 6 Research question 1: “What impressions did the students have of each other?”

The Mexican students had moderate-to-high levels of knowledge about the United States, and their images were mostly positive. The Texan students were “unable to paint a vivid picture of Mexico”. Only a little over half of of the poems were completely positive. The Texan students used only four of the six likely sources of information that the Mexican students used. Most of the Mexican students “had enough experience with U.S. culture to accurately portray it in poetry”, but the Texan students had little firsthand knowledge, so they wrote “about their own culture, created an imaginary place, or referred to stereotypes.” p. 6. The authors suggest that this discrepancy indicates a need for teacher Texan children about their neighbors.

p. 6 Research question 2: “What activities brought children of Mexican and Texan cultures together successfully to learn with, about, and from each other?”

The students wrote the poem, as well as a story about the day in the life of a fourth grader in the other country so that they could see how much they had to learn throughout the year. They also created documents about themselves and exchanged these via a messenger who traveled back and forth for unrelated business.

The book I Felt Like I Was From Another Planet was used to think of ideas. They compared table manners across cultures.

They met two times to meet each other, a third time to learn about the interpretive nature of history focused on the Alamo, a fourth time to read diaries, reenactments and share comparative essays about the Alamo, a fifth to share folk tales and folk songs, and finally to share murals of their hometowns. Writing activities were included for each of these videoconferences. Each videoconference also had “a flood of questioning” as they learned how they were similar and different. This study is an excellent example of a collaborative project design and the quality learning experiences that accompanied each videoconference.

p. 8. The differences among the students may be in part related to their socio-economic status. The Mexican students attended an exclusive private school, whereas the Texan students attended public school. The Mexican students had many opportunities for travel, while the Texas students had not.

Author/Audience: At the time of writing, the authors were both college instructors of educational technology. The article is written for those interested in distance education and educational technology.

Questions/Thoughts:

p. 2. The authors used Laughon’s (1998) four phases of online telecommunications projects: planning, advertising & registration, coordinating/moderating, and evaluation. I do think that we need to learn the lessons from Internet and email based projects as we develop and implement our videoconferencing projects.
Full reference: Laughon, S. (1998). Designing effective telecommunications projects. In Z. L. Berge & M. P. Collins (Eds.), Wired together: The online classroom in K-12, Vol. I: Perspectives and instructional design, (pp. 175-183). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton. This may warrant further instruction. Is anyone publishing these kinds of books now? Or did internet projects go away with the onset of Web 2.0?

PDF p. 4. “All videoconferences involved preconferencing, conferencing, and post conferencing activities for the students.” See a pattern emerging? Preparation is key! Even though the study doesn’t focus on that, several of these so far include a strong preparation component to the videoconference.

PDF p. 4 “Understanding the strong Mexican accent via videoconference technology required great concentration on the part of the Texan fourth-graders.” Have you noticed this with international VCs? Sometimes it’s very hard for the students to understand each other. We need to remember that when planning activities.

p. 5 The classes learned about their ancestries to find how many of them had parents born in other countries. They shared a self-collage in the first videoconference where they met each other. They said, “They are the same as us!” Sound familiar?

The authors created a model called “Cultural Connections.” It may be worth spending more time on this model and integrating it into my work.

The authors really didn’t focus on the effects of the technology or even describe what type of videoconferencing was used. The focus was on what they learned and how their perceptions changed throughout the year. Nevertheless, the experiences documented are a great model for videoconference collaborative projects, especially the international ones.

Lit Review: Videoconferencing as access to spoken French.

Kinginger, C. (1999). Videoconferencing as access to spoken French. Canadian Modern Language Review, 55(4), 468-489.

Also published as: Kinginger, C. (1998). Videoconferencing as access to spoken French. Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 502-513.

