ABSTRACT

The proliferation of computers and related equipment has been accompanied by the development of publishing and display technologies. In spite of this, blackboard and chalk remain the visual aid of choice in most classrooms. Reasons for this are explored and a solution is presented.

INTRODUCTION

During 1977 Commodore, Apple, and Radio Shack ushered in the personal computer revolution with the first affordable home computers. The ensuring period saw an incredible proliferation of computers and related equipment. Numerous display and publishing technologies have been developed that can effectively be employed in the classroom. Included are sophisticated word processors, drawing packages, scanners, powerful portable computers, display panels, and multimedia personal computers.

In spite of these developments the majority of classes still are taught employing the traditional blackboard and chalk. In fact the most widespread change involves the board. Colors other than black now are common and dry erase boards are being installed in many classrooms. The modus operandi, however, has undergone little or no change; the instructor speaks and writes and the students dutifully copy. Under the best of circumstances students leave class with an excellent set of notes, but one must question how much of the lecture actually was comprehended.

Given the availability of technology and the lack of the use thereof in the classroom, three principal questions arise. First of all why is technology not being employed in the classroom and are any of these the reasons legitimate? Secondly, is it desirable to use technology in the classroom? Finally, if such usage is desirable, what can be done to promote it?

IMPEDIMENTS TO EMPLOYING TECHNOLOGY

There are a variety of reasons that publishing and display technologies are not more widely used in the classroom. Inertia on the parts of the faculty and the administration is the first thing that comes to mind. Furthermore, the term inertia usually has a negative connotation. Professors who wish to maintain the status quo and do not care to put forth the effort necessary to change certainly are the case in far too many instances. Similarly, administrators often do not provide an environment that is conducive to the introduction of technology into the classroom.

There are, however, legitimate reasons why faculty continue to support the traditional lecture system. A principal concern is whether technology enhances learning or if it erects barriers that inhibit interaction with students. It is conceivable that lectures merely could become showcases for technology. Heavy teaching loads and keeping pace with the technological changes that have driven the computer revolution have left most professors with little time to develop systems that employ technology in the classroom. Another concern is the availability of equipment; that is, owning the equipment as well as its actual availability in the classroom. An instructor who must transport a computer, an overhead projector, and a display panel to an upper floor in another building soon may decide to use what is available in the classroom; namely, chalk and blackboard. Similarly, equipment that takes an inordinate amount of class time to set up, probably will discourage all but those who are firmly committed to change.

Reformation of the learning environment also presents administrative challenges. Principal among these are financial considerations. This is particularly true in a time of shrinking budgets and reduced government support. Another problem is who takes the initiative, the faculty or the administration. Excessive prodding of the faculty by administrators could be construed as unacceptable interference in academic matters.

EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES

Given the above impediments to the employment of technology in the classroom, the obvious question is, is it worth the time and effort? Given the inefficiencies of the present system, the answer must be an emphatic yes. The traditional lecture system was born in a time when only blackboard and chalk were available. Furthermore, the material being presented did not involve complex diagrams and complicated computer programs.

Times have changed; there is an urgent need to reform the lecture system. Furthermore, through technology the capability to do so now exists. Therefore, technology must be brought into the classroom, not to showcase this technology; but rather, to improve the efficiency of the learning process. This means technology must be employed not merely to increase coverage; but, to simultaneously improve comprehension. In addition, any paradigm that is adopted must be such that it is universally applicable to all classes.

THE BIG SHOW PARADIGM

A recent innovation in computer systems is multimedia¹ which integrates several display and presentation technologies. Sound, graphics, animation, text, and video from CD-ROM drives are available to greatly enhance presentations. One paradigm for modernizing the lecture system thus is to employ elaborate multimedia systems and sophisticated computer display equipment. Presentations are made in lecture halls to large groups as opposed to recitation sections. The lecture halls must be specially outfitted with computing and projection equipment suitable for large groups.

In addition to equipment and facilities, multimedia requires extensive preparation and logistical support. The fact that several display and presentation technologies are involved requires that lectures be crafted in a manner to adequately exploit these technologies. Clearly the effort needed far exceeds that for a conventional lecture. Logistics require the setting up and storing of the equipment as well as scheduling. The latter can present serious problems, especially if setup time exceeds the interval between classes.

Desk top machines, and even notebook computers, now have good multimedia capability⁴ Preparation and logistical considerations, however, usually preclude the employment of multimedia in small classes and recitation sections. Therefore, a big show paradigm for reforming the lecture system cannot be extended to all classes; but rather, must be restricted to large classes and the lectures for courses that include small recitation sections.

THE PORTABLE LECTURE DISPLAY SYSTEM

One objective in reforming the lecture system via the employment of technology in the classroom is that any plan be amenable to universal implementation. This precludes the use of a few elaborate systems. Instead the equipment should be such that it is available in most, if not all classrooms. One method of achieving this is to place a low cost system in every classroom. This has a number of disadvantages, principal of which is the cost incurred by having systems in classrooms full-time that are used part-time. Other issues are security, virus protection, and loading software appropriate for a diverse group of users.

