Wonderful When It Works …

Personal Reflexive Statement

The authors first connected at the 2013 Association for Humanist Sociology (AHS) meeting around our mutual interests and commitments to social justice and humanism. Toy researchers are few and far between, especially those from a critical sociological point of view, so Pennell was especially excited about the prospect of having two young scholars with expertise in both toys and the intersectionality of race and gender speak to her class. However, we quickly realized that given financial and time constraints, a technological solution was the only way to bring in West and Thakore as guest lecturers. Rather than seeing a technologically mediated experience as contrary or incompatible with humanist perspectives and pedagogies, we viewed it as quite compatible with AHS mission and purpose. In February 2014, we shared our experiences at the Mid-West Regional AHS meeting and were encouraged by responses to develop our work further. This paper represents the fruit of that collaboration. From our first meeting to the final edits of this article, our work has been guided by our shared purpose to not only help students think sociologically but also to support and learn from one another. For all of us involved, this experience exposed us to the possibilities of sharing our humanist research with groups across the country and potentially around the world.

In a time like ours when the social world is very much out of joint, when it is dangerously near the breaking point, sociology should be a much stronger cohesive force than it actually is. It is up to us to make sociology come to life for the student and for the common man outside the college campus…to make the most of our opportunities as educators in a world calling for re-education. (Katona 1943:439-40)

The issues and concerns voiced by Katona more than 70 years ago remain as pressing today as ever. Discussions of the importance of public sociology have returned to the center stage and faculty are still looking for new approaches to make sociology come to life in rigorous and relevant ways. Increasingly, this search has turned to technology as faculty are being encouraged (even pressured) by administrators to blend, infuse, and/or hybridize their teaching with electronically mediated pedagogies. Time-tested techniques like the use of guest lecturers are being adapted to fit the super-connected, pervasive computing environment that Laird and Ku (2005) say has become synonymous with student engagement. Chayko (2012) enthusiastically promotes the merits of social media (e.g., Facebook and Twitter) to spark the sociological imaginations of today’s digital natives, while others have found Internet-based videoconferencing to be an effective tool (e.g., Glass 2007; Koeber and Wright 2008). Both formats allow students to interact with the scholars and activists they are reading (or reading about) who may be impossible to bring into the classroom otherwise. For Chayko (2012), techno-mediated pedagogies lead students to engage the ideas and the people advancing them on a deeper level. Successful implementation of such approaches, however, requires attention to several key caveats and considerations. And, as Koeber and Wright (2008) found, the use of high-tech pedagogies can backfire, resulting in negative learning outcomes and poor evaluations of the guest speaker as well as for the instructor of record.

Whether face-to-face or in a technologically mediated format, guest speakers open the door for students to engage in expertise and points of view that compliment or contrast with that provided in reading or by the professor of record (e.g., Agha-Jaffar 2000; Pfeffer and Rogalin 2012). They can also expose students to race, gender, and age diverse speakers (Dougherty 2002; Kubal et al. 2003), combat boredom (Mann and Robinson 2009), or stimulate active engagement in the learning process (Beaton and Forster 2013; Glass 2007). However, technology not only brings the guest speaker concept into the 21st century but also offers a major benefit in that it eliminates the barrier posed by geographical distance.

The goal of our article is to share the obstacles and opportunities videoconferencing offered within the specific context of an interdisciplinary first-year seminar course for nonsociology majors. Through critical reflection of our experiences using a widely accessible and relatively easily managed videoconferencing technology, we identify key factors that contributed to the success of the lesson and provide recommendations for other educators interested in expanding the guest lecture approach into the virtual world. We begin by discussing the course and the relevance of a guest lecture, then discuss Internet-based videoconferencing options and our decision to use Skype, and conclude our article with an analysis of student feedback and our implementation decisions and outcomes from our experience.

Instructional Context

All of us had previous experience either teaching undergraduates and/or using videoconferencing pedagogically or for professional presentations or collaborations. Specifically, Pennell successfully used Skype to bring her copresenters working in Alaska and El Salvador to the Association for Humanist Sociology (AHS) meeting in Nashville, TN. She also had several years of experience teaching using multisite non-web-based videoconferencing classrooms. West used Skype-based interviewing and focus groups, as well as for teaching via webcam. Thakore had previous experience with guest lectures and undergraduate teaching, as well as with one-on-one Skype communications, but no formal experience of using Skype in the classroom.

