Invited talk to Campus Technology in Boston August 1, 2013 on Multi-Access learning. VIDEO ARCHIVE available: http://bit.ly/14xmEW8

1. Thinking Outside of the Classroom
Using Video Conferencing for Distance Learning and Collaboration
Valerie Irvine
Assistant Professor, Educational Technology, UVic
Co-Director TIE Research Lab
@_valeriei
Dean Crawford
Manager, IT Shared Services
BCNET
VIDEO ARCHIVE
AVAILABLE AT
http://bit.ly/14xmEW8

2. Session Overview
What is BCNET
Why was HD video conferencing required
How did we arrive at a solution
Measuring success in the small group meetings
Using video conferencing for multi-access learning
Overview of multi-access framework in relation to MOOCs
Research study findings of multi-access required credit course
Next steps…

3. What is BCNET
• Not-for-profit
• Shared IT Services
consortium
• 28 public and private, post-
secondary institutions in BC
• 18 research organization
members
Member-Owned.
Member-Operated.
Member-Shared.

4. Why HD Video
• 28 Institutions
• 161 Sites

5. Our process and solution
Requirements
1. Cost savings
2. Ease of use
3. Low support

6. Our process and solution
Requirements
1. Cost savings
2. Ease of use
3. Low support
First review in October 2007
Second review in March 2011
– 17 products evaluated / 6 shortlisted

7. Our process and solution
We selected Blue Jeans Network
Our primary rationale included
1. Integrated with Skype
2. Aggregated ports
3. Large support for existing room systems

9. Our Model
• We currently have 60 available ports
• 17 institutions using the service
• 141 user accounts

10. Our Success
 100% increase in
meetings year/over/year
 1,697 meetings last year
 860 meetings in first 4
months this year
 $334,000 in total savings
last year

11. Multi-Access Learning

12. Access
Control
Learner Agency

17. Four Tiers of Multi-Access
1.Face-to-Face
2.Synchronous Online
3.Asynchronous Online
4.Open

19. Grand Yellowhead School Division, Alberta

20. The Technology Integration
and Evaluation (TIE) Research
Lab

23. Seems Like A Lot of Effort?

24. Online Learning
• 25% increase in Higher Ed e-learning
market in 2012-2017 (Education Sector
Factbook, 2012)
• Full-time students are in the minority
(Bates)
• Brick-and-Mortar Universities are sleeping
giants in online learning (Irvine, 2013)

25. Revenue in Canada
• 90-95% controlled by government
• Remainder in regulated domestic tuition

26. Decreasing 18-22 demographic nationally.
USask, (2009). Managing enrollment strategically at the University of Saskatchewan 2009 Report.
Available online: http://bit.ly/Ik8ypY

27. Student Tuition Income
• Demographic decline a significant issue
• Domestic numbers unlikely to increase
before 2030
• Intl student #s will drop quickly after 2020
• Ability to increase resources is about
increasing net tuition  Student #s

28. ISSUES FACING BRICK &
MORTAR UNIVERSITIES
Current PSE Landscape demonstrates
1. Diminishing funds/cutbacks from the government
2. Increase in colleges with degree-granting status
3. Increase in online programs globally

29. Increase in online programs
world-wide…. or
Everything we provide is now offered by
someone else.
-- David Wiley

30. What students want:
Flexibility in their learning options
• Many have to work FT/PT jobs to be able
to afford PSE
• Reluctant to leave their positions in this
economic climate

31. Meeting Future Revenue Needs
• Govts & Undergrad students… not so much
• Graduate & International students… yes

32. SOLUTION to
Increase Revenue
Top ways cited to increase revenue are to:
1. Recruit international students; and
2. Deliver course-based master’s programs.

33. A 3rd
SOLUTION…
Change access
and registration
options

34. A 3rd
SOLUTION:
Multi-Access Learning

35. Current Face to Face
Option

36. Current Online Option

38. Destination in Place and Space

39. LEARNER ACCESS:
Promoting Student Agency
• Emergence of choice - expanding “anytime,
anywhere”
• Social media/personalized learning networks
expanded this to “with anyone”
• I would like to expand this to “in any way”

40. MOST IMPORTANTLY
Transfer locus of control of how to
access courses to the learner.

41. MASSIVE OPEN ONLINE
COURSES
• MOOC
– Upwards of 100,000 course registrations
– Original examples: #CCK08, #Change11,
ED831 via @gsiemens @downes
@davecormier @courosa
– cMOOC (#etmooc) vs xMOOC (Coursera)