Author: Celeste Kinginger
Title of Article: Videoconferencing as access to spoken French
Publication year: 1999
Database source: JSTOR
Name of journal: Canadian Modern Language Review
My Codes: VCProjects

Main Point: This study is of a classroom interaction between language learners in the U.S. and France via a videoconference. The language used in the videoconference was mostly beyond the learners’ ability, taking them outsite the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). By watching a tape of the interaction, the students were able to learn more and return to their ZPD. This is a really interesting lesson. I can think of a couple international language interactions we’ve had that have been full of laughter and nervousness as described in this article. Taping the interaction is a great idea of a way to increase the benefit from the time spent with the native speakers. Of course permission should be acquired before taping kids!

It’s interesting that there is a mismatch between the instruction of written language – students are taught to speak the written “correct” language – and the actual spoken language in the country. This would partially explain why the interaction was so difficult for the students. Something to consider when planning an interaction based on language! The article set up this problem with a discussion of the issues and problems with teaching written “purified” French and spoken French in it’s many forms.

Author/Audience: The author is writing for instructors of French, so some of the article is in French.

Theoretical Framework: Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)

Definitions …”site-independent learning can also be understood as two-way interaction across distance, for mutual benefit. In this model, telecommunications technology is a tool for providing access to members of a speech community whose language is the object of study.” p.1 in the PDF (doesn’t match the journal page numbers). Site independent learning is used as a term to explain the use of videoconferencing for a collaborative project / learning experience.

Methods:
This qualitative study examined selected interactions in a videoconference.

The actual learning experiences in this article are much better described than the Shaklee study. Students reviewed Hollywood remakes of French films, children’s literature, and television series. Both classes made web pages to publish their work. The students were assigned an email partner. The videoconferences consisted of two 60 minute sessions. The two teachers had worked collaboratively extensively for two years before the actual collaboration. Some interesting lessons here: notice the extensive “wrap around” experiences that accompany the videoconference. The use of asynchronous communication (email) extends the videoconference and helps work around the time zones. Notice also how this project started – they knew each other already!

Subjects: It’s not totally clear on the age/level of the students, but I believe both classes were university level – the American students were in the 5th semester or above at a regional state university, and the French students had “completed their Baccalauréat” (PDF p. 4).
The videoconference was over ISD lines at 256K and cost $332 for an hour. It sounds like they also had an echo to deal with as well as the delay. The instructors already knew that “pause length is a significant factor in the success or failure of intercultural communication.” PDF p. 4 with reference to Scollon. Interesting that this is an issue already with face to face intercultural communication. It’s exaggerated then in videoconferencing. We all have experienced how that pause after a question is so critical. Wait time! To work around this, they planned a structured interaction with prepared questions.

This study looks at the second of the two videoconferences, and only the French portion. The other half was in English because the French class was learning English. I think this model is critical for native speaker language exchanges. There has to be a give and take so that both classes get to try out the language they are learning.

The American students had prepared their questions and read them off of note cards. They had 11 questions in 30 minutes. The students already knew each other because of their email partners. So in some of the Q&A interactions, the students were paired one on one for the interaction while the others watched. This is an interesting way to organize it too. It would alleviate some of the confusion that comes when a language learner asks a question of a class of native speakers and they all answer at once, making it hard for the language learner to understand the answer.

The actual transcript of the interaction is included, and in the second one, one can see that the language learner was really struggling. The author suggests that this was due to the anxiety and stressful situation, and they may not have had enough experience with spoken French. As I’m reading this, I’m wondering if any of this happens with French classes that participate in the art museum programs offered in French.

After the class, the students watched the tape. And the student who was asked more questions in French and struggled to answer, took the tape home and emailed the other student four times in debriefing the interaction. This is another great way to help students get past the frustration of the real-time pressure of the spoken language and still learn from the experience.