Pennell initiated the idea of a guest lecture for a course she was teaching for the first time entitled, “Doing Gender in Toyland.” West and Thakore’s research on American Girl Dolls, a luxury brand of girls’ toys that has been part of middle-class American girlhood since 1986, fit perfectly with topics scheduled for the second half of the semester. Moreover, it would be a chance for students to see that real people with real lives, people who in many ways are like them, create knowledge through research. At the same time, financial and time constraints meant that using technology would be the only way that we would be able to bring West and Thakore into the classroom.

An interdisciplinary seminar, “Doing Gender in Toyland,” was designed for first-year students, the majority of whom would not be Sociology majors. Part of a complete redesign of the general education core at Pennell’s university, all first-year seminars require intensive writing and speaking components as well as specific learning goals associated with a given distribution area within the core (e.g., natural science, fine arts appreciation, cross-cultural/global awareness). “Doing Gender in Toyland” was designed to meet the Social Science distribution area. Three learning goals of the course tied directly to the videoconference included the following:

Distinguish questions that can and cannot be studied empirically.

The course was offered for the first time in fall, 2013. All 19 students (18 female; 1 male) selected this seminar as their first choice, suggesting that they were highly interested in the topic.

During the first half of the semester, students in the seminar read theoretical and empirical studies of gender (e.g., Bem 1983; Messner 2000; West and Zimmerman 1987), historical analyses of toys and kid culture (i.e., Cross 1997; Kline 1993), and a popular nonfiction work, Cinderella Ate My Daughter: Dispatches From the Front Lines of the New Girlie-Girl Culture (Orenstein 2011). The students completed three assignments designed to spark their sociological imaginations and move beyond simply categorizing toys as for boys, girls, or both. These assignments included writing a “thick description” of their experiences visiting a big box toy retailer and analyzing toy advertising using Goffman’s (1979) gender codes. Assignments tied to analysis of a short qualitative data set and a field trip to a local independent toy stores provided students with an introduction to research processes.

The last half of the semester focused on research ethics and methods with an expectation that students would develop their own research questions and design a small study. They completed a literature review on an aspect of toy marketing; but in general, the class struggled with moving from library research and exegesis to coming up with a researchable question of their own. Pfeffer and Rogalin (2012) suggested that the use of cross-discipline and cross-method guest facilitators for class discussions fostered more frank conversations about the “challenges, struggles, and failures faculty members experience when conducting their own research” resulting in a mutually enriching learning experience for students and faculty alike (p. 368). As a result, we designed the videoconference with two goals in mind. First, we wanted the students to learn key research and sociological concepts; and second, we wanted to help them understand the messy, often nonlinear nature of research to reduce some of their frustrations and self-doubt in relation to their own work.

Given both the topic of the course and the learning goals, Thakore and West’s research was an ideal complement. Thakore and West’s work examines the messages that are promoted through the dolls, accessories, and books provided by the American Girl Dolls collection. Both authors previously published on critical race analyses of intergroup relations in an American Girl online forum (West and Thakore 2013). In addition, they conducted an online ethnography combined with an online survey to examine how American Girl consumers and nonconsumers identify the “races” of the dolls in the collection. Thus, both the topic of their research and their research model itself provided learning opportunities for the students.

The guest lecture occurred during the ninth week of the semester; a good time to revisit key constructs from the beginning of class (i.e., gender display, semiotic analysis) and just far enough into their final project work for their own questions about ethical and methodological considerations in conducting research to emerge. In order to ensure the presentation supported the learning goals of the course, West and Thakore integrated specific vocabulary and concepts into their presentation at Pennell’s request.

The week before our videoconference, students read “‘They All Look Alike’: Racial Perception, Popular Culture, and American Girl Dolls” (Thakore and West 2012) along with a news story about changes to the American Girl Dolls product line (Schiller 2013). In conjunction with the readings, students were provided a list of key terms (e.g., hegemony, color-blind rhetoric, racial signifiers) to familiarize them with vocabulary they would hear during the presentation, and questions aimed at making connections to previous readings and to help students generate questions to pose to our guests. For example, to connect West and Thakore’s work to their previous readings, students were asked to:

Compare the processes West and Zimmerman (1987) and Bem (1983) described about how children come to understand sex category membership and gender with Thakore and West’s (2012) description of racial categorization and our understanding of race.