42. Multi-Access vs. COOL
• COOL – collaborative open online course
• A Multi-Access course but open
• Multi-Access
• Online, but not necessarily open
• LDAP connectivity w/ open toggle
• What it needs: 2-way communication

43. Multi-Access

44. Pilot of 2-Tier Multi-Access
• Petition
• 26 learners in the course
• 17 remote learners
• 9 F2F
• Survey administered at the end with
open-ended responses included

45. Pilot of 2-Tier Multi-Access
• 16 consented to participate
– 11 women, 5 men
– 10 from remote group, 6 from F2F group
– 8 had taken an online course before
• 7 women and 1 man

46. Learner Preferences for
Modality
TOP CHOICE
•9 out of 15 (60%) ranked multi-access as
top choice
•3 selected blended
•2 selected F2F
•1 selected online

47. Learner Preferences for Modality
Multi-Access strongly supported
•14 out of 15 (93.3%) chose multi-access
(F2F or remote) as 1st
or 2nd
choice

48. Learner Preferences for Modality
BOTTOM CHOICE
9 out of 15 (60%) ranked online as lowest rank
•4 (25%) selected F2F as lowest
•1 selected blended
•1 selected multi-access remote

49. Importance of Choice
• 4.67 on a 5.0 scale for importance of choice
in delivery mode
• 73.3% of learners reported a score of 5.0
(very important)
– All of these were students who had previously
taken an online course before
• Consistent across both F2F and remote
groups

50. Perceptions of Quality
• 8 students (57%) reported quality of learning
increased
• 6 students (42.9%) reported it stayed the
same
• No pattern between group membership as
F2F or remote group

51. INITIAL STUDENT
FEEDBACK
The REAL test of success.

52. Multi-Access Remote Student
I think the quality of teaching and learning was not
affected by the course being online. The instructor was
effective in delivering the material and giving
appropriate wait times after asking questions. It was a
very interactive course which I believe would have
the same impact if the course was fully F2F. We
are going towards an online community, and it is
great to know that there are already professors out
there that are equipped with the skills and
knowledge to effectively teach in any setting. Great
experience. I wish more people this year had had
the same opportunity.

53. I would say that it enhanced it. I felt like I was in the
class with live video and audio feeds, but at the
same time I had access to review the teaching
materials on my own computer and expand with my
own research during the class without disrupting the
flow of the lesson. For a long class (3 hours +) the
opportunity to access from home was a huge
advantage because the comfortable setting allowed
me to hold focus and breaks were more refreshing.
Multi-Access Remote Student

54. I really enjoyed the multi-access experience. I had
ongoing conversations on instant messenger with a
classmate whilst listening and taking in a presentation
for example. If you're in a face-to-face class you
can't just pull out your laptop and start typing
because it's rude, but when you're using multi-
access, you can immediately check out any thought
tangents online whilst keeping up with the presenter.
This makes the learning experience fuller, because
you can check things out as you think of them instead
of forgetting them and not getting around to it after the
class is done. I did feel part of the class as well.
Multi-Access Remote Student

55. • I also experienced the class from the other
side of the monitor, and I have to say, it
feels better on the technology. I felt the
pace of the class was much slower when I
was in the classroom F2F.
• hmmmmm. Personally I am an auditory
learner so this was exponentially better than
any previous online learning courses I have
taken.
Multi-Access Remote Student

56. It was fairly neutral, overall. I didn't feel like it
was any better or worse in terms of learning
quality, but I did feel that it was light years
more convenient for me. Grow this
opportunity! Offer these kinds of course
mediums as often as possible! They really do
make the grade, and it makes life for people in
rural areas so much easier and more
affordable!
Multi-Access Remote Student

57. I commend the individuals who
designed and implemented this course.
It was extremely successful, and
accommodated many students who
would have otherwise faced serious
challenges regarding their living
situations.
Multi-Access Remote Student

