Technology-Enabled Learning

Technology-Enabled Learning, Wright State University, December 6th, 2001

Technology-Enabled Learning

Jeff Froyd, Texas A&M University, [email protected]

David Cordes, University of Alabama, [email protected]

Wright State University

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


+

Issue Bin

Questions

Comments

Make a sheet of paper


Why might I be helpful?

• Taught at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology for 18 years in the Department of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering

• Developed an integrated circuits/electronics sequence

• Worked an a project to integrate computers into electrical engineering laboratories.

• Helped developed an integrated, first-year curriculum in science, engineering and mathematics– Purchases 70 NeXT computers in 1990– Co-developed many activities that integrated the computer


Workshop Outline

• 1:30 PM - Workshop Guidelines (5 min.)

• 1:35 PM– Innovative Classrooms (15 min.)

• 1:50 PM – How do people learn? (20 min.)

• 2:10 PM – Ways students use technology (40 min.)

• 2:50 PM – Workshop Goals (20 min.)

• 3:10 PM – BREAK (20 minutes)

• 3:30 PM – Information Dump (40 min.)

• 4:10 PM – Processing (50 min.)


Tenets of Learning

• Each learner needs learning goals• Each learner relates incoming information to his/her

existing cognitive network• Sharing and listening to the insights of others helps

improve your understanding of workshop content• Effective workshops are partnerships between facilitators

and participants.– Effective workshops do not occur when participants expect the

facilitators to do all the cognitive work– Effective workshops do not occur when facilitators expect that

participants will be able to “just make sense” out of a large set of informative slides

• Each participant brings many mental models to learning and change experiences.


Introduction: Basic Guidelines

• Will operate in a team-based mode– The group knows more than any one person

• Become involved frequently– No pre-defined set of material that “must” be

covered in this workshop

• When looking at innovative classrooms, we will focus on– The use of technology in the classroom– Lower-division engineering courses


Introduction: Team Formation

• Self-Organize into four-person groups– Want to emphasize diversity

• Try to organize to maximize diversity across the group

• Try to organize so that none of your team members was also on your morning team

– Introduce yourselves (name, discipline, institution) within the group


What is an innovative classroom?

Part One


Team Exercise

• Within your group: discuss the following question among yourselves

What is an innovative classroom?(and could you recognize one if you saw it)

Appoint a reporter to capture group results


An innovative classroom is ...

• Physical layout is flex. And conducive to groups

• Multimedia

• Phsyical demos

• Internet access for running programs

• Instructors using computers interchangeable with othe modes

• Distance learning

• All students have computers in studio environment and using software package


Team Exercise

• Within your group: discuss the following question among yourselves

Is the present classroom an innovative classroom? Why or why not?

Appoint a reporter to capture group results


Is this an innovative classroom?

• Somewhat, workshop env.

• Yes, info flowing from students

• Yes, everything except student access to computers

• Yes, but problems, screen covering whiteboard,

• Yes, swivel chairs (groups), projection equipment, (bad- too narrow and long)


How do people learn?

Part Two


Part One: Overview

• Four Fundamental Questions–What do I want people to learn?

–Where are learners starting from?

–How do people learn?

–How might I facilitate learning?


Pedagogical Approaches

• Active Learning

• Cooperative Learning

• Problem-Based Learning

• Project-Based Learning

• Discovery Learning

• Inquiry-Based Learning

• Distance Learning


Possible Confusion

“A common misconception regarding ‘constructivist’ theories of knowing (that existing knowledge is used to build new knowledge) is that teachers should never tell students anything directly but, instead, should always allow them to construct knowledge for themselves. This perspective confuses a theory of pedagogy (teaching) with a theory of knowing. Constructivists assume that knowledge is constructed from previous knowledge, irrespective of how one is taught -- even listening to a lecture involves active attempts to construct new knowledge… Nevertheless, there are times, usually after people have first grappled with issues on their own, that ‘teaching by telling’ can work extremely well.”

How People Learn, Bransford, John D. et. al. 1999

Expectations: What do you want people to learn?

• Course syllabi

• Learning objectives

• Taxonomies

• Competency matrices

• Rubrics


Current Reality: Where are learners starting from?

• Data about entering students

• Pre-tests

• Experience with past students



How do people learn?

How do people close the gap?

NeurologicalCognitive

ConceptualClassroom

Organizational



Howdo

peoplelearn?

