I have been using Skype for a number of years to keep in touch with friends in ways that social networking sites and instant messaging clients do not allow: real-time video conferencing. Yet, until now I never considered the potential benefits and consequences of using it as a mode of education. First, let's look at the positives. To start, Skype uses the Internet to broadcast its real-time video conversations. This would make it attractive to students in areas that do not have good education at their disposal. For example, students from less developed countries and rural communities would only need a computer, Internet connection, mic, and speakers to participate in classes over Skype, along with a reduced or even free tuition. In addition, Skype allows for the easy transfer of files, so it would be simple for students to hand in projects to teachers or for teachers to pass out documents to students.
On the other hand, Skype does have its drawbacks. In a video conference on Skype, your experience will only be as good as your Internet connection. If your connection is slow or unreliable, your video conference will be fuzzy and inaudible or it may not work at all. In addition, it may be difficult for teachers to directly interact with students as they would in a classroom setting. For instance, a teacher would not be able to watch a student work on a math problem in real time. Sure, the teacher could review his work after he sends the file to him, but that is much less efficient than a teacher watching you work on it. Also, if students are using Skype, it is impossible for the teacher to monitor their attention. Whether they are watching the professor or playing a computer game, the students eyes will still be fixed to the screen.
There are numerous disadvantages to using Skype, but for those that do not have a traditional classroom experience available, it is far better than not receiving an education at all.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree, Skype is a great tool for conversing with others compared to other methods such as social networking and instant messaging, but it needs to be vastly improved before it can be considered for widespread classroom use. However you do make a good point saying that when there is no alternative, and some people would be getting no education otherwise, Skype is an effective way of providing an education.
ReplyDeleteI like the idea of students in a third world country or distant rural community getting an education via Skype in theory, but I think we overestimate infrastructure when we say all they would need is the equipment and an internet connection. It's not as simple as Comcast running over with a dish and satellite and setting the up with the $49.99 starting package. The up front cost of all the equipment and the recurring cost of internet service is significant.
ReplyDelete