You are here:

Student Interactive Television Presentations: Local Vs Remote
PROCEEDINGS

, University of Arizona South, United States

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Vienna, Austria ISBN 978-1-880094-65-5 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

The purpose of this empirical research was to look at the student presentation potential via interactive television (ITV) during a spring 2008 Educational Psychology course. Review of the ITV literature has indicated a need for more student directed, and student to student interactions among sites. During the semester, students (N=11) in an undergraduate Educational Psychology ITV class were required to present in groups via ITV. Following the presentations, students who observed the presentations within the same class (local) and via ITV (remote) completed peer-evaluations. The results suggest that students viewing presentations locally expressed equitable satisfaction in comparison to students viewing presentations remotely.

Citation

Arnold, S. (2008). Student Interactive Television Presentations: Local Vs Remote. In J. Luca & E. Weippl (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2008--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 2517-2522). Vienna, Austria: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 5, 2024 from .

© 2008 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Anderson, L.P., Banks, S.R., & Leary, P.A. (2002). The effect of interactive television courses on student satisfaction. Journal of Education for Business, 77 (3), 164-168.
  2. Arndt, R.L., & LaFollette, W.R. (1991). Interactive television and the nontraditional student. Journal of Education for Business, 66 (3), 181-185.
  3. Bertsch, T.F., Callas, P.W., Rubin, A., Caputo, M.P., & Ricci, M.A. (2006). Effectiveness of lectures attended via interactive videoconferencing versus in-person in preparing third-year internal medicine clerkship students for clinical practice examinations (CPX). Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 19 (1), 4-8.
  4. Brandt, R. (1996). On authentic performance assessment. Educational Leadership, 54 (4), pp 5.
  5. Campbell, C.R., & Swift, C.O. (2006). Perceptions of compressed video distance learning (DL) across location and levels of instruction in business courses. Journal of Education for Business, 81 (3), 170-174.
  6. Clark, R.E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42 (2), 21-30.
  7. Dupin-Bryant, P.A. (2004). Teaching styles of interactive television instructors: A descriptive study. The American Journal of Distance Education, 18 (1), 39-50.
  8. Heiens, R.A., & Hulse, D.B. (1996). Two-way interactive television: An emerging technology for university level business school instruction. Journal of Education for Business, 72 (2), 74-77.
  9. Jurgen, H. (1981). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization of society (Volume I). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
  10. Kendall, J.R., & Oaks, M. (1992). Evaluation of perceived teaching effectiveness: Course delivery via interactive video technology versus traditional classroom methods. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 40 (3), 2-12.
  11. Kennedy, D.H., Ward, C.T., & Metzner, M.C. (2003). Distance education: Using compressed interactive video technology for an entry-level doctor of pharmacy program. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 67 (4), Article 118: 1-10.
  12. Kleinpeter, C.B., & Potts, M.K. (2003). Teaching practice methods using interactive television: A partial replication study. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 22 (1), 19-27.
  13. MacGregor, S.K., & Atkinson, T.R. (2002). Facilitating learner interactions in the two-way video classroom. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 31 (1), 45-62.
  14. Magiera, F.T. (1994). Teaching managerial finance through compressed video: An alternative for distance education. Journal of Education for Business, 69 (5), 273-277.
  15. Mash, B., Marais, D., VanDer Walt, S., Van Deventer, I., Steyn, M., & Labadarios, D. (2006). Assessment of the quality of interaction in distance learning programmes utilizing the Internet or interactive television: Perceptions of students and lecturers. Medical Teacher, 28 (1), e1-e9.
  16. McHenry, L. & Bozik, M. (1995). Communicating at a distance: A study of interaction in a distance education classroom. Communication Education, 44 (4), 362-371.
  17. McKenzie, B.K., Witte, J.E., Guarino, A.J., & Witte, M.M. (2002). Interactive television (ITV) instructor behaviors: Implications of frequency and importance. Innovative Higher Education, 27 (1), 65-73.
  18. McTighe, J. (1996). What happens between assessments? Educational Leadership, 54 (4), 6-12.
  19. Orlich, D.C., Harder, R.J., Callahan, R.C., Trevisan, M.S., & Brown, A.H. (2007). Teaching strategies: A guide to effective instruction. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
  20. Petracchi, M.E., & Patchner, M.A. (2000). Social work students and their learning environment: A comparison of interactive television, face-to-face instruction, and the traditional classroom. Journal of Social Work Education, 36 (2), 335-346.
  21. Pugh, R.C., & Siantz, J.E. (1995). Factors associated with student satisfaction in distance education using slow scan television. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA, April. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 382186)
  22. Roblyer, M.D. (2006). Integrating educational technology into teaching (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
  23. Schunk, D.H., Pintrich, P.R., & Meece, J.L. (2008) Motivation in education (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
  24. Seay, R.A., & Milkman, M.I. (1994). Interactive television instruction: An assessment of student performance and attitudes in an upper division accounting course. Issues in Accounting Education, 9 (1), 80-95.
  25. Seay, R., Rudolph, H.R., & Chamberlain, D.H. (2001). Faculty perceptions of interactive television instruction. Journal of Education for Business, 77 (2), 99-105.
  26. Slavin, R.E. (2006). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  27. Tu, C.H., & McIsaac, M.S. (2002). An examination of social presence to increase interaction in online classes. American Journal of Distance Education, 16 (2), 131-150.
  28. Van Vugt, M. & Hart, C.M. (2004). Social identity as social glue: The origins of group loyalty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86 (4), 585-598.
  29. Walther, J.B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19 (1), 52 – 90.
  30. Ward, C.T., Garrett, S.D., & Marsh, W.A. (2006). Does instructor presence in the classroom influence examination scores in a therapeutics course delivered via interactive video-conferencing technology? Pharmacy Education, 6 (2), 119-123.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts