Continue the Electronic Course Description Discussion Here
Attached is a 1 page explanation of how an electronic version of the
undergraduate marketing course might be taught to our students (on and off
campus) and to students at other institutions.
Any suggestions pro or con would be appreciated.
(Attachment at New Era Marketing Package)
X-Sender: jvanegas@mail.ce.gatech.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 10:50:45 -0400
To: edutech-friends@cc.gatech.edu
From: Jorge Vanegas
Colleagues:
I fully agree with Farrokh's and Chris' comments on this topic, and would
like to add some of my most recent frustrations and concerns.
1) The new approach (well synthesized by Fred) puts a tremendous amount of
additional extra work to the course instructor for the preparation of
materials... at the same time transfers a tremendous amount of
responsibility for what happens in a course to students... and also demands
a high level of logistic and technological infrastructure support...
My reaction: where are we going to get the time to do so as instructors...?
I have had tremendous visions of what I could do with electronic support in
my classes but never have been able to find the time to learn or do what it
takes... Furthermore, I am not sure students will live up to our
expectations and have the motivation and discipline it takes to learn on
their own... This obviously is a generalization, but for example, I
recently have been doing regular spot checks just to see if students keep
up with reading materials (required) for a class, and they blatantly
acknowledge they don't, no matter what strategy I use to try to get them to
read... and worse, do not care about any consequences... I am at a loss
many times about how to get them fired up, and believe me I have tried many
approaches... Finally, the current state of labs and othert support around
campus has also resulted for me in experiences like Chris'... Where are we
going to get the resources needed to establish and maintain this support
infrastructure..?
2) I am also having difficulty quantifying (or even trying to understand)
the value added of this approach... What really is effective learning and
what really is efficient teaching...? Is it mass commercialization of
knowledge that we are seeking? I have had light discussions with colleagues
about signs of trends of watering down education to a level of "audio
courses" that students can take while in their cars, or in the health
club....
I am not ready to give up total hope that electonic media can play a good
role in education, though... so I hope this dialogue continues...
Jorge
Jorge Vanegas, PhD
Associate Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and
Co-Director Construction Research Center, College of Architecture
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, GA 30332-0355, USA
Tel.: (404) 894-9881 and 894-0418 Fax: (404) 894-5418
Internet Address: jvanegas@ce.gatech.edu
X-Sender: cm@isye.gatech.edu
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 09:38:50 -0500
To: Farrokh Mistree
Folks--
I am also concerned about the *support* for electronic medium in the class
room Each fall, I teach a course that requires minimal infrastructure (C++
or Java) on a Unix (Sun) platform and it is always a disaster. Since the
class (as graduate class is small), at about midpoint in the quarter I let
the students in the course use our Center for Human-Machine Systems
Research Machines (chmsr). If you are interested in doing a usability
study, please feel free to watch/tape me on Mon/Wed, 3-4:30.
Although computer literate, I do not have the time in my professsional life
to learn how to administer such equipment nor troubleshoot it when it
fails. It is often a problem in ISyE classroom just to have an overhead
present, and then hope it works.
It may be that CoC provides better resources to more literate faculty, but
if the rest of us
chris mitchell
At 09:03 AM 11/19/97 -0500, Farrokh Mistree wrote:
>Fred:
>
>Good one page summary ... good piece of work. I agree with your premise
>that we will be doing more with the electronic medium in our classes in the
>next five years. Having said that let me think aloud:
>
>1 I am concerned about the section dealing with the method of
>delivery. Let me explain. The method of delivery depends on what you are
>trying to achieve in this class ... is the focus on teaching of facts or
>on student's learning? An answer to this question opens up a whole slew of
>other issues .... role of instructor, nature of assessment, etc.
>
>2 OK so this course is for a new age. What are the new goals for
>this new age course? Why do I pose the preceding question? I want to
>learn as to the core driver to this electronic medium.
>
>Cheers.
>
>Farrokh
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 12:51:31 -0500
From: Ashwin Ram
> It may be that CoC provides better resources to more literate faculty, but
> if the rest of us must add learning and on-going equipment support to our
> teaching responsibilities, I do not see how this will happen.
No, we're in the same boat as you are :-) I think Tech as a whole is way behind
when it comes to high-tech (or other) resources for teaching-related activities.
Ashwin.