To prime students’ thinking specifically about the research design, another question asked students to “explain why Thakore and West (2012) included both collectors and noncollectors in their research sample?”

Immediately prior to establishing the live connection, students were reminded of the learning goals for the class and reminded that information from the lecture would be on the final exam. They were encouraged to ask questions of the presenters and use this as an opportunity to think through challenges and questions they were struggling with in relation to their own research projects.

The What and Why of Skype?

Videoconferencing has changed substantially since its beginning in the mid-1990s. What once required an elaborate studio with near television station quality cameras, microphones, and technicians to establish connections can now be accomplished with a few clicks of a mouse or taps of a touchscreen. The cameras and sound systems on most personal computing devices (e.g., laptops, tablets, and phones) provide sufficient fidelity or can easily be augmented for most teaching situations. Used in conjunction with a Voice-over-Internet Protocol (VoIP) virtually anyone with access can harness the worldwide connectivity of the Internet for videoconferencing.

VoIP provides individuals the ability to communicate with each other using audio and/or video across Internet connections. Outside of costs for Internet access, basic versions of videoconferencing programs are free and can easily be downloaded on most computers and other Internet devices in a matter of minutes. To date, there are many free and low-cost VoIP programs (including our choice, Skype, as well as newer versions such as Google Hangout and FaceTime, among others); and each new generation in the global network further expands the number of VoIP options.

In our case, the decision to use Skype, a “second generation” protocol, over other options came down to a matter of convenience and familiarity. Skype has a straightforward interface with a relatively low learning curve for basic use and is widely available on a global scale. In order to connect, individuals first create a personal Skype account associated with an e-mail address. Then, users can add people to their Contact List either by searching for others in a Skype Directory or using an individual's profile ID to add them directly. Free access allows communication between two parties (through computers or other devices), but multiple users can communicate with each other from at least one (paid) upgraded Skype account. Skype was the natural choice for us because of our previous experiences; all three individuals involved in this project had previously used Skype for either personal, research, or teaching purposes. In the course of their dissertation research, both West and Thakore had used Skype to conduct video interviews with their respective respondents and West had participated in voice-only Skype group chats. West had also utilized Skype as part of teaching an online course, both for conferencing with students individually and teaching in remote-location classrooms with the assistance of local tech support.

In preparing for the guest lecture in Pennell’s classroom, it was necessary to account for the fact that Thakore and West, while in the same city, would be delivering their lectures from different physical locations. At the time, both Pennell and West had paid Premium accounts that would allow multiple users to interact with each other. Since only one Premium account was needed for our purposes, we used Pennell’s. Specifically, Pennell contacted West and Thakore directly to allow all three parties to see and communicate with each other.

Planning and Implementation

Establishing a relationship with the right people is a key element to a successful videoconference lesson, much as it is with more traditional guest lectures. As Barniskis and Thompson (2012) note, “Without some shared knowledge and relationship in place, there can be misunderstandings, confusions, and counterproductive assumptions about who is doing what and how” (p. 16). Planning, anticipating technical glitches, and building redundancy into the technological systems are the logical steps to success. In our case, planning followed a co-teaching model where the instructor provided insights into the student strengths and gaps in their understanding or concepts with which they were struggling. We met via Skype two times prior to the actual lecture day and exchanged several e-mails before that. Essential to the success of the videoconference was the advanced preparation and sharing of the PowerPoint the speakers used, as well as integrating the course goals and materials directly into the presentation as discussed previously.

The second and perhaps most important part of the planning was anticipating what our course of action would be in the event that the technology failed in part or in toto. With a clear understanding of how the lesson would unfold, we could easily cover and reassure the students when glitches occurred (e.g., we had to reestablish the connection with Thakore, had temporary screen freezes, and discovered that the audio would not work when the Skype window was minimized, but we never completely lost both connections at the same time). In addition, as a result of our practice sessions prior to the actual class, we developed a plan of action for when a connection dropped. We decided the responsibility for rejoining the conference call fell to the person who froze or dropped. This allowed the other presenter and the lead instructor to continue and keep the discussion going while minimizing the distractions for the students.

