A Research Study on the Use of Wimba Classroom Jalynn Roberts, Ph.D. Mary Nell McNeese, Ph.D. Amy Thornton, M.S.

A Research Study on the Use of

Wimba Classroom

A Research Study on the Use of

Wimba ClassroomJalynn Roberts, Ph.D.

Mary Nell McNeese, Ph.D.Amy Thornton, M.S.

Phased PilotPhased Pilot

• Fall 2006 “Pilot”o 1 course - managed outside of Blackboard

• Spring 2007 Pilot - 12 courseso 10 inside Blackboard; 2 per college as selected by

Deanso 2 outside Blackboard

• Received all-day training by Wimba• Added more faculty in March by invitation• Summer 2007 - offered university-wide

MethodologyMethodology

• 2 Survey Instrumentso Instructorso Students

• Responseso 5 Instructorso 19 Students

Skill Level With Computer Technology

Skill Level With Computer Technology

Instructors• Very Proficient with desktop

and web-based applications (40%)

• Familiar with using a computer and office application suites, but not familiar with hardware technologies (60%)

Students• Very Proficient with desktop

and web-based applications (52.6%)

• Familiar with using a computer and office application suites, but not familiar with hardware technologies (42.1%)

• Can use a computer to accomplish basic tasks (5.3%)

Course Taught/Taken Through Online Delivery – Fully or

Partially

Course Taught/Taken Through Online Delivery – Fully or

PartiallyInstructors• 3 or more courses (40%)• 1 or 2 courses (60%)

Students• 3 or more courses (57.9%)• 1 or 2 courses (42.1%)

Previous Use of Collaboration Before Using Live Classroom

Previous Use of Collaboration Before Using Live Classroom

Instructors• Yes (100%)

Students• Yes (68.4%)• No (31.6%)

Type of Internet Connection Used

Type of Internet Connection Used

Instructors• Dial-up (0%)• DSL (60%)• Cable (20%)• LAN (0%)• Don’t know (20%)

Students• Dial-up (5.3%)• DSL (36.8%)• Cable (42.1%)• LAN (15.8%)• Don’t know (5.3%)

Describe Your Experience With Learning to Use Live

Classroom

Describe Your Experience With Learning to Use Live

ClassroomInstructors• Very Easy (0%)• Somewhat Easy (40%)• Neutral (40%)• Somewhat Difficult (20%)• Very Difficult (0%)

Students• Very Easy (57.9%)• Somewhat Easy (26.3%)• Neutral (5.3%)• Somewhat Difficult (10.5%)• Very Difficult (0%)

Features Utilized While Using Live Classroom

Features Utilized While Using Live Classroom

Instructor• PowerPoint (100%)• Text Chat (80%)• Voice Chat (80%)• Whiteboard (60%)• Application Sharing (40%)• Polling/Quizzes (60%)• File Sharing (40%)

Student• PowerPoint (100%)• Text Chat (84.2%)• Voice Chat (78.9%)• Whiteboard (57.9%)• Application Sharing (15.8%)• Polling/Quizzes (15.8%)• File Sharing (10.5%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for Text Chat

Usefulness/Ease of Use for Text Chat

Instructors• Excellent (20%)• Good (80%)• Neutral (0%)• Fair (0%)• Poor (0%)

Students• Excellent (57.9%)• Good (31.6%)• Neutral (0%)• Fair (5.3%)• Poor (0%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for Voice Chat

Usefulness/Ease of Use for Voice Chat


Students• Excellent (26.3%)• Good (52.6%)• Neutral (5.3%)• Fair (10.5%)• Poor (5.3%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Whiteboard Feature

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Whiteboard Feature

Instructors• Excellent (20%)• Good (40%)• Neutral (20%)• Fair (0%)• Poor (0%)• Did not use (20%)

Students• Very Useful (26.3%)• Somewhat Useful

(36.8%)• Not Useful (0%)• Did Not Use (31.6%)• No Answer (5.3%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Application Sharing Feature

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Application Sharing Feature



(26.3%)• Not Useful (0%)• Did Not Use (52.6%)• Did Not Answer (5.3%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Polling/Quizzing Feature

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Polling/Quizzing Feature

Instructors• Excellent (0%)• Good (60%)• Fair (40%)• Poor (0%)



Usefulness/Ease of Use for the File Sharing Feature

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the File Sharing Feature




Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Hand-Raising Feature

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Hand-Raising Feature

Instructors• Very Useful (40%)• Somewhat Useful (60%)• Not Useful (0%)


(21.1%)• Not Useful (0%)• Did Not Use (15.8%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Polling Feature

Usefulness/Ease of Use for the Polling Feature

Instructors• Very Useful (60%)• Somewhat Useful (20%)• Not Useful (0%)• Did Not Use (20%)


(26.3%)• Not Useful (0%)• Did Not Use (5.3%)

Usefulness/Ease of Use for Accessing Archive of Previous

Sessions

Usefulness/Ease of Use for Accessing Archive of Previous

SessionsInstructors• Excellent (0%)• Good (60%)• Neutral (0%)• Fair (20%)• Poor (0%)• Did Not Use (20%)

