TARGET WebCT MS NetMeeting mIRC Whiteboard
S av e w orkspace co n ten ts In ed itab le form at
Yes.
N o. O n ly in p ro p rieto ry W ebC T w h iteb o ard form at, w hich can be re-im p o rted .
Y es
No. O n ly in p ro p rieto ry form at, as w h ite b o a rd file. C an be re im p o rte d ______________________
Y es - h as a S av e function
N o - bitm ap. S h o u ld be po ssib le to re-lo ad as an im age.
Print w orkspace c o n ten ts
No. Yes. I f prev io u sly saved a s a bitm ap,
via a n o th e r ap p licatio n .________ W ays fo r stu d en ts to
sh o w p articipation
N o S h ared po in ter (h an d icon) can
be selected a n d is d isp la y ed , in th e u ser's cu rren t co lo u r, on all screen s u n til can celled . H ig h lig h ter can be selected.
N o
P ossible paper rep lacem en ts (n o tem ak in g and referen ce tools)
Part o f a virtu al learn in g en v iro n m en t ( V L E ) w h ich has n o tem ak in g an d g lo ssary tools.
N o t included. N o t included.
P rovision for a sid e s (p art-shared com m u n icatio n )
N o b ut co u ld be o p erated a lo n g sid e W eb C T 's chat tool.
A u d io ch annel a v ailab le in N etM eetin g .
T ext c h at ch an n el a llo w s u sers to select th o se w ith w h o m they w ill com m u n icate.
It is clear that none o f these tools provides the support that this research has shown to be needed, although
NetMeeting has more of the necessary features than the other two. All the tools would be o f use to support the viewing and discussion o f an object but none would support the interactive work on texts that has been the subject o f the research. This is largely because o f the limited range of operations that can be carried out on text objects; the findings related to Objects and Operations may therefore be o f particular use to designers o f future shared workspace tools to support text-based teaching and learning. Commercial multicast conferencing tools are now on the horizon, offering new opportunities in education - provided that their design supports what teachers and students, on real courses, need.
8.4 Contribution to Teaching and Learning
The research has shown that a shared workspace tool can enhance teaching and learning in text-based disciplines. In distance learning it can enable activities that could not be supported in any other way. For co-located groups, it offers new opportunities. The research has shown why a shared workspace tool is useful in this teaching and learning context. Recommendations can now be made to teachers about the use o f shared workspace tools. Benefits for text-based teaching and learning will be maximised by following these. The recommendations are useful because:
• They cover not only information about activities and teaching strategies but information about the nature of the tool, so that it can be compared with other computer-based communication tools and used where it best supports the learning objectives.
• They are grounded in observation o f the tool's use in real courses, over an extended period o f time, by nine different teachers and more than 80 students. All the field trials were in foreign language
classes but, as stated in Chapter Four (section 4.3.5), the courses studied were sufficiently wide- ranging as to make the findings generalise to other disciplines that deal with reading and writing texts, and with the study and development of written and/or spoken language. The fact that so many activities observed in English and Spanish lessons could be describled similarly (Chapter Five, section 5.3.3) laids support to this.
8.4.1 Recommendations to teachers
1. Teachers need to understand the nature of the shared workspace tool in order to make decisions
about how to use it. As stated in Chapter One, a shared workspace is: • A tool to support two or more people working together; • A sketching tool;
• A tool to support synchronous group working.
The attributes that benefit teaching and learning, in text-based disciplines, are:
• Sharing: the teacher can always see what the students are writing. This means that the teacher can
intervene instantly, and provide immediate feedback and correction to individuals, not just general feedback to the whole group. It enables teachers to give the appearance of interacting simultaneously with a number of students. The students can see each other's work, which enables them to learn fi-om one another and to interact easily with one another's writing. Learning activities should capitalise on this. The students are also aware of other students working alongside them, which may contribute to motivation and a sense of shared endeavour (Whitelock et a/., 1995).
• Persistence: whatever kind of language students use, it can be revisited at any time during the lesson.
It can be discussed. Changes can be made to it. This supports the public review of all students' writing done during a lesson. Saving the contents of the shared workspace at the end of the lesson expands the possibilities. The teacher can edit the work, prior to distribution to students. It is also possible to re-use student work, in a later lesson, which expands the possibilities for studoit interaction. The feet that entries in the shared workspace are persistent also supports the provision of memos and reference material in the shared space.
• Accessibility: A shared workspace is equally accessible to students and teacho*, unlike a classroom
whiteboard. This is one fector that helps to create a workshop atmosphere and perhaps change the role of the teacher. The teacher can be a partner in studmts' writing. Students, when working on individual computers, can control their own movement in the space and this may promote their sense of being in control of their own learning.
• Manipulation: A shared workspace is a tool for activity, not just display. A shared pointer, and
drawing actions, give students new opportunities for active participation. Physically moving objects is engaging and fun for students. Teachers should encourage the use of drawing and explore ways to give students a sense of being active.
Making the most of the attributes of shared workspace tools means changing some ways of working. For instance, all the studmts can see each other's writing at all times. Whm they are working simultaneously, it may not be effective to give them all the same writing task, as is commonly done using traditional classroom equipmmt.
Teachers may well want to begin by using some learning tasks that were originally paper-based. However, as they move beyond "translating" activity from paper to computer, it is important to consider how best to exploit the attributes of the shared workspace. The shared workspace offers something different from what is offered by other tools that might appear similar, such as text chat tools or electronic whiteboard products. Teaches might find it helpful to consider the differences:
• Text chat tools: These are synchronous communication tools but they do not offer space. More
explicit reference is needed in conversation than when using a shared workspace tool. For instance, in a shared workspace, a single word, "Yes?" can be placed next to the item to which it refers, which is more economical, and perhaps closer to spoken conversation, than when the item has to be referred to explicitly. If a shared whiteboard is used, drawing operations can enrich expression. Another difference is that text chat tools do not try to guarantee that everyone sees the same thing at the same time. Finally, although it is possible to save the results of a chat session, no manipulation or editing can be done during the session.
• E-mail: E-mail offers communication at a distance, using one of the most widely available and long-
established Internet tools - but it does not offer synchronous communication. Asynchronous communication is particularly useful for collaborating across time zones or to accommodate different institutional timetables. Organised as a mailing list or bulletin board, e-mail can be shared and revisited. E-mail offers time to think about content, structure and language, rather than quick-fire exchanges. It also offers the chance to draft in private before sharing the results, unlike a shared workspace. Explicit reference to previous messages is needed to make meaning clear so, again, dialogues will be probably furtho" removed from spoken conversation than those in a shared workspace.
• Electronic whiteboard products: These large display surfaces support application sharing and
hence a wide range of useful teaching and learning activities^. However, they do not offer studaits individual control. LMlike a computer-based shared workspace tool, the view is controlled by one person, probably the teacher, and the same view is always shared by all participants. Individual students have less control than with a computer-based shared workspace tool. Switches between individual, whole class and subgroup activity may be less easy to support.
• Word processors and drawing packages: These products offer a very sophisticated range of
fimctions and features, to support the production of a polished end product. Experience of such tools should make a shared editOT or whiteboard easy to leam but these are tools to support individual work or asynchrœious co-authoring activities. Shared whiteboards and editors support short periods of synchronous collaboration, suited to sketching, drafting and planning rather than the production of finished products.