Archives


Atom Feed

Associated Blogs
 
Edge City
 
Numbering Peano
 
Praxis101
 
Prof. von Clueless in the Blunder Dome

Recent Items
 
Exceeding Customer Requirements: Bad for Business
 
Your Cyber Servants
 
Emergent Semantics
 
Maximizing Workspace Utilization
 
RFID Privacy Being Ignored
 
Community Source Development: The Higher-Education Road
 
Arphids: Swarming Near You?
 
Our Kids Are in Big Trouble
 
From Blogging to Publishing
 
Oh Oh, They Got Me!  Google SMS

The Press Hunt for Local Bloggers

The Seattle Times: Business & Technology: Blogging guru stops, for a while, in Seattle.  From 2004-09-22: Kristi Heim of the Seattle Times dropped in on the September Seattle Web Logger Meetup and has beautifully characterized Dave Winer's appearance on the scene.  Naturally, we are all blogging about it.

One thing for me is that, chatting with Dave, I realized that I had misjudged our relative ages. We were looking at times when the world looked bleak before, and I was thinking of the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Bay of Pigs fiasco before that, experiences, like the Korean War, that Dave had only heard of.  (The first presidential election that I was old enough to vote in was held in 1960.  I voted for Nixon.  I really did.  I didn't regret the result, though.)  So I guess the reason I rank myself as a contemporary with Dave is not that he is wise beyond his years (which of course he is), rather that he is as young as I feel [;<).

In a related article, Kristi covers more information around the question she brought with her to the Meetup and that I am still thinking about.  It has to do with how much blogs figure in local civic life.  For me, blogs are a way of extending my reach across time and space to kindred spirits that share my niche interests.  The same happens with my web sites, which are predominantly devoted to my intellectual and professional pastimes.  And I share my neighborhood (funky West Seattle) along with others who share their original home towns and their new home cities.

It is interesting to see that there are local issues that connect bloggers and to see how passionate people are.  I'm proud of the Monorail initiative and I can see there is value in letting people know that there is more to it than waiting for a perfect solution the way we usually paralyze transportation innovations around here.  I think I'll be blogging about that, after I check out the Shark Blog.

I did that.  I need to calibrate my prediction after the results are certified.  The Monorail "recall" initiative failed, but I don't think I got the numbers.  We'll know soon.

Education: What Does Student-Centric Look Like?

Orcmid's Lair: Education: It's About the Students.  Phil, in a comment to my 2004-09-12 entry, asks me to clarify exactly what I am emphasizing when I speak of student-centric delivery.  His question has me realize that I am so immersed in the novel aspects of an on-line distance-learning program that I haven't made it clear to those who've not experienced it that there is something markedly different.  First, let me shift to "student-centric" as the first clarification.

With regard to the discipline and structure of the program, including timely, weekly marks and other support, I agree that my on-line experience is of a tightening of the kind of discipline that on-the-ground institutions aspire to as well.

I also see that much of what I observe is very much tied to the fact that this is an on-line program.  Because there is no face-to-face (F2F) contact, and there is no fixed meeting time, there is actually an enhancement in delivery as part of the need to deal appropriately with the asynchronous character of the on-line setting.

For example, the availability of marks -- in my private, secure grade book -- by the day after the study week (Thursday, in this program), and a progress report from the instructor ahead of that, builds on the fact that we are in electronic communication already.  In the on-the-ground courses I took (pre-Internet, with my last such course at the Stanford 1995 Summer Session) we met when we met so if there was to be instructor feedback it would be at then next class, if that early.

But I want to respond to Phil's main question about lecturer-centric versus student-centric.  It will take some interesting scheduling and organization to deliver an on-the-ground class in this manner, and I hadn't realized that until asked.  Also, this is certainly not the only approach to student-centric learning, but it is an example I have tasted personally.

Entering a Virtual Classroom.  You can see how the distance-learning classroom works if you look at the Virtual Tour that is provided as part of the delivery organization's web site.  You'll need Flash, but it provides a very accurate depiction of the virtual classroom situation.  Let's look at it one step at a time.