The author suggests (PDF p. 9) that another reason the students struggled so much was that they “live in what may be termed an ‘acquisition poor’ environment for acquiring competence in spoken French.” Most of the students didn’t have access to native speakers. This highlights another reason to use videoconferencing to access native speakers (as hard as that is to do!). However it seems clear that the instructors involved should at least read this article to assist in the planning of the videoconference.

p. 10 “It may be legitimate to suggest that the videoconference took place in a language to which the learners had ever before been exposed, of the existence of which they had been mainly unaware.” This is a serious situation; one to be considered before planning an interaction with native speakers.

While the American French students were able to participate minimally during the videoconference, they now had a tape of the interaction. They watched them again and again in class until everyone understood the features of spoken French used in the interaction.

While the students had trouble, they all appreciated the experience. They reported learning so much from it, and wished it could have happened more often in their class. Now that we have IP connections, the cost of this type of interaction is gone. There is still the difficulty of finding a partner class and negotiating the time schedules.

Findings/Conclusions:
Three problems were illustrated in this project: the language classroom anxiety induced by the stress of the videoconferencing, the unclear status of spoken language in American French instruction, and the need to make a place for language awareness in the curriculum.

The spoken language is especially a problem with French.

Telecommunications will force the profession to address the issues of spoken French.

Instructors should consider the students’ ZPD when planning a similar videoconference.

Instruction in languages may need to include a more rich explanation of foreign languages, accounting for “social and situational variation.” (PDF p. 11).

Cross References:
The Becta lit review says: Videoconferencing “provides enhanced opportunities for language students to interact
with native speakers” (Kinginger 1998). p. 2

The Alberta lit review says: videoconferencing “has been expensive – the cost of videoconferencing over telephone lines is equivalent to the cost of six long distance calls (per site) for the duration of the event.” p. 5

Thoughts
There are some important lessons in this study on preparation and planning for a videoconference. The value of the recorded interaction is emphasized. The study also shows how to make the best of a videoconference that doesn’t quite turn out the way you might have thought it would.

Lit Review: The use of videoconferencing techniques which support constructivism in K–12 education

Sweeney, Marilyn Ann. (2007). The use of videoconferencing techniques which support constructivism in K–12 education. Ed.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts Lowell, United States — Massachusetts. Retrieved September 23, 2007, from ProQuest Digital Dissertations database. (Publication No. AAT 3257352).

Author: Marilyn Ann Sweeney.
Title of article: The use of videoconferencing techniques which support constructivism in K–12 education.
Publication year: 2007
Database source: ProQuest Dissertation Abstracts.
Name of journal: n/a
My Codes: VCContentProviders, VCProjects, VCImplementation.
Main point of the dissertation: Main research question: Is there a relationship between K-12 educator preference for constructivist learning theory and their use of videoconferencing to support constructivism in their videoconferencing lessons? The study looked at four constructivism constructs: prior knowledge, mental models, interaction, and student directed active learning and how those constructs are applied in videoconferencing.

Methods. A survey was used that was built on three other research studies: a survey by Hayden (1999) to find links between constructivism and videoconferencing, a survey by Ravitz, Becker and Wong (2000) to see if distance learning educators used constructivism, and a constructivism preference tool by Taylor and Fraser (1991).

p.23 gives a great rationale for a nationwide sample and using a listserv to administer the survey. Videoconferencing is an emerging technology so a nationwide sample is logical to get more respondents. Also these educators are already using technology, so a listserv is a good way to get to them.

Data analysis techniques included using Cronbach’s alpha to determine the reliability of the two survey sections. Correlation, linear regression, and ANOVA were used to analyze the videoconferencing techniques and constructivism preferences.

Thoughts on the Sample. I remember this survey coming across the listservs. It’s interesting that only 63 educators responded to the survey. I think it’s because so many on the VC listservs aren’t classroom teachers – they are media specialists and tech coordinators – those responsible for videoconferencing. I don’t remember if I finished filling it out or not, but I remember looking at it and thinking that the questions didn’t apply to me because I wasn’t teaching. I wonder how many other coordinators did the same. How many of us forwarded the survey to the teachers we support? I can’t remember if I did or not, but there may have been other ways to get a higher sample of actual classroom teachers.

