8ICT ResearchBecta

What the research saysabout video conferencingin teaching and learningThis report is based on an analysis of research into the usemade of video conferencing and its impact on teaching andlearning. It summarises the key findings and suggests resourcesfor further reading.

Video conferencing allows people in different locations to see and talk toeach other. It may also support the electronic exchange of files, sharing ofcomputer applications and co-working. Distinctions are becoming blurredby technological developments, but three types of video conferencingsystem exist:

● desktop units

● roll-abouts

● room systems.

Desktop video conferencing involves each individual using a computer, withone on-screen window for each site. A roll-about system stores all theequipment required in a wheeled cabinet. A room system includes the sameequipment, but housed in a permanent installation.

There are three ways of making the connections required for a sessionto take place:

● over the internet, using either an analogue or digital telephone line

● across a network within an institution

● using dedicated cables, radio waves or microwaves.

The quality of sound and vision during a video conference will deteriorate ifthe speed of the connection becomes too slow. Internet connections involvevarying bandwidths and consequently are unreliable for teaching purposes.Long-distance video conferencing usually uses an integrated services digitalnetwork (ISDN) connection over digital phone lines.

To judge whether video conferencing has the potential to enhance teachingand learning, it is necessary to examine the available research evidence.

What is videoconferencing?

Contents● definition of video

conferencing

● key research evidence aboutvideo conferencing

● areas of further investigation

● bibliography and furtherreading.

SummaryResearch evidence about videoconferencing can be foundacross the educational sectorsand includes the followingkey benefits

● allows interactive accessto experts

● enables collaborationby teachers and learnerswith peers

● enriches the experience ofdistance education by reducingfeelings of isolation andencouraging interaction

● raises student motivation.

How teachers can maximise theimpact of video conferencing

● establish pedagogicaloutcomes

● exploit the motivationaleffects on students

● seek partnerships withother schools.

General benefits● It supports distance learning by

linking up tutors and students, andalso offers a means of reassurance andsocial contact for students(Hearnshaw 1997).

● Subject teaching can be enriched byinput from experts or practitioners, asin mathematics and the Motivateproject (Gage et al. 2002).

● Students can develop communicationand social skills by collaborating withtheir peers in other institutions.

● Students who normally stay in thebackground participate more; theyare motivated to take part in videoconferencing.

Benefits for students ● Collaboration with schools where the

pupils come from different culturesleads to the development ofmulticultural relationships andunderstanding, while enrichingtraditional activities (Cifuentes& Murphy 2000).

● It provides enhanced opportunitiesfor language students to interactwith native speakers (Kinginger 1998;Wright & Whitehead 1998).

● It offers an alternative outlet forexpression by those normallyhampered by poor literacy skills(Eales et al. 1999).

Benefits for teachers● Academic aspirations are raised

amongst those studentscommunicating with more assuredstudents, who become positive rolemodels (Cifuentes & Murphy 2000).

● Strong relationships are fostered withpeers when working with otherschools on collaborative projects(Cifuentes & Murphy 2000).

● The audience for courses can beincreased by teaching face to facewith one group and simultaneouslytransmitting to a second centreelsewhere (Gilbert 1999; Carville& Mitchell 2000).

● Clips from sessions may be used asmaterial for evaluating and modifyinganti-social behaviour by students(Coverdale-Jones 1999).

Benefits in initial teachertraining ● Students can observe teaching

practice without being present in theclassroom (Kinnear et al. 2002)

● Students may use video clips of theirclassroom experiences to share ideasand teaching resources (Sharpe 2000)

● Students on teaching practice feel ‘asafety in distance’ when using videoconferencing to communicate withtheir supervisors, resulting in a morefrank interaction (Sharpe 2000).

Benefits for students with specialeducational needs ● Support can be provided to children

with complex physical andcommunication difficulties withoutprofessionals or families spending lotsof time travelling (Donegan 2002).

● Students may overcome feelings ofisolation and develop social skills byassociating with peers who havesimilar needs (Thorpe 1998).

● The video conferencing context actsas a focus for some students, helpingthem to organise the way they thinkand act (Thorpe 1998).

● Students discover that if they shoutout or talk over one another theycannot be understood, and alter theirbehaviour to take turns to talk(Thorpe 1998).

Factors for effective use● Reliable equipment needs to be

available, which provides good soundquality and is supported by a fastconnection.

