Audiographic Teleconferencing Project: An Evaluation

• Communication poor or inconsistent
• There was no visual communication with other locations or Lakeland Centre. Not all participants could be heard and/or understood.
• Parts of presenter's words were cut out -still understandable, but annoying.
• Presenter's voice sometimes not too audible.
• Sound quality was poor.
• Presenter's voice often broken up. (Mentioned by two people.)

• Pace and Time
• I find audiographics painfully slow. (Six people mentioned the slowness of the pace.)
• Signing on took almost 30 minutes.
• My major criticism of the audiographic teleconferencing is that the time involved to let everyone speak/write/type seems to take up so much time. If it isn't working perfectly, more time is lost.
• There was time to break in but it slows the pace and we definitely ran out of time.
• ...tutors were hesitant, knowing the time frame, to take up too much air time.

• Other technical issues or problems
• Technical delays were especially frustrating. The session started very late.
• We were unable to use our writing pad but [based on observations) it seemed slow and inexact.
• The writing pad in particular I cannot ever see as being an effective tool for the student....
• I and local staff attempted to delete files and put new ones on for session Ib. We thought we did it right but I guess we just deleted the files.

• Practical and "human" issues
• Not used to concentrating on screen, speaker, pad, study guide.
• A certain amount of impersonal feeling.
• My tutors' attention wandered during long waits for responses.
• My set-up was different from the one described (in the handbook).