Last term at Cornell University a group of five second semester Dutch students attended a language class five times a week that included games, group work, writing on a whiteboard, and conversing one on one with their professor. The hitch? Their professor, Chrissy Hosea, was in a classroom in New Haven, and a Yale student was participating in in all group activities.  This experiment in synchronous distance learning was run through Cornell’s Language Resource Center (LRC) and Yale’s Center for Language Study (CLS), and Chrissy Hosea, lector in Dutch, and John Graves, academic technologist, came to TwTT last Tuesday to explain how the project worked and some of the challenges and surprises of setting up a synchronous distance learning program.

Distance learning is growing in popularity not only because of its convenience, but also because it makes financial sense for universities to pool resources in the instruction of less popular subjects. When Cornell found that it could no longer finance a language program in Dutch it turned to distance learning to avoid abandoning students who had started the program already.  The challenge, however, was not to compromise the learning experience.  Students at Yale and Cornell would both be receiving institutional credit for the course, and in order to serve as a replacement for regular classroom instruction, the distance program had to match or exceed the regular classroom experience.  Despite challenges in planning and pedagogy the course earned positive reviews from students on both campuses.

The planning and logistical challenges of distance learning are manifold, and range from problems with internet connectivity to schedule conflicts.  Since the course must be approved by both universities there are twice as many academic committees to be dealt with as compared to a normal class, and seemingly innocuous schedule differences in exam periods and vacations can disrupt instruction unless they are anticipated.  The instructor must also make an effort to keep up with news on both campuses – not being aware of a blizzard or riot can create a disconnect between student and professor.

John explains that in terms of technology and space usage the goal is to make the distance part of distance learning as transparent as possible.  The main software solution, Adobe Connect, was chosen because of its many features (including virtual break-out groups, live screen sharing and collaboration, and reusable workspace templates), and a Tandberg videoconferencing solution was implemented to capitalize on the strong Tandberg infrastructure already deployed at Yale.  The Sympodium electronic tablet is used by the instructor to annotate directly on visuals, and students can share in the workspace using Wacom tablets.  Since Cornell had been in an experimental distance program with Syracuse University their room was already set up permanently and included two remote control cameras, an omnidirectional permanent microphone, and a 50″ plasma display.  One of the advantages  of this layout is that the camerawork is automatic – the microphone detects where voices are coming from and the cameras adjust to that location, eliminating the need for a camera handler.  Yale is in the process of setting up an eight student workspace that balances the need for camera coverage with the impression of being in the same room, but for now uses a completely mobile setup that requires marginally more intervention.

Although technology issues did crop up periodically, usually in the form of frozen video due to an overtaxed network, the system was reliable enough to allow Chrissy to concentrate on teaching, and to figure out how to overcome some of the limitations inherent in distance learning.  She points out that one of her primary concerns was having good enough video quality to “read” the students – explaining that an instructor can tell at a glance when students are getting lost, and being able to do this over video was important.  Cooperative games and group work were well implemented over Adobe Connect – where ideas were generated at 2 am, to play pictionary, for example, and implemented in time for the morning class.  An unexpected advantage of having microphones and cameras was that students always needed to speak loudly and clearly to be heard over the network, forcing them to expose problems with pronunciation.  In fact, students became confident enough speaking over the internet that it was possible to have them give an oral presentation in a Cornell museum (using an iPad as the camera) while instructor watched.

By the end of the term all of the students agreed that a synchronous distance program is a viable way to learn a language, and a few commented on how unexpectedly similar it is to a normal language class.  While Chrissy suggests that it may not be a good approach for more than 12 total students, the compromises were very limited when compared to a normal class, and a mandatory 10 minute weekly office hour session over Skype helped her get closer to the students – something that would be crucial if distance learning were to be used for a first year course.  Although presently the permanent distance learning space at Yale’s CLC is still under construction, the success of the Dutch experiment suggests that distance learning is on track to not only stay, but grow.

For full coverage of this session, please click the video below
(note a slight delay upon initial playback):

video platform video management video solutions video player