A third area that required consideration prior to the day of the visit falls under the umbrella of “interactional dynamics.” For example, thinking through how to address each other (as well as how to introduce ourselves to the students) during the presentation. This was especially key in this situation since the professor uses an informal style and first-name basis relationship with her students. We decided that using this informal style of address would be consistent both with the ethos of the class and Short and Martin’s (2011) findings that an informal style was linked to higher levels of student satisfaction, engagement, and ultimately recall of the information. Keeping things on a first name basis also served to minimize role distance between students and the speakers, as well as differences in status/credibility that students might ascribe to the speakers had we used formal titles (i.e., one speaker was a PhD candidate at the time of the lecture).

A feature of the videoconference environment that we did not anticipate, but were able to navigate well because of our advanced planning and solid relationship, was the need for the faculty to cue one another about things that were happening in their respective locations that might not be discernable on camera. The confused look of a student in the back row or the silent cue to signal the need to move on given the time available are easily communicated when the guest speaker is in the room, but are trickier when everything is magnified and amplified in the videoconference and the speakers are always “on.” In our model, the two guest speakers were able to use each other as gauge points for the classroom interactions and could play off of each other, which increased the dynamism of the situation. For example, when Thakore was speaking, West could focus on observing the classroom and vice versa. They were also able to demonstrate a collegial working relationship for the students, which is an important aspect of professional socialization. Pennell, as the lead instructor, was able to moderate the class discussion and indicate whether there were any questions that the students wished to have addressed, even though the mediated guests had not observed their cues. Her on-site presence was particularly helpful in that she could repeat and clarify students’ questions, which were not always picked up clearly by the computer microphone. She was also able to manage the time issues.

Guests also need to work to minimize distractions in their remote locations. For example, during the lecture, West’s cat walked across the webcam and effectively “joined in” the presentation. This supported the personal link that had begun with the guests’ opening AHS-style reflexive statement and brought a welcome moment of levity, two elements that Short and Martin (2011) identified as promoting greater retention and understanding of course material. However, it did require quick action to prevent the incident from becoming a distraction from the presentation.

During the lecture, students shared observations and asked the researchers about their work. At the prompting of the presenters, several students shared their personal experiences with American Girl dolls and these questions served as entree into a broader and deeper discussion. Some students were particularly concerned with learning that the American Girl company had discontinued some of their childhood toys. They were able to make connections between their personal experiences and larger social questions of consumer culture, racism, and indoctrination.

At the encouragement of the professor, students made connections to their upcoming research projects and asked about the process of determining a field site for conducting research. Students were particularly intrigued at the idea that online sites such as message boards, chatrooms, and social media could be locations for research projects (although no students choose to situate their projects in such areas). The use of technology as an instrumental tool in the classroom may have helped students understand that the Internet has greater possibilities than simply entertainment.

Student Outcomes

Both direct (i.e., final exam) and indirect measures (student evaluations) indicate that the videoconference experience helped students meet specific course goals. In terms of the final exam, students correctly answered a very high percentage of questions over West and Thakore’s presentation (i.e., 95 percent for the class as a whole on those seven exam questions). Every student could correctly identify the sampling method used in their research and most students were much better able to interconnect sociological concepts from course readings early in the semester.

Reflecting on their experience, students also indicated that they felt that West and Thakore’s presentation helped them understand the material and develop their research ideas. The videoconferencing experience also helped the class “gel” as a group and renewed their engagement and enthusiasm for the course. In their end-of-course feedback, students noted:

It was an amazing opportunity! And it was a good switch for us because it brought a little more interest to the class and broke up the stress from the second part of the semester!! (Student 2)

I greatly enjoyed Bhoomi and Rebecca's guest lecture as it provided a lot of information that I’ve never known. The whole presentation was eye-catching. (Student 7)

Bhoomi and Rebecca's presentation was very interesting. I liked the topic and enjoyed being able to talk with them in class. I think you should definitely do it again. (Student 15)

Beyond just adding interest and relieving stress, students’ positive evaluations were also tied to the usefulness of the presentation both in terms of understanding the material but with their own research projects. Students credited the presentation with increasing their understanding and noted the connection to assigned readings when making recommendations for future offerings of the class.