How do you facilitate learning and

learners?

Pedagogical Theory

Examples

Cooperative Learning

Problem-Based Learning

Curriculum Integration

Expectations

What do you want people to learn?

Learning TheoriesHow do people learn?

Pedagogical Theories

How do you facilitate learning?

Current Reality

What are learners starting from?


Four Questions

• What do I want people to learn?– Expectations, judgment

• Where are my students starting from?– Data, experience

• How do people learn?– Learning process– Research: neurology, psychology, cognitive science,

artificial intelligence, physics education

• How might I facilitate learning?– Teaching process


ReflectionModel for Learning and Teaching

Team Exercise

THINK-PAIR-SHARE

Identify two insights that you have gained from the four-question model for learning

and teaching.

Identify two questions for which you would like answers.


ReflectionModel for Learning and Teaching

• May not pay attention to starting point

• Expectations don’t cause learning

• Different levels of learning

• Think about expectations, starting point, but not others

• Pre-course questionaries indicate very large variance

• What do you do with a wide variance?

• Do I want student expectations?

• Knowledge to Synthesis

• Different methods to determine starting point

• Different methods for different learning levels


How might students use technology?

Part Three


Categories of Technology

• Learner-Centered: Focus on what students are doing with technology

• Stop here and ask participants for suggestions on what students can do with technology.

• Are they receiving/consuming information?• Are they communicating/collaborating with

other students? With the teacher?• Are they learning to use new tools for

designing and/or analyzing engineering artifacts?


Categories of Technology

• Consumptive Technology– Facilitates access to and transfer of information– Faculty generate info; students read info– Examples: browsers, Adobe Acrobat Reader

• Collaborative Technology– Facilitates communication among class members– Examples: e-mail, web forums (WebBoard)

• Generative Technology– Facilitates increasingly powerful actions by users– Students can perform more difficult tasks with the same

effort or the same tasks with less effort– Examples: MATLAB, Maple, Microsoft Office


Consumptive Technology: Examples

• Hypertext Browsers

• Adobe Acrobat Reader

• Multimedia Players– Real Player– Microsoft Media Player

• Java Applets

• Computer-Graded Assignments (?)


Consumptive Technology Characteristics

• Student perspective: Technology is easy to learn and use.

• Faculty perspective: Technology presents a substantial learning curve and choices among technologies are difficult to make.

• Faculty perspective: It takes a SUBSTANTIAL amount of time to create material for student consumption. For multi-media materials the ratio of creation time to viewing time may be higher than 10:1.

• Faculty perspective: Reuse of material is very important.


Consumptive Technology: Applications

• Courses that reach beyond campuses

• Course notes on web

• Power Point presentations on web

• Java applets

• Computer-graded assignments (?)

• ??


Consumptive Technology: Leverage

• Commonality of software applications among students and instructor, e.g, same web browser, same media player, etc.

• Can often be facilitated by institutional computer center


Consumptive Technology: Resources

• Woody Flowers presentation– http://www.asme.org/educate/

• Burks Oakley presentations– http://www.online.uillinois.edu/oakley/

• Kurt Gramoll projects (Engineering Media Lab)– http://eml.ou.edu/

• NEEDS (National Engineering Education Delivery System)– http://www.needs.org

• SCALE (Sloan Center for Asynchronous Learning Environments)– http://w3.scale.uiuc.edu/scale/

http://www.asme.org/educate/

http://www.online.uillinois.edu/oakley/

http://www.needs.org/

http://w3.scale.uiuc.edu/scale/


Team Exercise

• Stage 1 – Decide how your team will work on this exercise. (2 minutes)

• Stage 2 – List ways in which consumptive technology may facilitate learning. If time permits, prioritize your answers. (4 minutes)

• Stage 3 - List ways in which consumptive technology may hinder learning or have negligible impact. If time permits, prioritize your answers. (4 minutes)


Ways in which consumptive technology facilitates learning.

• Provide easy access to resources, e.g., handouts, etc.

• Move from copying to more active reading• On-line tests provide immediate feedback• Allows visualization and simulation for visual

learning styles• Allows responsiveness, access to practice

problems• Anytime, anyplace• Projecting notes provides space for interaction• Helps keep teacher organized


Ways in which consumptive technology does not facilitate learning.