● Rules governing interaction should beestablished before a session starts.

● An appropriate teaching style is neededto suit the medium; teachers may needto adjust their teaching style, providingexplicit opportunities for discussion, andaddressing all audiences.

Sidmouth Community College and Baylis Court Secondary Schoolcollaborated on Key Stage 3 geography, to develop anunderstanding of two very different environments. Studentsexchanged annotated pictures and maps of their local area.Thefirst session was a question and answer session, leading into morespontaneous and informal discussion in the second. Before thethird session students devised and completed a questionnaire onlocal leisure facilities, taking turns in the subsequent sessions topresent findings and ask questions.

Focusing on the local environment proved to be a good way ofstimulating interest in geography, and allowed for thedevelopment of basic skills centred on the use of maps andphotographs.Video conferencing aroused the curiosity ofstudents, who then learned a good deal about each other’s homearea (Arnold et al. 2002).

Video conferencing in practice

Key research evidence about videoconferencing in teaching and learningOn the basis of Becta’s analysis, video conferencing can have positive effects in the areas outlined below (thereare references for further reading supplied alongside most of the findings).

About Becta’s ‘What theResearch Says…’ series

This series of briefing papersis designed in particular forteachers, ICT co-ordinatorsand school managers, to providean initial idea of the availableresearch evidence for the useof information andcommunications technology(ICT) in schools and colleges.We welcome feedback andsuggestions for further titles inthe series (contact details can befound at the end of this briefing).

Attitudes of students Many studies have found that studentsreact positively to video conferencing,finding it enjoyable and showingconsiderable interest in the medium(Wright & Whitehead 1998; Eales et al.1999).There is, however, a significantdifference between students showing anactive interest in wanting to communicateand those who are attracted by thenovelty, but are essentially only passivelyinterested in the process.

Students who are normally hampered inschool activities by poor literacy skills havebeen reported to be the most active andcompetent participants in videoconferencing, eager to communicate bytalking instead of writing.The motivationdeveloped during video conferencingseems to transfer to areas where literacyskills are more central (Eales et al. 1999).

However, some students have been foundto react badly to the technology (Tyler1999; Coverdale-Jones 1999). It should notbe assumed that all students will react wellto a proposed video conference, especiallyif it contains the added strain of beingconducted across language barriers, andteachers need to evaluate in advance howtheir students might respond.

InteractivityInteractivity during a video conference canbe problematic, and facilitating measuresare required. Clearly, technical mishapssuch as a connection failing will workagainst the success of a session. Othersuch hitches include a time delay betweenpicture and sound, a shortage ofmicrophones for would-be contributors,and sound which is dominated bybackground noises.There are also non-technical considerations which arise fromthe peculiarity of the scenario – allparticipants may not be able to see eachother, and may, therefore, miss visual cluesindicating that somebody wishes to speak.

Sessions which depend on studentcontributions will prove challenging if the

teacher does not enable participation byall; in fact it has been suggested that videoconferencing affects styles of teachingmore than learning (Tyler 1999). Rules forparticipation are needed, and teachersshould build in to their lesson clearopportunities for interaction. Theyshould receive training in overcomingthe challenges of the medium.

Teaching by video conferenceVideo conferencing is sometimes used toextend access to existing courses.Twoclasses may be taught simultaneously, ofwhich one is present with the teacher, theother connected by video conference. Inthis situation the question of equity arises:for the remote students to get a good dealtheir experience should be of the samequality as the other. Given limitations oninteraction, whether it be discussion, gameplaying or simulations, there are concernsthat all students may not benefit equally.

One way to find out whether videoconferencing is successful is by asking thestudents concerned. A US study suggestedthat students completing a course byvideo conference were satisfied with themode of study; it also highlighted theimportance of the teacher in this success.A key factor was that the teacher usedpresentation skills to create opportunitiesfor interaction.The physical separationbetween the teacher and students wascompensated for by developingappropriate resources to use the mediumeffectively (Furst-Bowe 1997).

Experience at De Montfort Universityraised questions about the quality ofinteraction that may take place. Itsuggested that video conferencing is onlyadequate for activities where littleinteraction is required, such as a lecture.Among the negative aspects reportedwere the domination of proceedings byless inhibited participants, points scoringbetween groups and a lack of interaction(Tyler 1999).

