Audiographic Conferencing

Audiographic conferencing has the same technical requirements as an audioconference, but additional elements are used. For example, each site has a standard computer with modem, keyboard, and colour monitor with an appropriate software application; an electronic tablet and pen which allows for hand-written text and graphics on-line; and usually a document camera, although a VCR and camera can also be used.

Facilitation Requirements

The role of the facilitator is to ensure that learners are speaking to one another, and able to send and receive messages (text or graphics) to one another. The facilitator may also be responsible for prepared materials being collated, and copied, to all user sites.

The challenge for the facilitator is to ensure that learners are able to exploit fully the benefit of using a combination of text, graphics, and audio media, as well as a variety of learning styles. In this way, the facilitator does have to be quite skilled in the use of graphics packages, which will support what learning materials are developed and how they are used in the conferencing session.

Indicators of Effectiveness of Use

Clearly, there are specific indicators of effective use, especially when graphics and text are introduced into a conferencing session. For example, Burge and Roberts point out that users should:

• Produce legible graphics;
• Use the pen and tablet in the same way as use of chalk and board in traditional classroom settings;
• Use icons provided in the software package to erase or change the text or graphic;
• Use the keyboard to type additional material during the session;
• Regularly store material on disk so that it is not lost; and
• Use the on-screen pointer to indicate numbers or words.

Poor use is characterized by some of the following, which are not necessarily specific to audiographic conferencing only:

• Complex graphics which are confusing, and not directly related to the discussions;
• Too many users per computer (i.e. more than 6 users) which limits ability to see and use the technology aids such as pen and tablet or keyboard;
• Talking while data is being sent which interferes with quality of the transmission;
• Full screens of small print, which is difficult to read.(Burge, E. et al. p 47-8)

Use in Distance Education Delivery

Use of audiographic conferencing by distance education providers does appear to be increasing, although this is related in part to decreased costs of the technological equipment. Bates claims that ‘the cost of audio-graphics equipment has dropped rapidly in the last few years, from US$20,000 a work station down to around US$5,000 today’. Hence, variations in use appear to be linked more to variations among institutions’ cost policies, rather than policies on telephonic technology teaching. From his analysis of costs of use of telephonic technology to support distance education, Bates argues that costing conferencing use is complex. He argues that it is deceptively ‘cost effective’ because this is only in relation to the technology itself, and not the actual time spent on the course as a whole. Similarly, it is cost effective only when student numbers are low.

An interesting observation made by Bates is that the organizational nature of the distance education provider often impacts on the decision to use this form of technology. Bates claims that the use of technology is conceptualized as an ‘extension of the classroom’ and hence found in many dual-mode institutions. He states that although some adjustment is made, the basic teaching approach in the face-to-face and conferencing session is essentially the same. This does have a major disadvantage in that:

courses offered by [audio and audiographic] conferencing in dual-mode institutions [are] often merely added on to an academic’s teaching work-load, without extra pay, or even consideration for promotion; indeed it may eat into the academic’s research time. Also, many such courses have to be given outside regular teaching hours, in evenings or week-ends, because requirements of working students…In such institutions, [audio and audiographic] conferencing in support of other learning materials tends to be limited to substituting for optional face-to-face tutorials, where students are too scattered to meet together.(Bates, A. 1995. p 178-9)

Use of audio and audiographic conferencing does potentially facilitate greater two-way communication than ‘one-way’ technologies such as print or broadcasting. The challenge for South African distance education providers is that it is not possible to assume, as in North America, Australia, or European countries, that learners have at least minimum access to telephones in their homes. This is borne out by work conducted by SAIDE researchers with the Regional Access Programme (RAP) of esATI, a distance education provider in KwaZulu-Natal, which has used telephone tutoring to support distance learners.(Selikow, T-A. 1998) Although the model of support used is one tutor per twenty students, RAP’s potential to introduce use of audio and audiographic conferencing facilities is limited by low levels of access among learners to the minimal requirement of a telephone at home. For example, in a 1998 cycle of the programme, 25% of learners has access to a telephone in their homes, 45% access to some other telephone, such as a public phone in a nearby shop, and 30% no access. It is very likely that the 75% of RAP learners with limited or no access will be distantly located in areas that fall outside of the main Durban-Pietermaritzburg axis. Telephonic support offered to learners seated at a public phone booth or in a neighbour’s house will be at best be partially effective, and at worst, a total waste of the learner’s time and money.