• Learner focus on one info source, e.g., skip lecture

• Facilitates cheating• Access to unreliable info• May encourage lack of engagement• Less thinking because of provided answers• Electronic overhead doesn’t add value• Teacher may go too fast• Potential info overload, failure to focus


Collaborative Technology: Examples

• E-mail• Web Forums – threaded discussions

– WebBoard– First Class

• Instant Messaging– AOL IM– ICQ

• Conferencing Software– Microsoft NetMeeting


Collaborative Technology: Characteristics

• Student perspective: Technology is easy to learn and use.

• Faculty perspective: Technology is easy to learn and use.

• Faculty perspective: Responding to student inquiries and comments may be time consuming.

• Faculty perspective: Putting collaborative technology in place is not difficult.


Communicative Technology: Resources

• Math Forum– http://www.mathforum.com/

http://www.mathforum.com/


Collaborative Technology: Leverage

• Commonality of software applications among students and instructor, e.g, available e-mail server and clients, available web forum software, etc.

• ??


Generative TechnologyExamples

• Programming Languages

• Office Productivity Suites

• Numeric Manipulation Systems

• Symbolic Manipulation Systems

• Computer-Aided Design Packages

• Simulation Packages


Generative TechnologyProgramming Languages

• System Languages– FORTRAN– C– C++– Java

• Scripting Languages– Perl– Python– TCL– Mathematica– Maple– MATLAB


Generative TechnologyOffice Productivity Suites

• Microsoft Office– Word

– Excel

– PowerPoint

– Outlook – e-mail

– Access - database


Generative TechnologyNumeric Manipulation Systems

• MATLAB– Simulink

– Toolboxes: Signal Processing, Control, etc.

• Octave– Open Source Project


Generative TechnologySymbolic Manipulation Systems

• Maple

• Mathematica

• MathCAD


Generative TechnologyComputer-Aided Design Systems

• Electrical– Mentor Graphics, Cadence, Spice

• Mechanical / Thermal / Fluid– Working Model, Interactive Physics

– SDRC IDEAS

– AutoCAD, Mechanical Desktop


Generative TechnologyLaboratory Systems

• Examples– LabVIEW– VEE

• Computer-Based Instrumentation– Example: physics laboratories

• Laboratory Automation– Example: circuits laboratories


Generative Technology: Characteristics

• Generative technologies have steeper and longer learning curves for both students and faculty than consumptive and collaborative technologies.

• If students and faculty go to the effort to learn a generative technology, it seems that it would be more helpful to build on that learning in one or more subsequent classes.


Generative Technology: Leverage

• Learn once, use repeatedly – required because of the relatively steep, lengthy learning curve

• Requires that departmental, college, and/or university faculty agree on a set of applications, how students will learn to use the software, and how students will repeatedly apply the software

• ??


Team Exercise

• Stage 1 – Decide how your team improve on the following exercise. (2 minutes)

• Stage 2 – List ways in which generative technology may facilitate learning. If time permits, prioritize your answers. (4 minutes)

• Stage 3 - List ways in which generative technology may hinder learning or have negligible impact. If time permits, prioritize your answers. (4 minutes)


Ways in which generative technology facilitates learning.

• Analyze data and presentations

• Easier editing and rewriting

• Simulation and visualization can handle wider range of problems

• Model more alternatives, handle real-world problems

• Students use tools to self-assess

• Improve communication skills


Ways in which generative technology does not facilitate learning.

• Iterate until correct without much understanding• Lose physical feel for answers, less contact with

reality• Too dependent on technology and not thinking• Taking simulation results as fact with

reasonableness checks• Emphasize appearance rather than substance• Cost and maintenance to college or university• Learn tool and not fundamentals


Workshop Goals

Part Four


Team Exercise

• Stage 1 – Decide how your team will improve on the following exercise. (2 minutes)

• Stage 2 – Develop a list of goals for the remaining part of the workshop. (4 minutes)

• Stage 3 – Select the three (3) most important goals from list your team has generated. (4 minutes)


Tentative Workshop Goals

• Data showing best use of different technologies• Aware of collaborative packages that allow simultaneous

student access for team activities (PK)• Know more about on-line testing (PK)• See examples of other facilities and applications of

technology• List methods for adjusting learning objectives for various

student capabilities• See review and assessment of current computer

technologies• Info on available resources• Know about web-based distance learning• Methods to keep passive students involved


Team Exercise

• Stage 4 – Select the three (3) most important goals from the tentative list generated by the workshop. (3 minutes)

