United States Distance Learning Association

own graduate experience as being face-toface
intensive with her advisor and peers.
She said, “I really enjoyed those times
when I could go by his office and just sit
and speak with him about my topic. Also I
remember that often a group of us would
sit in his office and have great conversation.”
In light of these experiences, she naturally
would have ambivalence about
interacting only in a virtual environment
in that it may take away from the richness
of the experience. She clearly was much
more tied to this concept of a live presence
than the other professor. Perhaps that
would wane as she became more experienced
in teaching. This would be something
to note in selecting professors for
using this technology. The more experienced
faculty may not have such a strong
need for a face-to-face presence with their
students. It would be expedient to gauge
their attitudes around having a face-toface
or virtual presence.
COMPLEXITY
The perceived complexity of Live Classroom
became compounded when many
faculty thought that they had to learn how
to teach in a fully online course to use this
technology. However, some professors
modified the use of Live Classroom to
record and archive their lectures in the
face-to-face classroom. This would have
been a good strategy to suggest for the
entire faculty. Using it this way would
have provided a bridge to allow them to
get comfortable with the technology and
master it in stages.
The complexity of Live Classroom was
mitigated by the full support and training
offered to the faculty by CLTT. Having
instructional and technical support
allowed them to relax and concentrate on
their teaching. It is essential that in considering
diffusion of new technology that the
complexity factor is reduced to a minimum.
TRIALABILITY
Both faculty members had the opportunity
to experiment with Live Classroom
and did not have to make a decision for
full-scale adoption immediately. This was
helpful for the junior faculty member who
was more hesitant in delivering her course
off-site. If she had not been given this
opportunity to test it in a modified way,
she might not have engaged with it at all.
OBSERVABILITY
There was nothing tangible to observe in
terms of results of the use of this technology.
However, the Center did donate tablet PCs
to those faculty using Live Classroom for
the semester. Other faculty inquired about
their new laptops, which initiated the discussion
of Live Classroom. It is important to
try to provide something concrete in relation
to new technology usage.
COMMUNICATION CHANNELS
The rate of adoption of an innovation is
measured by the number of individuals
over a specific period of time who adopt
the innovation (Rogers, 1995). Communication
channels, either mass media or
interpersonal, will influence this rate.
However, the communication channel
needs to be used strategically depending
on the stage of adoption. For example, in
the early stages of diffusion, the innovation
is picked up by early adopters. Rogers
(1995) developed five adopter categories
that provide useful information when
framing the diffusion process for a new
technology. They consist of innovators,
early adopters, early majority, late majority,
and laggards. These categories provide
a structure for audience segmentation and
different communication channels can be
selected for the target audience.
Rogers’ (1995) framework suggests that
the process of diffusion begins with the
innovators. In this case, the innovator was
a department (CLTT) rather than an individual.
This allowed for control of financial
resources and was helpful in assuming the
Volume 4, Issue 4 Distance Learning 51