--
Ashwin Ram
Associate Professor, College of Computing
http://www.cc.gatech.edu/faculty/ashwin/
X-Sender: guzdial@cleon.cc.gatech.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 09:54:04 -0500
To: Ashwin Ram
At 12:51 PM 11/19/97, Ashwin Ram wrote:
>> It may be that CoC provides better resources to more literate faculty, but
>> if the rest of us must add learning and on-going equipment support to our
>> teaching responsibilities, I do not see how this will happen.
>
>No, we're in the same boat as you are :-) I think Tech as a whole is way
>behind
>when it comes to high-tech (or other) resources for teaching-related
>activities.
>Ashwin.
Ashwin, who do you think that we're "way behind"? Peer institutions?
There are places that I know of that are doing more to encourage and
support the use of electronic media by faculty (e.g., University of
Michigan, George Washington University), but these are the exceptions. My
sense is that most research-oriented campuses are in the same boat as we
are: They want to make a move, but the technology and infrastructure hold
them back.
That's what I hear in Jorge's complaints, and I find myself saying them,
too. In the primary course that I teach, CS2390 Modeling and Design
(75-150 students per quarter), I have struggled to introduce technologies
such as CaMILE, a case library of successful student projects, a turn-in
system, and a grading browser for TAs and instructor. This has cost me far
more time than it should have -- and this is my research area where I
should be able to afford the time! The challenge is not just to get
something running (which is certainly challenge enough), but to keep it
running quarter-after-quarter. (I can't tell you how many times I
accidentally hard-coded a fact about a specific class, only to have it
crash the next course in which I used that tool.)
I see Jorge's concerns and my own as a research and development challenge.
It *HAS* to become easier. If it continues to be this hard, we will have
enormous difficulty convincing faculty at research-oriented campuses to
spend the time and to make the changes.
Mark
-----------------------
Mark Guzdial : Georgia Tech : College of Computing : Atlanta, GA 30332-0280
(404) 894-5618 : Fax (404) 894-0673 : guzdial@cc.gatech.edu
http://www.cc.gatech.edu/gvu/people/Faculty/Mark.Guzdial.html
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 15:08:34 -0500
From: Melissa Bachman
I like to hear discussion on these questions:
>I am also having difficulty quantifying (or even trying to understand)
the value added of this approach... What really is effective learning
and
what really is efficient teaching...? Is it mass commercialization of
knowledge that we are seeking? I have had light discussions with
colleagues
about signs of trends of watering down education to a level of "audio
courses" that students can take while in their cars, or in the health
club....
If it is so difficult to deal with the support issues, isn't it even
more important to know what's really worth while? If it's going to
take valuable time, the effort better be worthwhile. Perhaps some of
the most valuable uses of technology are, at the moment, not worth the
effort, but some of the least time consuming uses of technology are
probably not worth the effort either.
At a conference I attended recently, the following criteria for
determining the educational value of technology were identified by a
group of faculty from a variety of different universities.
Does it enable quality interaction among instructor and students?
Does it increase student interaction with the subject matter?
Does it promote deep processing of ideas?
Does it go beyond information retrieval to problem solving?
Does it allow a new instructional experience that could not occur
without it?
Does it remove obstacles rather than create new ones?
Is the pedagogy improved by the technology?
Does it free up time for quality classroom interaction?
In a sequence of courses, does it allow access to previous course
materials?
Good criteria, I think, but certainly not all-encompassing.
Melissa
--
Melissa Bachman
Center for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning
Georgia Institute of Technology
melissa.bachman@oars.gatech.edu
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:15:22 -0500
From: tg2@isye.gatech.edu (T. Govindaraj)
To: ashwin@cc.gatech.edu, cm@isye.gatech.edu, guzdial@cc.gatech.edu
Subject: Re: Electronic Course Description
Cc: dllewell@isye.gatech.edu, edutech-friends@cc.gatech.edu,
farrokh.mistree@me.gatech.edu, isye_faculty@isye.gatech.edu,
john.jarvis@isye.gatech.eduhhhhhistree@me.gatech.edu
Status:
I was going to keep out of this, having had continuing problems for
many years. And it is not because I can't handle the technology either
(nor are they due to my not knowing the field; since I have been
working on intelligent tutoring/training systems for almost 15 years).