Further research could include replicating this study in a smaller geographical area but with more teachers. For example, last year we had over 700 videoconferences in our service area. I would guess that’s at least 300 teachers who participated in videoconferences. I can think of a few other educational service agencies who have a lot of teachers using VC and could help with getting more teachers to fill out the survey.

It’s interesting also (p. 71) that half of the respondents had done 20 or more videoconferences. They must have been more willing or more likely to fill out the survey. I can think of many teachers in my area who have only done 1-5 VCs.

Survey Development
How the survey was developed. A chart on pages 61-62 show the correlation between the survey question, the constructivist construct (prior knowledge, etc.), the major theorist and the researcher. These survey questions would be great tools to think about for every videoconference as part of the evaluation. For example:

  • Was the videoconference preceded by classroom work on the topic?
  • Have the students completed readings about the topic prior to the videoconference?
  • Did the students take notes or fill in an activity sheet during the videoconference?
  • Did the students write about what they learned in the videoconference?

These are all great questions. Ones we should think about more as we design and evaluate our participation in videoconferences. I guess also these vibe with me because I’m a constructivist at heart.

Findings.
“The key finding of this study is that the use of videoconferencing techniques has a positive relationship to the educator’s preference for constructivism. The greater the preference for constructivism in their classroom, the more frequent is the use of videoconferencing techniques, which support constructivism.” The higher the constructivism preferences of the educator, the more videoconferencing techniques they used. (β=.536, n=39, p<.001) p. 106. This is really interesting!! How many times have you heard coordinators ask – how do we get teachers to use VC more? Maybe some of them don’t see the connection between their teaching preferences and goals and the results that can be achieved with a videoconference? I don’t think that just telling them they can connect with NASA or the Columbus Zoo will cut it for training. Maybe this is why the immersive constructivist learning environment created by Jazz is so powerful. I wonder if it’s powerful enough to change opinions about constructivist learning? A before and after survey of beliefs about constructivism and VC would be interesting, especially if coupled with a comparison of use of VC before and after Jazz.

93% of the respondents precede their videoconferences with work on the topic. p. 84 We know that preparation ahead of time is critical to the success of the VC, so this fits well with our experiences.

I wish that interactivity were more defined. 81% of respondents give students the opportunity to ask their own questions of the remote end. p. 84. But what else is interactivity? The MysteryQuest format is highly interactive as the students have to engage with each other’s content. Simulation programs such as the Challenger Learning Center e-Missions are also interactive at a higher level than just Q&A. Roxanne has been exploring this with her Holiday Extravaganza videoconferences. I guess another study would be to really delve into the definitions and forms of interactivity. Many want to know other ways to increase interactivity besides such asking questions.

The respondents preferred constructivist teaching strategies that include students talking with other students about how to solve problems (98%) and teaching interesting things about the world outside of the school (91%). p. 90. What would be even more interesting is to give this survey to all the teachers in 2 or 3 schools. It would be interesting to see if the teachers who aren’t using videoconferencing score lower on these items.

Another interesting finding is that fewer respondents involved students in the planning for the videoconference even though they preferred that in the constructivist section of the survey. Could it be because they don’t know how to involve students in planning a VC? or that the VCs they are participating in actually don’t have room for students to plan the VC? think of content provider programs. Most of them don’t have too much room for student planning other than bringing their own questions. Whereas projects such as Monster Match, Holiday Extravaganza, and Read Around the Planet have a high potential for teachers to involve students in planning for the VC. If teachers choose, students can brainstorm the activities and presentations to share with the partner class.

Coordination/Implementation
“54% of the respondents reported being self-taught which suggests on-site support could supplement the other avenues.” p. iii. Hmm. Is this another evidence of the need for a school level videoconference coordinator? Someone IN the building to assist teachers in using VC in their curriculum?

