Faculty from three universities cooperatively prepared and delivered a special education course for general educators. Interactive television was used for the presentation of instructional modules to four of the six remote sites. The remaining two sites viewed videotapes of the presentations one week following delivery. All other course activities, assignments, and evaluation requirements were identical at all six sites. Course evaluation data suggest that participants not only preferred interactive presentations, but also judged content and teaching as less effective when it was not interactive, Recommendations for increasing student involvement are offered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bullock, L., & Simpson, R. (Eds.). (1990). Critical issues in special education: Implications for personnel preparation. Denton : University of North Texas.
2.
Dirr, P.J. (1987, August). Critical questions in the evaluation of distance education. Paper presented at the 3rd Annual Conference on Teaching at a Distance. Madison, WI . (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 307846)
3.
Farr, C.W., & Muscarella, D. (1991). Is video really necessary? A study comparing interactivity in video and audio classrooms. Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 350 984)
4.
Gehlauf, D.N., Shatz, M.A., & Frye, T.W. (1991). Faculty perceptions of interactive television instructional strategies: Implications for training. The American Journal of Distance Education, 5(3), 20-28.
5.
Hackman, M.Z., & Walker, K.B. (1990). Instructional communication: The effects of system design and teacher immediacy on student learning and satisfaction. Communication Education, 9, 196-206.
Ludlow, B.L. (1995). Distance education applications in rural special education: Where we've been and where we're going. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 14(2), 47-52.
8.
Miller, J.W., McKenna, M.C., Ramsey, P. (1993) An evaluation of student content learning and affective perceptions of a two-way interactive video learning experience. Educational Technology, 6, 51-55.
9.
Pugh, R.C. & Siantz. J.E. (1995, April). Factors associated with student satisfaction in distance education during slow scan-television. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.
10.
Ritchie, H., & Newburg, T.J. (1989). Classroom lecture/discussion vs. televised instruction: A comparison of effects on student performance attitude, and interaction, Ameracarc Journal of Distance Education, 3, 36-45.
11.
Simpson, R.L., Whelan, R.J., & Zabel, R.H. (1993). Special education personnel preparation in the 21st century: Issues and Strategies. Remedial and Special Education, 14 (2), 7-22.
12.
Sponder, B.M. (1990). Distance education in rural Alaska: An overview of teaching and learning practices in audioconference courses. Monograph Series in Distance Education, 1. Fairbanks: University of Alaska Center for Cross-Cultural Studies.
13.
Spooner, F., Spooner, M., Algozzine, B. & Jordan, L. (1998). Distance eduaction and special education: Promises, practices, and potential pitfalls. Teacher Education and Special Education, 21(2), 121-131.
14.
Wolcott, L. (1995). The distance teacher as reflective practitioner . Educational Technology, 35(1), 39-43.
15.
Zhang, S., & Fulford, C. (1994). Are interaction time and psychological interactivity the same thing in the distance learning television classroom ? Educational Technology, 34 (6), 58-64.
16.
Zigerell, J. (1984). Distance education: An information age approach to adult education. Columbus: OH: ERIC Clearing House on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 246 3111).