I used (or at least tried) Teamwave last spring, and also tried to
prepare and publish material (all of it) and use them live in class
(in addition to making them available on the net). Among the several
problems I encountered (that continue to `haunt' me this quarter, to
varying degrees) are (1) the lack of proper background and familiarity
with computers among students, (2) seemingly minor and trivial
infrastructure and staffing problems, and (3) the lack of appreciation
of the real problems, the degree of which increases as one goes up
the organizational/administrative ladder.
Some problems will go away in time, like (1) above. But, I am concerned
about several other problems. If the past is any indication, I am not
too optimistic that they will disappear in the near future. The problems
I have been having and the inordinate amounts of time that I end up
spending are perhaps the price that we pay for being at the bleeding
edge! :-(
A few years ago I stopped offering a graduate course that I had
developed a dozen or so years ago on the effective use of interactive
computer graphics, requiring real projects and working interfaces
because I got tired of `fighting' all the `computer' (read
infrastructure and support) problems. My intention is not really
to gripe about these, because my `administration' seems genuinely
interested in helping. But, I sense deeper `institutional' problems
that I cannot quite understand. Let us hope that these will improve
soon.
govind
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 1997 14:11:32 -0500
From: Ashwin Ram
Yes, I do think we are way behind the top institutions in the use of
technology to support teaching and education. I don't know if we're way behind
the average, but I don't think we're aiming to be average either, are we?
But peer comparisons are not what I meant. More importantly, I think we are
way behind the current state-of-the-art in utilizing what technology can do
for us. We are all in the business of creating this new technology, yet we do
not use it ourselves in our daily lives.
And, most important of all, I think we are way behind our own faculty's needs
and desires to use technology in education. Many of us want to do more, yet
are unable to because of the kinds of frustrations that Govind mentioned. If
faculty at some technologically-backward institution are content with being
technologically-backward, that is absolutely fine. But in an institute like
ours where faculty are clamoring to do more, we should be supporting them in
doing more.
My wife teaches inmtroductory chemistry at Emory. She can walk into any
classroom in her building, and she has instant access to a networked computer
which is always up, always on the internet, and always hooked up to project
its display on a large screen above the whiteboard. Side-by-side is a screen
hooked up to a VCR. She can call up her PowerPoint slides from her computer in
her office (or at home) and start her presentation. She can bring up a Web
site and run an applet showing a molecular simulation. She can show a
videotape of a chemistry demonstration and explain it side-by-side on the
whiteboard, or model it on the computer.
I teach CS1502 (introductory programming). There is not one single classroom
at Georgia Tech, in the College of Computing or elsewhere, where I can do any
of these things. Not one classroom! Imagine teaching Java and not being able
to show the students a real applet. I can carry my own PowerBook along with
me, but there is only one classroom on our entire campus which is large enough
to hold CS1502 and has facilities to display the PowerBook's screen. When I do
choose to plug in the PowerBook (which takes several minutes), I can't use the
whiteboard, the overhead transparencies, or the VCR at the same time -- it's
literally only one at a time. I don't have a remote control to avoid having to
run back and forth to the PowerBook to move to the next slide. There isn't
even a phone in the room -- I always end up carrying my personal cell phone
with me so I can call the support person when something goes wrong or doesn't
work (as it often does). There is no question of students having computers (or
even computer connections) available to try out our code as we develop it in
class, to build and play with models interactively, to experiment, to do
anything but passively listen and scribble notes.
I hold guest lectures in CS1502. Sometimes a guest lecturer needs a VCR or a
computer hookup. Shouldn't I be able to assume that one will be available as
part of the standard equipment of a classroom? In many classrooms at Georgia
Tech I can't even assume that an overhead projector will be available.
You remember what happened during our recruiting season -- one of our faculty
candidates had to use a modem to dial up a local ISP in order to show her work
because we did not have a seminar room which had a network connection and
display facilities. Imagine that -- a College of Computing which doesn't have
a seminar room where one can plug in a computer. When I taught CS7511, my
co-instructor and I had to carry our own projection equipment across campus
for each and every class so that we could do hands-on computer modeling
exercises in class. We often hold PhD defenses with outside committee members
-- we either leave them out of the loop or ask them to listen on a
speakerphone because we don't have adequate videoconferencing facilities.
We spend all this money running ethernet cables into a hundred offices in each
building, yet we neglect to wire the five classrooms with the same facilities.
We put computers in each faculty office, yet we neglect to put one in the
classrooms. We don't even have phones and clocks in the classrooms. Why is
this? When we have the technology available, when we have the faculty who are
willing and able to use it, when we have a need, why don't we bite the bullet
and do it? Do we value education on this campus or don't we?