Lit Review
One way to organize a literature review is by history of videoconferencing. This is how Sweeney organized her lit review.

Definitions
Definitions included are videoconferencing, ISDN, IP, Interactive TV, distance education, e-learning and listserv. (p.20).

I find it interesting that Sweeney uses the word “conduct” to describe teachers who participate in videoconferences: “. When you participate in a videoconference with a content provider, do you consider yourself as “conducting” the videoconference, or do you think the content provider is conducting it?

Questions/Wonderments I Have

  • I need to think more about Vygotsky’s concept of social constructivism and how it is evidenced in the various videoconferences I’m involved in – ASK and MysteryQuest for example.
  • I really need to think about how we’ve implemented social constructivism in the Jazz class.

This was a really interesting dissertation and is worth a skim through if you can find some time to access it!

Which collaboration site should I use?

In the last few weeks I’ve facilitated several collaborative VC projects, worked on a few, and taught a few workshops on videoconferencing projects. It’s made me think about projects and what it takes to make them happen. I’ve been thinking about how to find collaborative partners, and how those relationships evolve. Here are a few partner sites, tools, and strategies I use.

Alberta, Canada
When I want to collaborate with someone in Alberta, I use the VCAlberta social network, or email Alberta friends I’ve collected from Read Around the Planet, my online classes PICC & K2K, and the Alberta summer conferences such as Elevate 2008. I’m also learning about the possibilities with the 2Learn.ca site.

Ontario, Canada
When I want to collaborate with someone in Ontario, I use the Interactive Classroom site, or email Ontario VC friends I’ve collected from various experiences.

England, Scotland, Wales in the United Kingdom
UK connection are great collaborations. The time change is manageable for US EST, and the cultural difference is enough to make the connection really fun as well as curriculum related. There are three sites I use for UK partners: Collaborations Around the Planet, Global Leap, and Janet Collaborate.

Other international partners
For connecting to other countries, I’ve found that the Megaconference and Megaconference Jr. listservs are the best source for a potential international parter. You get on the Megaconference listserv by participating in the event.

Internet2 / International / University
If you want an Internet2 partner, international partners, or university level partners, another collaboration site to check out is the Internet2 K20 Initiative Muse site just released this fall.

Needing a partner fast
When I need a partner really quickly for a project within a few weeks, I send a note to the K12 IVC listserv. Usually I can fill a project within a couple hours. Partners responding are almost always US schools.

Needing lots of partners
For projects that I need lots of partners (like MysteryQuest), I post my request on several sites: Collaboration Collage, K12 IVC listserv, Megaconference Jr, and sometimes on the CILC Collaboration Center if I can wait for the announcement to go out on the next Monday.

Sustained Collaborations
There are also scenarios with sustained collaborations where I use “my collection” of videoconferencing friends. I have a folder in my email for all the states, provinces and countries where I know someone with VC. I also have a few good buddies like Arnie and Roxanne and others! who can help me get partners in a pinch. Some of those partnerships, especially those with Arnie & Roxanne, mean long term sustained shared collaborative projects and team facilitated events. Now that CAPspace is up and running, I’m starting to turn there when I need a phone number or email for a VC friend.

What are the strategies and tools that you use for finding collaborative partners?

International Eco-Conversations: Carbon Emissions

Last week we had five sessions over two days of our Eco-Conversations project. Dowagiac Middle School connected to five different schools to discuss carbon emissions.  Here are some notes I wrote during the sessions:

The presentation from Westcliff High School for Girls included a play on “The Weakest Link”. Five students were interviewed about how they got to school. After their carbon footprints were revealed, the student with the highest carbon footprint was pronounced “the weakest link. Goodbye!” Their students also interviewed our students as part of a school energy use survey.