58. If I lived very close to campus year round, I think I would
have preferred to be in a F2F class or a multi-access class
in which I was in the room. However, I lived in [a town on the
outskirts] and avoiding the 45 minute drive saved me a
lot of money and valuable time that I could spend being
more productive. On top of that, the flexibility that the
multi-access course provided allowed me to move to
another city to prepare for my practicum much further
ahead of schedule than a F2F course would have
permitted. I went to my practicum city 3 weeks before my
start day; while a F2F class would have given me a long
weekend to pack up and move, meet with teachers,
supervisor, and admin, and plan my lessons with no time to
observe.
Multi-Access Remote Student

59. I think it contributes to the quality of learning
because it's differentiated instruction. By
having a multi-access course, students can
choose how to participate. I felt like my
needs were met and the video enhanced
the quality of the teaching and learning.
Without video, I wouldn't be able to
concentrate for 3 hours.
Multi-Access Remote Student

60. I would have also appreciated the
opportunity to choose whether I would be
an online or F2F student, even though I
reside in [university’s city].
Multi-Access F2F Student

61. • I know that the remote group benefitted from
the online aspect of the class for monetary
reasons, which I fully support. University is
expensive, saving money any way that
individuals can, should.”
• “I think [multi-access] would be ESPECIALLY
important for professional development courses
that full-time teachers would want to take.
Multi-Access F2F Student

62. • Multi-access allowed me to talk and
discuss with students and hear their actual
voices and their thoughts rather than just
written comments. From other online
classes I've taken there was very little
student-student participation, with this
class I felt like these peers were right
there with us. It enhanced the
experience.
Multi-Access F2F Student

63. • This course was amazing. It allowed for
freedom of life - the ability to participate
online and face-to-face was essential in
life as a parent, caregiver for an ailing
parent and a full time student.
Multi-Access F2F Student

64. Pilot Expansion
• 1 pilot out of 8 sections of core course
• Expanding to 6 out of 8 sections in 2013/14
• Major research-corp partnership being
negotiated to expand our work across
campus
• Grant shortlist for MOOC research initiative
by Gates Foundation

65. Multi-Access is Expanding
• Multi-access emerged in 2009
• In 2013, new pockets of variations are
popping up:
– Blendsync in Australia
– Synchromodal in USA
– “Blended” misuse in examples

66. Multi-Access is Expanding
• Common terminology will be important
• Multi-Access is the new framework or
lens
– Merges on-campus and online
– Can merge open
– Envelopes MOOC

67. Next Steps
• More Infrastructure
• ROI research on the infrastructure
• More “n” and rigourous research
• Registration system tweaking
• Policies & governance

68. Reassembling the Building Blocks
has RISK…
but we otherwise risk irrelevance
Reassembling the Building Blocks
has RISK…
but we otherwise risk irrelevance

69. References
• Irvine, V., Code, J., & Richards, L. (in press). Realigning
higher education through multi-access learning. MERLOT
Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2).
http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/irvine_0613.htm
Temporary link till published:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4616169/Irvine-Code-
Richards-2013.pdf
• Irvine, V. (2013, July). Multi-access learning. Invited talk to
Blendsync.org. Retrieved from
http://connect.csu.edu.au/p6wu6ey0fhq/
• Irvine, V. (2013, May). The 21st
century university. Keynote
to TLT13. Retrieved from http://youtu.be/HZ_msR7YHwY
(multi-access part at 49:36)

70. References
• Irvine, V., & Richards, L. (2013, January). Multi-access
learning: Overview and preliminary project data. Presentation
to the Canadian Institute of Distance Education Research.
Retrieved from
http://cider.athabascau.ca/CIDERSessions/irvine2013/sessio
ndetails
• Irvine, V., & Code, J. (2012, May). The 21st-century
university: Implications and benefits of choice of learner
access and openness. Paper presented at the BCNET-HPCS
Annual Conference, Vancouver, Canada.

71. References
• Irvine, V. & Code, J. (2011, January). The 21st Century
University. Presentation to the Change11 MOOC. Retrieved
from http://change.mooc.ca/week16.htm
• Irvine, V. (2009). The emergence of choice in “multi-access”
learning environments: Transferring locus of control of course
access to the learner. In Proceedings of World Conference
on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and
Telecommunications 2009 (pp. 746–752). Chesapeake, VA:
AACE.

72. Dr. Valerie Irvine, PhD
virvine@uvic.ca | @_valeriei
http://edtech.uvic.ca/virvine
http://tie.uvic.ca/ | @TIELab
http://www.slideshare.net/virvine/
Dean Crawford
dean.crawford@bc.net
Manager, IT Shared Services
BCNet