Ok, ok, I know I'm deliberately being provocative, but the fact remains that
we are way behind in availability and use of technology in education on this
campus, as measured by (i) what the best institutions are doing, (ii) what is
feasible given the current state-of-the-art, and (iii) what our faculty would
like to use if only it were available.
Ashwin.
--
Ashwin Ram
Associate Professor, College of Computing
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0280
Phone: (404) 894-4995, 894-7865
Fax: (404) 894-2970
E-mail: ashwin@cc.gatech.edu
Web: http://www.cc.gatech.edu/faculty/ashwin/
X-Sender: rheikes@isye
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 1997 15:39:01 -0500
To: Ashwin Ram
I (along with all the ISYE faculty) have been getting copies of all your
concerns about support for computers in the classroom. Let me suggest that
you need to get you message to the proper people. While serving as
Secretary of the Faculty, I have hear several presentations by Bob McMath
(at Academic Senate meetings and Executive Board meetings) about his
concerns and plans in this area. He even has some money available.
If you believe that a broad base of faculty support for change is needed to
get things happening, consider that the Undergraduate Standing Committee
(the Chair is Perry Desai, ME) had been charged in the statutes to
"continually review new methods, aids, and techniques of instruction. When
significant changes are considered possible, the Committee shall make
recommendations to the Academic Faculty. . "
If you want a discussion of this at an Academic Senate meeting let me know,
and I'll ask the Executive Board to put it on the agenda.
Russ Heikes
Secretary of the Faculty
From: Russell Shackelford
I'd like to heartily endorse each and every one of the points made
by Ashwin in his recent post. The simple fact of the matter is that,
from a teaching perspective, Georgia Tech implicitly defines "high tech"
as a whiteboard instead of a chalkboard. Around campus, we find
overwhelming evidence that advanced technological capabilities are
reserved almost exclusively for research activities.
Given the status and reputation of GT, it's an embarrassment that
we are not leaders in our own town (much less state or region) in
deploying relatively simple and straightforward commodity-level
technology to support our teaching mission.
Rather than just bitch, perhaps we should assemble a moderate list
of requirements for up-to-date classrooms. It seems that one such
definition is implicit in Ashwin's description of his wife's classroom
environment at Emory. Once we have succh a spec, then we can pursue
means of insuring that *all* our classrooms meet the minimum std.
russ
--
Russell Shackelford / College of Computing / Georgia Tech / Atlanta 30332
russ@cc.gatech.edu Work: 404-894-9217 Home: 404-681-0405
X-Sender: mhallerb@mgt-sun2.gatech.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 1997 18:15:20 -0500
To: Russell Shackelford
Hello everyone,
as a non-computer faculty member who wants to use technology in the
classroom I agree with everything Russell and Ashwin have written. I would
add, however, that sometimes even the simplest of technologies are missing.
In roughly two out of three classes I have taught one must bring an
overhead projector along if one plans to use overheads during lectures.
Video units are controlled by building staff and often are difficult to
reserve. Most surprisingly, I have taught in 90 degree heat in classrooms
that have no air-conditioning. My point is that what was technologically
advanced in the 1970's doesn't appear in many 1990's classrooms. I should
add that, at the other public university where I have taught (UCLA), the
basics were generally in place, so I don't believe that the distinction is
public university/private university.
As a relatively new Assistant Professor I cannot say what political levers
must be pulled to get some action, but a future budget priority should be
to modernize the classrooms. It may not be possible to hook up a Powerbook
in classroom, but at least one room with the necessary equipment in every
building would be appropriate. The basics like air-conditioning should be
expected everywhere.
So much for my two cents' worth...
Mark Hallerberg, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Sam Nunn School of International Affairs
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0610
mark.hallerberg@inta.gatech.edu
http://www.inta.gatech.edu/mark/markhome.html
(404) 894-1900 (Fax)
(404) 894-0682 (Office)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 10:17:18 -0500
X-Sender: mdrake@ibid.library.gatech.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: russ@prism.library.gatech.edu, mark.hallerberg@inta.library.gatech.edu,
guzdial@cc.library.gatech.edu, cm@isye.library.gatech.edu,
farrokh.mistree@me.library.gatech.edu,
edutech-friends@cc.library.gatech.edu
From: Miriam Drake
Hello Friends: Your messages have struck lots of chords with me. When I
came here from Purdue 13 years ago I was appalled at the lack of support
provided to faculty in the classroom. For several years I requested funds
to begin to supply things like overhead projectors, TV monitors, etc. to
classrooms. In addition I wanted people who would routinely check
equipment, change light bulbs, make repairs, etc.I was told that it was the
responsibility of each department. I did not agree than I do not agree now.