The Simon Langton Grammar School for Boys is one of the only schools in their area to receive a “green flag” status for schools in their area. We learned a lot about what they are doing for the environment in their school and community. This connection we had trouble with the audio. At the end, they couldn’t hear us, but we could hear them. Some students ran quickly to get a whiteboard and they improvised. It still worked out very well. Even in the Q&A section, students were focused on the environment issues. They asked questions such as, Do you have ethanol for your cars? How far do you drive to school? Do you have all big cars in America or is that just a British myth?

Next we connected to Rosslyn Jr. High, in Edmonton Alberta. Students asked questions like, What is your local government doing to reduce carbon emissions? And, what is the cost of gas in your area?

St. Peters Church of England School. This group is working on putting a recycling plan in place in the school. As it happens, they have a group called the Global Action Plan coming to their school for a waste audit the day of the conference. Their presentation included the work they are doing on waste products and also about the waste audit. There are about 10 students in the EcoGroup school club.

When talking to the coordinators and technicians, we learned that there are over 200 schools in the UK who want to do projects like this. I think there is a big untapped market for collaborative projects in the UK. We just need to figure out how to find each other. I believe that sites like Collaborations Around the Planet, Global Leap, and Janet Collaborate are important tools for finding collaborative partners in the UK. The trick is, if at all possible, figure out the time zone difference for your desired connection ahead of time so you can ask for reasonable timed connections of your potential partners. When we emailed for partners, I listed both times, EST & UK.

One issue with this project was the preparation for the presentations. I did hear from concern about the amount of preparation work. I hear this a lot from our middle schools, and wish we could design more projects that are easier to implement for tight curriculum schedules for middle and high school students. However I did receive this reaction from the lead teacher for the project:

My students absolutely LOVED IT. You know they really liked it when they are telling other teachers and students about it!!! Talking to another country is by far the best VC out there!! When you have students like those here in Dowagiac who have maybe been as far away as Detroit or Chicago (many not that far) they are fascinated with the accents, language usage…….very cool, I would talk to another country any time it was available!

Finally, thanks to Google Alerts, I ran across this great write-up from the  Dowagiac Daily News.

A great experience for one of our RUS grant schools, showing the power of videoconferencing in rural schools.

Singing with Rudolph

07-12-05rudolph.jpgWe’re lucky enough to have four classes from Mars Elementary included in Region 12’s Holiday Extravaganza, Singing with Rudolph program yesterday and today. They are all kindergarten classes and they loved it!

Rudolph starts out asking the kids to show their antlers and to laugh like a reindeer. This breaks the VC ice and gets the kids moving & interacting. Rudolph sings songs like Santa Claus is Coming to Town, and Jingle Bells. Rudolph also asks the students some questions such as: What do elves learn in school? The elf-abet! This is a short but excellent example of getting the students to interact from the very beginning of the session. They answer questions, do motions, sing, and participate the whole way through!

I grabbed a picture of “Rudolph” from Roxanne’s blog. This way you can see how it’s done. “Rudolph” also has his own band – check it out!

This is a fun and easy program that introduces kids and teachers to videoconferencing in a low-key format. It hooks them on VC to try other programs. Thank you to Shane & Roxanne for sharing this program with us!

Math Mania Reflection

Here’s another reflection from Deb Kraska, Eagle Lake Elementary, teacher/videoconference coordinator at another of my high-use videoconference schools. Deb just finished the Kid2Kid Videoconference Connections class. This is her reflection on how her Math Mania project went. (Actually it’s on one of them; she did three of these!) I think it’s very important to understand the thinking process teachers go through as they prepare and plan a videoconference. This knowledge and understanding helps us support our teachers more effectively.

After figuring out that my connecting school couldn’t dial my extension and I couldn’t get through to their IP address, we were able to connect through the bridge. Everything went well connecting on Friday. We used the document camera to show our riddles. They read theirs to us. It would have been helpful if they would have written their riddles on a poster. It worked out well, they just read them a few times to us. We exchanged riddles back and forth for about 45 minutes.
Notice how projects that are fairly content dependent (think MysteryQuest and this program) really need a visual to back up the presentation. So when planning projects, consider if the content needs to be reinforced with a visual. In this particular session, the partner school was so new to VC. Just making the connection was an accomplishment. But nudging them a bit further to prepare a visual would have been helpful as Deb indicated.