About the research literature This is an area where a substantial number ofstudies exist, the bulk of the literature foundhaving been published between 1997 and 2000.The potential of video conferencing to supportlanguage teaching and distance learning isimmediately apparent, and this is reflected in anumber of published studies. The highereducation sector has seen the opportunity toreach more students without increasing thenumber of lecturers, and several studiesinvestigate how appropriate this is. There areconcerns about anxiety levels engendered amongstudents, but there are also reports of positivebehavioural changes, and an interesting angle ispresented by the use of recordings to evaluatesessions. Many schools and local educationauthorities are implementing video conferencingand producing small studies to illustrate its use,but there is a shortage of larger-scale studies intothe educational impact.

Current researchA two-year Department for Education and Skills(DfES)-funded evaluation of the use of videoconferencing in schools began in 2003. Some27 schools are involved, which have differentlevels of experience with the technology, rangingfrom a lot of experience to very little.

The research aims to explore the impact of videoconferencing on students’ attainment in specificsubject areas, giving a picture of teachers’ andstudents’ real experiences. Managed by Becta,this project will use both qualitative data fromteachers and students, and quantitative datarelating to attainment from national tests.

Key areas for further research ● Feelings of anxiety and episodes of antagonistic

group behaviour towards others couldundermine the benefits that may be gained. Avaluable area of further research, therefore,would be to investigate how these may bereduced. One possible method might be to makeinitial contact with a remote school group byemail, encouraging students to form somepersonal links before undertaking a videoconference.

● Interactivity can be problematic, and it would behelpful to know the effect of desktop-based, asopposed to room-based, video conferencing. Itmay be that individuals or small groups basedaround computers are better equipped andmore prepared to participate in interactivesessions.

● Many accounts exist of how schools are adoptingvideo conferencing; larger-scale research into theimpacts on teaching and learning would add tothe understanding of this technology’s potential.

Key questions for schools

● What educational benefits are you looking for?

● How do you want to make use of video conferencing?

● Does the school have sufficient bandwidth?

● Are there other schools which would be capable of joining sessions?

Explanation of findings As with ICT more generally, direct causal effects are not always easilyidentifiable. Drawing clear conclusions on the effects of ICT from therange of research evidence and reports available can be problematic.There are a number of factors that limit effective comparisons, such asdifferences in sample sizes, methodologies and effects, and the extentand purpose of ICT use.

www.becta.org.uk/research

Becta’s ICT ResearchNetworkIf you’re interested in research on the use ofICT in education, you can join Becta’s ICTResearch Network.

The ICT Research Network seeks to encouragethe exchange of information in order toinform the national agenda and professionalpractice.

Membership is free and is open to:● teachers● ICT co-ordinators● ICT advisers● school managers● researchers● policy makers● research sponsors● industry.

The Network provides them with anopportunity to:● exchange information on current research● develop partnerships● discuss priorities for further investigation● focus research on issues of importance to

practitioners and policy-makers.

They can do this via:● an email discussion list● publications● conferences and events.

More information on Becta’s ICTResearch Network can be found at:

http://www.becta.org.uk/research/ictrn/

Alternatively, send an email to:ictrn@becta.org.uk or write to:Michael Harris, ICT Research Network,Becta, Millburn Hill Road,Science Park, Coventry CV4 7JJ.

About BectaBecta is the Government’s lead agency for information and communications technology (ICT) ineducation and supports UK Government, national organisations, schools and colleges in the use anddevelopment of ICT in education to raise standards, widen access, improve skills and encourageeffective management.

About the ICT in Schools ProgrammeThe ICT in Schools Programme is the Government's key initiative to stimulate and support the use ofinformation and communications technology (ICT) to improve standards and to encourage new ways ofteaching and learning.The enormous potential of ICT means that for the first time it is becoming possiblefor each child to be educated in a way and at a pace which suits them, recognising that each is different,with different abilities, interests and needs.The challenge over the next four years will be to successfullyembed ICT in every facet of teaching and learning where it can directly impact on raising standards ofattainment. A vision for the future of ICT in schools is provided in the paper Transforming the way welearn, available at: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/ictfutures

While every care has been taken in the compilation of this information to ensure that it is accurate atthe time of publication, Becta cannot be held responsible for any loss, damage or inconveniencecaused as a result of any error or inaccuracy within these pages. Although all references to externalsources (including any sites linked to the Becta site) are checked both at the time of compilation andon a regular basis, Becta does not accept any responsibility for or otherwise endorse any informationcontained in these pages including any sources cited.