We need a central service to worry about it.
I applaud Russ' suggestion of coming up with some specifications.
It would help the cause if we could come up with some sort of planning and
multi year start up and budgeting. I will be happy to help. Let's keep
talking, maybe someone will listen. Miriam Drake
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 1997 10:07:59 -0400
From: Melissa Bachman
Russell Shackelford wrote:
> who wants to go first?
Me! Me! And I don't even teach. I think it's important to start small
and practical.
I'd say not *ALL* classrooms but during "phase one" select classrooms
with connections to the internet that are most likely to provide the
most instructor access, but I've no idea how anyone would figure that
out. The number of classrooms should depend on this concept.
I'd begin with an overhead, a screen, a computer, and an LCD projector.
Instructors could effectively use both, the overhead for text slides or
outline slides and the computer for...whatever can't be done on the
overhead.
For practical reasons, I would want an easy to use set up that does the
basics and is fairly secure (can't walk away). I've seen podiums at
other schools that can be locked so that equipment can be easily secured
without having to have doors locked at all times. I would arrange the
projector and computer in a podium so that the projector and computer
are ready to plug and play and easy to access in case of problems.
I would avoid the "higher tech" set up with mounted projectors and on
and on. Projectors will come and go (as in new models and sizes, not as
in being stolen). Simple and cost efficient is best. I think the cost
of a super duper set up would be wasted money that could go to computers
and projectors in more rooms. Whatever the set up, it should be easy
for instructors to manage and manipulate themselves.
Instructor control and access should be a higher priority than equipment
control and protection. Better to be easier used and accessed than well
protected and never utilized. I'm not saying security is not important,
but that utilization is more important.
Melissa
--
Melissa Bachman
Center for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning
Georgia Institute of Technology
melissa.bachman@oars.gatech.edu
X-Sender: amyp@isye.gatech.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 10:40:07 -0400
To: Russell Shackelford
I was fortunate enough this summer to teach in a VERY nice classroom over
in AE --
Guggenheim 422, which has seating for upto 60-70 people (my estimate).
A counter fronts the room which all AE faculty keys can open.
Inside is contained:
* a combined MacPowerPC / Wintel computer, on the ethernet
* VCR
* (of course) overhead projectors, which were usually not locked up.
* ports to hook up my own computer or other AV equipment.
The computer can be toggled between being a Mac & being a PC -- the same box
contains both types of processors. Installed is all software they thought
anyone
in the department might want to use. Also, they have special software for
making the
mac work like an xterm for any other computer on the net -- for example, I
could demo
graphics running on my SGI.
Now, to get to the nifty stuff. They have two screens, and for each, there
are two display projectors
mounted in the ceiling, already focussed and hooked up. Also, the room has
a good speaker
layout.
A small touch panel mounted in the counter controls all. Which screens to
have up or down.
Which projector to have on or off. Which input device (computer, VCR or
other hookups) to have
driving each projector and drive the speakers.
As an example, one lecture I was able to teach --
Stage 1: Drop the right screen, and display on the right projector software
examples running on the computer. Simultaneously have the left screen up,
and diagram on the left white board, in response to student questions, what
is going on the in the software.
Stage 2: Drop the left screen, and lecture from overheads, running computer
demos on the right as examples.
Stage 3: Put explanatory viewgraphs on the overhead projector (left screen)
and (with the touch of one button) switch the right ceiling projector from
displaying from the computer to displaying from the VCR. Run videos
showing aircraft crashes (my favorite) on the right, allowing students to
refer to the viewgraphs on the left outlining causes, things to look for...
This was beautiful for the faculty. The most I ever carried to lecture was
viewgraphs, a video tape, and a floppy -- and the least was absolutely
nothing, I could just download a presentation over the net and lecture from
the computer. I did not need to carry, hookup, or delay the class in
fumbling with strange equipment.
It also prevented many of the departemental concerns we have faced here in
ISyE -- instructional equipment missing or returned late, equipment damaged
by harried or careless faculty, cart-mounted projectors presenting too
small a picture when placed in the front of the room.
