This page’s contents is still being contemplated…thanks for peeking, and stay tuned.
_

DSS Attorney’s Conference Webinar

Faculty: Janet Mason

Program Manager:  Jessica O’ Sullivan

Event: 2009 Winter Conference for Social Services Attorneys

Type: Webinar (Adobe Connect Pro)

Date: February, 26, 27 (1.5 days)

Clients: 24 online; 75? local

Link (view sample): Day 1–Morning Session

Objective:

Make DSS attorney conference available in a satisfactory format to remote clients unable to travel to Chapel Hill .

Challenges:

• Simultaneously present to local (SOG) and remote audiences.
• Give remote participants equal ability to interact with local audience (ask questions and share comments).
• Allow remote participants to hear local audience comments and questions.

Description:

click to view sample

Janet Mason received inquiries from several clients requesting a means to attend the 2009 Winter Conference for Social Services Attorneys remotely.  Travel budget restrictions would have otherwise not allowed them to attend.  Janet and Jessica contacted TLS mid-December 2008 (i.e. not last minute) to start discussing what options would be available for the February event.  Videoconferencing and simple video recordings were eventually ruled out for various reasons, and it was decided to attempt a live simultaneous event with the face-to-face (f2f) conference.  The online event received a unique course code, and course marketing, pricing and registration was identical to the f2f event.

Expectations for live interaction were set sufficiently low for online participants in the event  interaction from remote audience would not be supported.  The IT division was able to devise and test a solution which would both share conference presentations, and permit remote audience participation.  Though not especially elegant, nor sustainable in the long run, the solution worked very well during the conference.  Acting as webinar technicians, Cindy Lee and Greg Whisenhunt, took turns following along with (replicating) the presenter’s slide changes in the webinar software.

John Saxon played the role of moderator for online questions and comments.  When remote participants submitted a question or comment, John would raise his hand in the room (2603) and read aloud the question into a microphone.  The presenter was then seen and heard by the online participants as they responded to the question.  The webinar technician and online question moderator roles have proved to be essential for a successful webinar. These roles should be added to any future program budget that plans to use a webinar.

Brad Bednar provided helpdesk support for the duration of the conference.  He reported very few technical calls, citing webinar access as the chief issue (i.e. participants wanted to enter the webinar space before it was open). Also noteworthy, the DSS attorney Conf. webinar was the first SOG webinar to employ video.  Despite the relative low image quality, the use of video was very well received by the online viewers–though not recommended for large audiences.

Feedback:

100% of surveyed clients ( 19 of 24 thus far) found the software easy to use and reported being “very satisfied” with the webinar.  Some also shared some qualifying remarks that need our consideration.  Keep in mind that these clients opted to register for the online event.

• I really like attending from my office. No time wasted driving and spending the night in a motel.
• This was great!! It was much easier to watch than I anticipated.  However I did not like having to print my own material.  Is there any way you could mail the notebooks?
• In light of our county’s 50+ million dollar budget deficit, attending via webinar was fine. I miss seeing our brethren-in-trenches and the wonderful SOG staff.
• I will attend by webcast every chance I can.
• Encourage all presenters to use PowerPoint.  It enhances the online experience. [a number of presenters did not use slides]

~Joel G.