• Stage 5 – Collaborate with another team and select the three (3) most important goals from the list of six (6) goals. (3 minutes)


Workshop Goals


BREAK

15 minutes


What Others Have Done

Part Five


What others have done

Short (~25 minute) information dump• Background Information

– One-page introduction to technology-enabled learning

• Representative Foundation Coalition efforts– Arizona State University– Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology– Texas A&M University– University of Alabama– University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth

• Other sample initiatives– Drexel’s EE laboratories– RPI’s studio model


New Classroom Environments


Arizona State University

• Philosophy– College focus on technology in classrooms, different

classrooms for different needs, faculty training essential

• Classroom layout & equipment– Hold 40 to 80 students, team-based seating, instructor has

ability to project student work on main screens

• Software & Applications– Wide variety, different rooms have different packages, all

information available via the Internet

• Audience– All fundamental engineering courses


Arizona State University

Sample

ASU

Classroom


Rose-Hulman Institute of Tech

• Philosophy– Completely networked campus environment

• Classroom layout & equipment– Every student purchases a notebook computer as an

entering student (model is specified by institution)– Over 20 classrooms have been equipped with network and

power connections to support notebook computers

• Software & Applications– Maple (calculus), Working Model & Maple (dynamics),

Physics labs (Excel - data acquisition/analysis)

• Audience– All engineering students and classes


Texas A&M University

• Philosophy– Classroom technology must be scalable for large classes (~100)

• Classroom layout & equipment– Remodeled about 10 classrooms for first-year and sophomore courses– One computer per two students– Departments have constructed their own classrooms, more are planned

• Software & Applications– Microsoft Office, Maple, AutoCAD, Eng. Equation Solver (EES), Internet– EE has students design, simulate, construct, measure and compare

behavior of circuits. Class uses NI hardware and software.

• Audience– Freshman and sophomore engineering students– Specialized classes in specific disciplines

Scr

een

CVLB 319: ENGR 112 Team LayoutSections 501 - 503S

creen

Windows Windows

Podium

Doors Doors

412

21

311

20

210

19

91

131417 16

24 23

8 7 6 51518

22


University of Alabama

• Philosophy– Technology in classrooms, classrooms convenient to

students (one new classroom in “engineering dorm”)

• Classroom layout & equipment– Remodeled six different classrooms– Tables for four, one computer per two students– Departments constructing their own classrooms

• Software & Applications– Microsoft Office, compilers, FORTRAN, Maple

• Audience– Freshman engineering students– All students in introductory computing sequence


Alabama Classroom Layout

• Several classroom formats exist– All have computers at student desks, instructor

console, projection system– Primarily used for lower-division classes


University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth

• Classroom layout & equipment– Remodeled three classrooms with tables that seat

four students and have two computers (48 seats)

• Software & Applications– Maple and Excel– Based on Studio Physics model (RPI), students

perform physics and chemistry experiments in the classroom, acquire, display and analyze data

• Audience– Freshman & sophomore engineering majors


University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth

IMPULSE

Classroom


Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI)Studio Classrooms

• Philosophy – studio environment– Integrate classroom (lecture) with laboratory

(experiments, acquire/display/analyze data)

• Classroom layout & equipment– Tables with two students (one computer)– Student

• Using computer faces away from instructor• Listens to lecture facing away from computer

• Audience– Mathematics, sciences, engineering students


RPI Classroom Layout

• Students face instructor during lecture– Away from computers

• Student away from instructor when using computers– Instructor can

see monitorseasily


Drexel Classroomshttp://www.educatorscorner.com/education/case_studies/drexel.shtml

• Laboratory layout & equipment– Laboratory bench for two students (one computer)– Suite of measurement equipment with computer control– First-year and sophomore students

• Perform experiments and laboratory projects for three hours/week

• Philosophy– From the start students work with current equipment and

explore stimulating physical phenomena

• Audience– Engineering students


Resources

• Relevant resources– Foundation Coalition

• http://www.foundationcoalition.org/

– Arizona State University• http://www.eas.asu.edu/ceasrooms/• http://www.eas.asu.edu/~asufc/teaming.html

– Texas A&M University• http://coalition.tamu.edu/

– RPI Studio Classroom• http://ciue.rpi.edu/studioteaching.html

– Sigma Xi Resources• http://www.sigmaxi.org/scienceresources/undergradedu.htm


End of workshop

Questions?

Documents

Technology-Enabled Learning