The credit for Guggenheim 422 goes to Dr. Jim Craig of the AE department,
its founder and caretaker.
-AP
*
Amy R. Pritchett
Assistant Professor Dep't of Industrial and Systems Engineering
Joint Assistant Professor Dep't of Aerospace Engineering
Georgia Tech
Atlanta GA 30332-0205
Tel: 404-894-0199
Fax: 404-894-2301
Email: amy.pritchett@isye.gatech.edu
From: minsk@isye.gatech.edu (Brian Minsk)
Subject: Re: Electronic Course Description
To: russ@prism.gatech.edu (Russell Shackelford)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 09:58:50 -0500 (EST)
Cc: mark.hallerberg@inta.gatech.edu, russ@prism.gatech.edu,
guzdial@cc.gatech.edu, cm@isye.gatech.edu,
farrokh.mistree@me.gatech.edu, edutech-friends@cc.gatech.edu,
john.jarvis@isye.gatech.edu, dllewell@isye.gatech.edu,
isye_faculty@isye.gatech.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Status:
"Stupid" question:
Tech is requiring that students buy computers now, right? Why doesn't (didn't)
Tech require that students buy a laptop so they could bring them to class (as
well as use them at home)?
Maybe too expensive? Big potential for theft?
I vaguely remember that there are some business schools that require their
students have laptops.
Brian
________________________________________________________________________
Brian Minsk Center for Human-Machine Systems Research
minsk@chmsr.gatech.edu School of Industrial & Systems Engineering
voice: (404) 894-2373 Georgia Institute of Technology
fax: (404) 894-2301 Atlanta, GA 30332-0205
WWW: http://www.isye.gatech.edu/chmsr/Brian_Minsk/
X-Sender: cm@isye.gatech.edu
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 1997 10:22:18 -0500
To: Russell Shackelford
I would be happy with one or two classrooms that actually met the needs of
a represenative group of instructors. I do not think it is straightforware
about what to buy, how to arrange it, what will work 'best', etc. Like
most things in rapidly changing technology, I think it is important to
incrementally implement-test--and-evaluate. I would be glad to volunteer
as a representative instructor.
chris mitchell
At 09:30 AM 12/5/97 -0500, Russell Shackelford wrote:
>
>ok, so what might our classroom tech-spec look like?
>
>1. In *ALL* classrooms?
>
>2. In *all LARGE* classrooms?
>
>3. In *all SMALL* classrooms?
>
>4. In *SOME but not all* classrooms?
>
>ideas? preferences? wishes?
>
>(half-baked ideas are welcome!)
>
>who wants to go first?
>
>later,
>russ
>
>
>--
>Russell Shackelford / College of Computing / Georgia Tech / Atlanta 30332
>russ@cc.gatech.edu Work: 404-894-9217 Home: 404-681-0405
>
>
Christine M. Mitchell, Ph.D.
Center for Human-Machine Systems Research
School of Industrial and Systems Engineering
765 Ferst St.
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, GA 30332-0205 USA
+1 404-894-4321
+1 404-894-2301 (fax)
cm@chmsr.gatech.edu
http://www.isye.gatech.edu/chmsr/Christine_Mitchell
X-Sender: nb2@eiffel.ce.gatech.edu
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 1997 10:49:12 -0500
To: edutech-friends@cc.gatech.edu
From: "Nelson C. Baker"
Good discussion. I've heard many of these comments around campus for awhile, it is nice to see them discussed. Ok - my two cents.
Why go for wires in the classroom - sounds expensive to retrofit. Why not wireless on campus - then students can go anywhere on campus into large and small classrooms, the library, their dorm rooms, etc. Other campuses are moving in this direction.
Another issue is the power requirements in the classrooms - how many only have 1 duplex outlet? I don't usually have enough power to run the overhead, computer, VCR/TV in the classroom. I can only imagine the demand for powering up laptops after being in class for 5 hours. Also, lighting - some classrooms don't have blinds that can be closed.
Bigger item - support/training! Students are buying software. I have a difficult time buying these titles to support my teaching from research accounts where I have to sign A21 statements. Who is going to buy them for faculty/staff (site licenses)? Most of us (not all) are capable of learning these technologies/software on our own. Some of us use these technologies also for our research, but there is a large percentage of faculty who do not use these technologies in their research activities. How will they learn (more than just turning hardware on, but **when** to use technology, where is it helpful to the student and where is it **NOT** helpful). Can we leverage these lessons among all faculty? How about one hour workshops / seminars / brown bags / discussion groups /web pages (pick your flavor) to disseminate how to use and what the students are already using the software for in classes/assignments.