The week begins.  The virtual class that is portrayed in the tour is MSC-SE-010329-01, the first section of the Software Engineering module starting on March 29, 2001.  It is Thursday on the start of the fourth study week (seminar in the lingo used in the program).  I don't know if these are composite characters or not, but it is a lot like the MSC-SE-030320-02 that I took as my second course following the obligatory initial Computer Structures course.  Back in virtual March 2001, each student received the syllabus at the start of the course, and on Thursday April 19, the students in this section will have found the written lecture and assignments in the shared folder that the class has been provided for the Seminar 4 week.  If you are West of Greenwich like me, you could have found the materials there on Wednesday and, depending on the instructor, even earlier.  It's even more important that Lin Fong in Singapore find the materials available on Thursday morning his time.  (Students will become very accomplished at navigating time zones in these courses.)

The Lecture.  The Flash page that shows a Window entitled "Lecture 4 - Modelling and Prototyping" is very much like the lecture pages (which can be saved as RTF) as presented in the FirstClass client. This software is used for access to the material using the Embanet system in Toronto.  There's a browser interface too, but I find the fat client preferable, especially because I can work with it off-line after synchronizing with the classroom materials, and it is easy to back everything up from there.  What's important is that all materials for the week are available at the start.  There is no fixed place in space and time where the lecture is delivered as occurs on-the-ground.  So, already, the instructor is not at the center of the universe.  You might think that the computer-mediated communication system is now in that place.  Not so.  There is a central exchange point, but we deal with each other through it, it does not itself command our attention except when there is a breakdown of some sort.

There can be questions of the instructor, mostly for clarifications or to point out a broken link to a suggested web resource, that sort of thing.

Discussion Questions.  Here's where everything changes. At the start of each seminar, there are typically 2-3 discussion questions that have been assigned to the class by the instructor. It looks like the virtual reading assignment is in Ian Sommerville's Software Engineering 6th edition, with Chapter 7 on System Models and Chapter 8 on Prototyping.  (The current modules are using Sommerville's 7th edition, so this doesn't match up any longer.)  In my course, the postings of initial contributions were due by Sunday evening.  The students then comment on each other's offerings, so that there is an asynchronous discussion over the course of at least four days, and everyone is expected to participate each of those days.  This is where the course happens, along with the individual study and explorations by the students.  All of the structure that is provided, the written lecture, the syllabus, the textbook and other materials, are the foundation for what then arises through discussion.  Remember, these are adults and most are engaged in one way or another in Information Technology already.  The variety of experiences and perspectives is stimulating.

I had this very discussion question about prototyping in my SE module.  The discussion was pretty lively.  Think of it, 15 1-2 page discussion submissions with links to sources, followed by selected comments and new questions on each other's submissions.  One of the early practices that students develop is to focus on quality instead of quantity and be selective in what you choose to comment on.  But over the course of the seminar, each of these students will post around ten discussion notes.  The instructor may add in some comments or questions as a way of pointing toward something or to invite expansion/clarification of an item.  Sometime the instructor may need to bring a discussion back on track, though I found that to be pretty rare.  There may be penalties for people who respond too much, and the rules-of-the-road are set at the beginning of each module, usually in the syllabus.

I haven't been in other graduate programs, but I have the sense that this is what "seminar" means. In this medium, it works superbly.

There's more I could offer, especially about MSC-SE, my favorite module. The students form groups that are active by the third seminar and work on a progressive set of deliverables that culminates in a final submission at the 8th seminar. I thought I was experienced at international collaboration and development until participating in a group of four spanning 16 time zones. Every day, the sun rose in Beijing, London, Toronto, and Seattle as we discussed and corresponded in arriving at our group product.  That was just a little uh ... challenging, shall we say.

This form of delivery works for me.  And there is much accomplished in face-to-face classrooms that is not available here, especially for the instructor.

We already know that not every delivery mechanism works equally well for every student, and it is important to quickly learn whether this works for some one intrigued enough to try it.  When I started my program, in November 2002, the initial course was preceded by a two-week orientation and familiarization mini-course in which we became familiar with the tools and style.  And the initial Computer Structures course was essentially a free-trial that preceded any further commitment to the program.  I was given every opportunity to be satisfied that the approach worked for me and that I was prepared to apply the necessary rigor.  So there it is.  High levels of structure and institutional accountability, with the actual learning carried out in a particular discussion-oriented, student-centric approach.