Bibliography and further reading

British Educational Communicationsand Technology Agency (Becta)

Millburn Hill Road, Science Park,Coventry CV4 7JJTel: 024 7641 6994Fax: 024 7641 1418

Research email: research@becta.org.ukBecta main email: becta@becta.org.ukURL: http://www.becta.org.uk

Technical information on video conferencing is available on the ICT Advice site:http://www.ictadvice.org.uk

This briefing and others in the ‘What the Research Says’series can be found onthe Becta Research website at: http://www.becta.org.uk/research/

© Becta, 2003

ICT ResearchBecta

The research referred to in this briefing represents a selection from the rapidly growing field of ICTresearch related to ICT, and should not be regarded as a definitive list of the ‘most important’research in this area.

ARNOLD, T., CAYLEY, S. & GRIFFITH, M. (2002),‘Video conferencing in the classroom.Communications technology across thecurriculum’, Becta,http://www.becta.org.uk/technology/vc/vc_classroom/index.html.

CARVILLE, S. & MITCHELL, D.R. (2001), ‘"It's a BitLike Star Trek": the effectiveness of videoconferencing’, Innovations in Education andTraining International, 37 (1), pp. 42–49.

CIFUENTES, L. & MURPHY, K.L. (2000), ‘Promotingmulticultural understanding and positive self-concept through a distance learning community:cultural connections’, Educational TechnologyResearch & Development, 48 (1), pp. 69–83.

COVERDALE-JONES, T. (1999), ‘Thecommunicative effects of videoconferencingas a language learning environment: a reducedsocial and linguistic medium’, paper given atthe conference of the British Association ofLecturers in English for Academic Purposes, Leeds.

DONEGAN, M. (2002), ‘TELENET project, summaryreport’, ACE Centre, http://www.ace-centre.org.uk/html/research/telenet/teleport/int.html.

EALES, R.T.J., NEALE, D.C. & CARROLL, J.M.(1999), ‘Desktop videoconferencing as a basis forcomputer supported collaborative learning in K-12 classrooms’, paper given at the EducationalMultimedia, Hypermedia andTelecommunications Conference, Seattle, WA.

FURST-BOWE, J.A. (1997), ‘Comparison of studentreactions in traditional and videoconferencingcourses in training and development’,International Journal of Instructional Media, 24 (3),pp. 197–206.

GAGE, J., NICKSON, M. & BEARDON, T. (2002),‘Can videoconferencing contribute to teachingand learning? The experience of the Motivateproject’, paper given at the Annual Conference ofthe British Educational Research Association,http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00002264.htm.GILBERT, J. (1999), ‘But where is the teacher?Cost-effective distance learning made possible’,Learning and Leading with Technology,27 (2) pp. 42–44.HEARNSHAW, D. (1997), ‘Capitalising on thestrengths and availability of desktopvideoconferencing’, Active Learning, pp. 52–58,http://www.ilt.ac.uk/public/cti/ActiveLearning/al7pdf/hearnshaw.pdf.KINGINGER, C. (1998), ‘Videoconferencing asaccess to spoken French’, Modern LanguageJournal, 82 (4), pp. 502–513.KINNEAR, H., MCWILLIAMS, S. & CAUL, L. (2002),‘The use of interactive video in teaching teachers:an evaluation of a link with a primary school’,British Journal of Educational Technology33 (1), pp. 17–26.SHARPE, L. (2000), ‘Multipoint desktopvideoconferencing as a collaborative learningtool for teacher preparation’, EducationalTechnology, 40 (5), pp. 61–63.THORPE, R. (1998), ‘The use of personal videoconferencing with special needs pupils fromthree schools serving rural areas: a case ofsuccessful adoption of new technology’, Journalof Information Technology for Teacher Education,7 (3), pp. 395–412.TYLER, C. (1999), ‘Beyond the content — video-conferencing’, Speaking English, 32 (2), pp. 15–27.WRIGHT, N. & WHITEHEAD, M. (1998), ‘Video-conferencing and GCSE oral practice’, LanguageLearning Journal, 18 (Dec), pp. 47–49.

06/2

003-

04/0

01/a

/WK/

1K