With these considerations in mind, a portable system has been devised. It consists of a notebook computer and a combination overhead projector-display panel.⁶ The use of the combination unit means that only two relatively small devices need be transported to the classroom. In fact, if necessary, the system can be carried in a suitcase with wheels and a built-in handle. The computer has sufficient hard disk space to hold Windows, a word processor such as Microsoft Word for Windows,⁵ lecture notes that contain a significant amount of graphics, plus applications software for a course.

Except for a projection surface requirement, the system can used in any classroom. The projection surface can be a standard screen or a dry erase board. While the image on a dry erase board is not quite as clear as that on a screen and there is some glare from certain angles, it has the advantage that the images can be annotated. If a dry erase board is not available, substitutes can be employed. One such substitute consists of a lightweight portable board that can be propped against a chalkboard. Another possibility is plastic sheets that adhere to a chalkboard via static cling.

The above system has been employed in an undergraduate microprocessor course based on the Motorola HC11. Workstudy students who were serving as operators for a UNIX system entered the text of the lecture notes for the course into this system in their spare time. The author converted these notes into Microsoft Word 6.0 and added appropriate formatting. Simple diagrams and tables were constructed using Word. More complex materials from manufacturer's manuals were scanned and imported into Word. Lectures are projected using Word. The Word version, rather than a hypertext³ version, of the notes was projected to avoid involvement with another software package. Furthermore, Word provides a full range of display options, including single and multiple line scrolling, jump to a specified page, full screen display, and change of fonts.

PEDAGOGICAL STRATEGIES

In order to save students from having to copy the projected lectures, the notes have been placed on sale in the campus store. This would appear to have solved the problem of students attempting to simultaneously copy and comprehend. Unfortunately merely, projecting notes and pointing to them as they scroll by would court pedagogical disaster. Hence a strategy to engage the students and make them part of the lecture had to be devised. The strategy selected is based on semi-notes.² Semi-notes are a set of notes with selected portions omitted. The structure of the notes, lengthy text, complex diagrams and tables, and computer programs are retained, thereby freeing the class and the instructor from tedious copying. The omitted portions are presented as part of the lecture providing an incentive for students to maintain attention while customizing their notes.

An issue in constructing semi-notes is what part of the notes to omit. One could arbitrarily leave out brief but significant parts. This has the advantage of clearly identifying what has been omitted for students in class and for anyone attempting to make up an absence. An alternative is not to omit anything specific, but to have numerous places where explanations in the notes require elaboration. This has the advantage of not being contrived while requiring the students to be involved in the subtleties of what requires elaboration.

While projecting on a standard screen provides optimum clarity, it is not amenable to annotation. One could place a blank transparency on an overhead projector being used in conjunction with a display panel. This is not at all convenient and actually is impossible if a combination overhead projector-display panel is being used. A preferred method is to project onto a dry erase board and annotate using markers. In this manner the instructor has the same contact with the class that is achieved with a chalk and blackboard lecture. While a color projection system is desirable, economics may dictate the use of a black and white. This shortcoming can be ameliorated by the use of colored markers.

It has been found that the mode and timing of the distribution of notes to the class influences how effective they are in the classroom. For example, in one class, materials displayed and annotated in class had the textbook as the source. Students were observed copying complex diagrams that were available in the text. The converse was true when the notes were specifically prepared for the course and distributed in class or sold in the campus store. In this case nearly all students made good of these notes by highlighting and annotating them.

CONCLUSIONS

There are numerous reasons why available technology is not more extensively employed in the classroom. Given the need for education to become more efficient, it is imperative that technology be applied to learning in the classroom. Furthermore, while sophisticated setups may have their place in large lectures, the real progress will be made by using technology in most, if not all, classes. A portable lecture display addresses this need.

REFERENCES

1. A Guide to the Personal Computer, "Multimedia - the Sights and Sounds of Computing," New York: The New York Times May 19, 1991, pp. 18, 19.
2. W. D. Baker, Active Learning through Semi-Notes, Proceedings of Computer Aided Engineering, 1985 Annual Conference, June 1985.
3. A. J. Grover, "Integrating Hypertext into Teaching the Computer Science Curricula," Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Eastern Small College Computing Conference, October 1992, pp. 131-134.
4. J. A. Martin, Multimedia Notebooks, PC World, July 1995, pp. 190-202.
5. Microsoft Corp., Microsoft Word for Windows Version 6.0, Redmond WA: Microsoft Corp., 1993-1994.
6. nView Corp., nSight Monochrome LCD Data Projector, Newport News, VA: nView Corp., 1993.

EMIL C. NEU

Emil C. Neu is Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Stevens Institute of Technology. In addition to teaching, Dr. Neu has done research on reliability, computer-aided testing, and partial period Fourier Series. He currently is working on the integration of computers and modern teaching methods into the Engineering Curriculum. He also is Secretary of the Faculty and Coordinator of Graduate Advising.

Back to Table of Contents