Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
The following features of VC make it a unique
and beneficial conduit for CoPs:
experiences) easily through this virtual
medium.
The live atmosphere is more relaxing than
•
•
high-resolution video and audio that can
an audio or text-only setting, and encour-
ages more conversation and better prob-
lem-solving (Sallnas, 2005).
Live demonstrations, such as new prod-
accommodate groups of people
real-time interaction without high trans-
•
portation costs
multi-location access
•
•
ucts introduced by vendors, can simplify
instructions, and questions can be handled
immediately.
Documents and realia can be shared more
•
ability to record sessions
•
ability to incorporate external resources:
computer, document stand, whiteboard,
telephone link, dataconferencing link.
•
easily.
Quick set-up time enables groups to share
•
the Potential of video Conferencing
topics of immediate, timely interest
Multiple sites can exchange the same infor-
•
On the whole, VCs offer a more personal, relational
online learning environment for meaningful group
interaction than other computer-mediated or audio
medium. This form of communication also paves
the way for TLs to work with their site teachers
and administrators to organize VC collaboration
opportunities with grade levels and departments
outside their district or state. Typically, video
conferencing has been used by librarians within
large school districts, library consortia, and profes-
sional organizations. Recently, organizations are
starting to talk with each other via video confer-
encing; when the American Library Association
conference overlapped the National Educational
Computing Conference, TLs from both organiza-
tions connected with each other virtually using a
tabletop video set-up.
Video conferencing has several benefits that
together uniquely facilitate CoPs:
mation simultaneously, optimizing consis-
tent messages (Higgs-Horwell & Schwelik,
2007; Townes-Young & Ewing, 2005).
Video conferencing also has drawbacks.
Certainly, it works only as well as the equip-
ment and the connectivity allow it to. Bandwidth
capacity and workload (i.e., simultaneous use)
are particularly important considerations, even
with compressed video. Poorly managed video
conferencing sessions can also lead to disap-
pointing results. In their investigation of virtual
teams, Anderson, McEwan and Carletta (2007)
and Chakraborty and Victor (2004) noted these
video conferencing issues:
•
Remote sites tend to take on an us-them at-
titude, wherein each group tends to think
more positively about themselves and
downplays the remote groups.
Talk is more task-oriented / less social, and
•
Participants feel included because they can
•
experience everyone, including body lan-
guage. Current technology provides high-
resolution images with little if any time de-
lay for voice synchronization, so that subtle
expressions can be decoded accurately.
Groups can access and consult with out-
bodies are more confined than in face-to-
face meetings.
The site which has the main event coordi-
•
nator has higher status; other sites may feel
less involved or at a disadvantage. Without
a strong supervisor, the remote group may
disengage. If two sites share the coordi-
nation, the lead people have to negotiate
•
side experts in their own environments (fa-
cilitating demonstrations and “field trip”
Search WWH ::
Custom Search