File/web/xxx servers that as faculty we can put learning material on that will be available in the classroom and study environments. With a 50 minute "learning session", I don't desire to take half of that to install/ftp/tryout etc material during the class. If students can learn material in the classroom and then study that material in the same format everyone wins.
Back to support - who will maintain this classroom equipment? I come in and do my session - will the settings on the equipment allow the next person to come in and use the environment without trying to figure out what happened before they arrived?
As for which classrooms, if technology is not easily available, it won't be used. As a faculty member I need to be able to "count" on the learning environment to be ready. Remember these "teaching" activities account for "1/3" our time in P&T (by most measures - implied or real). At least one other university is providing faculty with computers every 3 years WHEN the faculty member attends a two week course on how to use the technology appropriately and how to incorporate them into pedagogy. While this is expensive, it is an interesting concept.
The real benefits of the technology will be more than showing syllabi and course notes (fancy transparencies). It is in the simulations, virtual "trips", searches for information that helps students see and comprehend the material. Unfortunately, while some work has been done to actually understand the impacts of technology on/to learning, much is still unknown, especially in the longer term (more than a segment of a course).
In addition to the hardware items for the classroom, what kinds of activities do we as faculty want to do in the "learning environment"? What "items" do we as faculty want to help us do these things? This list is equally important, and probably more so.
- Nelson
Nelson Baker, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Georgia Institute of Technology
School of Civil & Environmental Engineering
790 Atlantic Drive
Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0355 USA
nelson.baker@ce.gatech.edu
http://www.ce.gatech.edu
X-Sender: rich@jaguar.cc.gatech.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 1997 10:03:28 -0500
To: minsk@isye.gatech.edu (Brian Minsk),
russ@prism.gatech.edu (Russell Shackelford)
From: Richard LeBlanc
At 9:58 AM -0500 12/5/97, Brian Minsk wrote:
>"Stupid" question:
>
>Tech is requiring that students buy computers now, right? Why doesn't
>(didn't)
>Tech require that students buy a laptop so they could bring them to class (as
>well as use them at home)?
>
>Maybe too expensive? Big potential for theft?
As someone who was very involved in the decision process, I'll try to
provide some insight about this. The higher costs of laptops was a factor,
but not the deciding one. The potential for theft and related problems
were the real issues. The students the committee that studied the
feasibility of a computer ownership program told us that students in
general were strongly against laptops. Concerns were (1) potential for
theft, (2) threat to personal safety because all Tech students would be
know to frequently carry valuable computers, (3) inconvenience because of
the weight, fragility and potential for theft (think of how students
normally treat their bookbags).
Considering issue (3) alone, it seems that if we had required laptops, Tech
would have been obliged to provide the students with somewhere to check
them for safekeeping at various times (like PE classes, since we tell
people not to leave valuables in the lockers at SAC). This would naturally
require secure space (very hard to come by!) and staff. Given these sorts
of concerns plus the cost issue, we decided that requiring laptops just
wouldn't work, though students can buy them if they choose.
>
>I vaguely remember that there are some business schools that require their
>students have laptops.
Actually, there are quite a few campuses that are now requiring laptops for
everyone, including two in Georgia (Floyd and Clayton State). IBM is
aggressively marketing a Thinkpad leasing program that seems to work well
in the eyes of many people.
Rich
==================================================================
Richard J. LeBlanc, Jr. Phone: 404-894-2592
Associate Dean and Professor Fax: 404-894-9846
College of Computing E-mail: rich@cc.gatech.edu
801 Atlantic Drive
Georgia Tech
Atlanta, GA 30332-0280
Last modified at 12/16/97; 10:48:35 AM
X-Sender: fallvine@mgt-sun2.iac.gatech.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 13:47:48 -0500
To: edutech-friends@cc.gatech.edu
From: fred.allvine@mgt.gatech.edu (Fred Allvine)
Subject: Electronic Course Description
Status:
Other Links of Interest
College of Computing | EduTech Institute | GVU Center
Mark Guzdial | CS2390, Modeling and Design | STABLE | MMC - CaMILE | How To Squeak