The guest lecture provided a different view on what was being taught within the class and helped me grasp certain information better. (Student 3)

If you’re using the American Girl Dolls study as literature for the class, then it would be nice to Skype with them again. Otherwise, maybe it’d be interesting to hear how another researcher went about their study. (Student 6)

West and Thakore’s lecture provided an effective transition for the students work on their last major course assignment of designing a research study. The following illustrative comments reflect the students’ appreciation for the opportunity to discuss research methods and ethics with scholars currently engaged in a study that on the surface might seem to be about toys but actually reveals much more about larger sociological issues and constructs:

It was a great experience to hear from people that had done similar research that we were getting ready to complete ourselves. (Student 1)

I thought the American Girl Doll presentation was very helpful as we moved to the research project because it showed us things we should be looking for while doing the methods and data collection. (Student 2)

It helped me think of different ideas for my project. (Student 4)

It was really cool to be able to have a conversation with Bhoomi and Rebecca, and to hear about the steps they had to go through in order to perform their study. I thought it was helpful when we had to make our own research study, and to see how people responded to their study. (Student 6)

It was also helpful when starting my group's research paper, because it provided the basic layout and construction of a research project within this area of study. (Student 7)

Students only reported positive experiences related to the videoconference and Pennell did not receive any criticisms of insufficient professor involvement or perceptions of the videoconference as a substitute for fulfilling her professorial obligations as has been reported by others (e.g., Glass 2007; Koeber and Wright 2008). Cognizant of this possibility, Pennell actively worked to forge close connections with her students through individual conferences and correspondences prior to the videoconference. In addition, she prepared the students to view the videoconference not as an optional activity or an afterthought but as integral to their learning experience.

Students clearly understood the purpose of this guest lecture, something that has not been the case for other guest speaker events we’ve observed. As a result, their questions were also very specific and directly focused on how the presenters came to their topic and research approach rather than intellectual argument. Consequently, the experience was not as interactive as an in-person guest lecture might have been. However, based on our experiences, we doubt that the technological interface is the determining factor in this regard. Rather, it is more likely indicative of where traditional first-year students are in terms of their epistemological development and gender socialization as receivers of knowledge (e.g., Belenky et al. 1986; Perry 1970). As one student wrote in her reflections on the experience:

It was good for helping us understand how to go about our own research, but it was a little intimidating because they were talking about their dissertation and more extensive research than what we were doing. (Student 14)

Nevertheless, this same student also strongly recommended to “do it again” with future classes. In general, the students responded very positively to the technology. Many used Skype or similar interfaces regularly to stay in touch with family and friends at home, and all of them recommended that it be incorporated into future offerings of the course. Several students expressed a desire for additional videoconferences. However, these same students recommended not going beyond two because it might be “too much” given everything else that “comes at us” during the semester.

Recommendations

As we have discussed throughout this article, the challenges of an electronically mediated guest lecture are both interactional and technological. The technical complications can be alleviated through cooperation between the participants, but there are several specific steps that can be taken to increase the likelihood of a successful outcome.

Conclusion

We concur with others who have explored the use of videoconferencing as a way to engage students in deep and meaningful discussions with emerging scholars. Skype afforded students the opportunity to hear about cutting edge issues and research methods at the crossroads of gender and race. Their questions reflected a high level of interest and engagement consistent with Laird and Ku’s (2005) findings; and, as Koeber and Wright (2008) found, a solid and strong relationship with the person primarily responsible for the course was also integral to our success. Working together as a team and sharing personal stories of research obstacles, frustrations, and accomplishments also helped students see research as something that is done by people like themselves, rather than just “names on the pages of books or articles.” The technologically mediated guest lecture not only helped to meet the course goals but also served to ignite the sociological imaginations of our students, introduced them to a community of scholars, and allowed them to develop their writing and speaking skills as well as their confidence in handling complex ideas and concepts. We should note that we too benefited from the experience. For example, since the opportunity in Pennell's classroom, Thakore has implemented Skype-mediated guest lectures in her own classroom (to date, with only one guest lecturer at a time) and helped other colleagues navigate and use Skype guest lecturing in their classrooms.

It is important to note that Skype or other VoIPs are not the only or best way to facilitate guest lectures in the classroom. However, taking into account the logistics of our respective locations, remote video conferencing proved to be the most effective option for us. Our collective experience with this approach gave us a unique perspective on the ways in which technology mediated pedagogies can further establish and support the dissemination of humanist sociological research.