I evaluated my student learning by monitoring their participation during the videoconference. The student had to solve the problems on notebook paper and then turned it in. After the videoconference we discussed as a class what we would do differently next time. We also like being able to hear the other class solving their problems. I felt that was a major part of the learning process. The other class had used dry erase boards, my class liked that idea. For the next videoconference we are going to redo a few of the problems that need to be more challenging.
How do you evaluate your videoconference experiences and student learning?

I thought everything went well for this VC. I was happy with my student’s problems. I was unsure if the difficulty level was going to match up with the other class. It turned out to be a good match for both classes.
Deb’s concern about the difficulty level or the match between the classes is a common concern that we rarely think about when planning these projects. It’s hard to tell this ahead of time. I can’t think of a good way to know this ahead of time other than talking to the teacher. Sometimes that doesn’t let you know either. On the other sometimes really great learning happens with an unevenly matched (age or grade) connection. It does require flexible and creative thinking. Another one of those hidden challenges that we need to remember when planning collaborative projects.

Using the document camera went well. Freezing the picture whenever I wanted to move it was very helpful in keeping the picture clear. I also learned how to use the picture in picture button to view the other class and the document camera at same time.
Freezing the picture is a feature on the new Lumens Digital Visualizer installed at our 35 RUS grant schools. A Freeze button allows you to freeze the image, move the papers for the next visual, then unfreeze. This way none of that annoying transition movement is sent across the videoconference.

Integrating VC into the curriculum was much easier than I was initially making it. This was an easy way to help the students work on their problem solving skills and writing skills.
Yeah!! The simple VCs are the ones that really break the ice for teachers and get them started on their videoconferencing journey!

Mass Collaborations between Two Schools

This afternoon I had a chat with one of my videoconference coordinators, Linda Johnson, coordinator for Mars Elementary, Berrien Springs. Mars is a K-2 building with 25 teachers. Last year was their first year with videoconferencing, and they did 44 videoconferences. This year they already have 26 programs scheduled.

A few weeks ago I sent a collaboration request from a school in Ontario to Linda. The Ontario school originally wanted to do one exchange, but now they have 10 exchanges in the process of scheduling. Here’s the interesting part: instead of the two videoconference coordinators hashing it out, Linda gave her teachers their Ontario partner’s email address. The teachers are negotiating their times & submitting several potential times to the coordinator to finalize the schedule after checking the district’s VC calendar.

As we all know, scheduling is the bane of videoconferencing. When we first started videoconferencing, I did the scheduling for all of our schools. This year is the first year I’ve started training my videoconference coordinators to do their own scheduling. And now Linda is sharing some of that scheduling labor with her teachers. It seems evident that the way to sustain growth is to keep training the next level down to create more independence in scheduling & planning collaborations.

Do you know any other tips for several collaborative projects between the same two schools?

Thanksgiving Exchange

07-11-19thanks.jpgThis morning Mars Elementary (K) is connected to Riesel Elementary (2nd grade), TX for a Thanksgiving exchange. This project is a result of the Mini-Jazz training that Roxanne and I offered together in September.

After introductions, the students shared turkey artwork and read several things they were thankful for (pets, family, etc.). One thing that worked well in this exchange was the format: each class had 3 students share; then the other class had 3 students share. This made it easier for short attention spans!

Next the students named different things they would be eating for Thanksgiving.

thanksgiving.jpgAll good collaborative projects include a map lesson. The Riesel kids were sitting on a carpet that was a map of the world. This started a discussion of where each class was located and how similar they were.

This quick 15 minute exchange was simple and easy for both classes involved. Students practiced reading, speaking, and listening. Great job, teachers!