Students• Excellent (21.1%)• Good (15.8%)• Neutral (10.5%)• Fair (0%)• Poor (15.8%)• Did Not Use (31.6%)

Audio Quality During Voice Discussions

Audio Quality During Voice Discussions

Instructors• Very Clear (0%)• Somewhat Clear (100%)• Neutral (0%)• Somewhat Unclear (0%)• Very Unclear (0%)

Students• Very Clear (5.3%)• Somewhat Clear

(57.9%)• Neutral (5.3%)• Somewhat Unclear

(21.1%)• Very Unclear (10.5%)

Overall Usefulness of Live Classroom

Overall Usefulness of Live Classroom

Instructors• Very Useful (80%)• Somewhat Useful (20%)• Not Useful (0%)


(5.3%)• Not Useful (5.3%)

Level of Technical Problems With Using Live Classroom

Level of Technical Problems With Using Live Classroom

Instructors• Very Severe (0%)• Severe (0%)• Moderate (60%)• Minimal (40%)• Non-existent (0%)

Students• Very Severe (5.3%)• Severe (10.5%)• Moderate (42.1%)• Minimal (31.6%)• Non-existent (5.3%)• Did Not Answer (5.3%)

Technical Support Services Used

Technical Support Services UsedInstructors

• 24/7 Phone Support (20%)• Website Support (0%)• Learning Enhancement

Center (80%)• Didn’t Require (0%) • Learning Enhancement

Center Staff (20%)• Graduate Assistant (20%)

Students• 24/7 Phone Support (5.3%)• Website Support (5.3%)• iTech Helpdesk (21.1%)• Didn’t Require (42.1%) • Learning Enhancement

Center Staff (0%)• Instructor (52.6%)• Another Instructor (5.3%)

Quality of Technical SupportQuality of Technical SupportInstructors• Excellent (40%)• Good (20%)• Neutral (0%)• Fair (20%)• Poor (0%)• Did Not Use (20%)

Students• Excellent (26.3%)• Good (21.1%%)• Neutral (0%)• Fair (0%)• Poor (5.3%)• Did Not Use (47.4%)

Description of Technical Difficulties - InstructorsDescription of Technical Difficulties - Instructors

• Three instructors reported that they experienced audio issues, especially when students tried to transmit to them audibly. The problems ranged from being garbled to being totally inaudible.

• One professor mentioned the inability to show copyrighted video, but also that Wimba was looking for a way to resolve that issue.

• One professor said that he/she was kicked out of the sessions for no reason, and that some students experienced the same difficulties.

• Better troubleshooting tips are needed for students.

Description of Technical Difficulties - Students

Description of Technical Difficulties - Students

• Accessing archived sessions was time consuming and sometimes impossible.

• Problems with logging into the system. • Seven students reported issues regarding the audio. These

issues included clarity, voices fading in and out, and a total loss of audio at times.

• Speed of connection was an issue for one student. This student said he/she was about five minutes behind during some sessions.

Additional Comments - Instructors

Additional Comments - Instructors

• All of the comments mentioned the reliability of Wimba, and that the program’s potential will not be realized until the aforementioned technical issues are resolved.

• All of the instructors agreed that while they did not experience any major issues with Wimba, it will be a valuable tool once its reliability issues have been resolved.

Additional Comments - Students

Additional Comments - Students

• All of the comments mentioned the reliability of Wimba, and that the program’s potential will not be realized until the aforementioned technical issues are resolved.


AnalysisAnalysis• All of the comments mentioned the reliability of

Wimba, and that the program’s potential will not be realized until the aforementioned technical issues are resolved.


AnalysisAnalysis• A majority of both instructors and students reported

high levels of satisfaction with the text chat, voice chat, whiteboard, and hand-raising features.

• Most instructors reported good and fair levels of satisfaction regarding application sharing, polling/quizzing, file sharing, and accessing archives. A majority of students reported that they did not use these features.

AnalysisAnalysis• Most instructors and students reported minimal to

moderate levels of technical difficulties with Wimba Live Classroom, and most of those technical difficulties regarded the quality of audio.

• Overall, both students and faculty reported high levels of satisfaction with Wimba Live Classroom, and both groups believe it enhances the online classroom environment.

Further ResearchFurther Research

• Current Survey will involve 17 institutions from:– Mississipppi– Tennessee– Utah

• 15 Community Colleges and 2 Universities• Current Survey is undergoing the Institutional

Review Board process and will hopefully be administered at the end of the spring 2009 semester.

Contact InformationContact Information

• Mary Nell McNeese– [email protected]

• Amy Thornton– [email protected]

• Jalynn Roberts– [email protected]

• Presentation is available at:– http://instructtech.wordpress.com

mailto:[email protected]



http://instructtech.wordpress.com/

A Research Study on the Use of Wimba Classroom Jalynn Roberts, Ph.D. Mary Nell McNeese, Ph.D. Amy Thornton, M.S.

Documents