From: JCROSS@OREGON.BITNET (James Crosswhite)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Subject: Computer Travels (Long Last Message)
Date: 17 Oct 92 02:06:15 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: mbu-l@ttuvm1.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"mbu-l@ttuvm1.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

"There is no happiness for him who does not travel; living
in the society of men, the best man often becomes a sinner;
for Indra is the friend of the traveler. Therefore wander."

                                   The Aitareya Brahmana

"For what is unknown to the French schools will be revealed
across the Alps; and what you cannot learn among the Latins,
fluent Greece will teach you."
                                   Abelard

"The primary means of the investigation of social reality in
pre-industrial times was travel. The reports of travelers
provided the raw materials of what was later worked up into
statistical compilations; another source was the travel
correspondence so closely bound up with the art of travel."

                                   Justin Stagl


Computer Traveler here, for the last time under this name. I
returned from my travels (I think), and submitted my report.
I don't really know what's left of the purity of the road
(J.K.) in my report to my superiors.

You may recall that I was forced into exile by a vice-
provost. We are planning on converting our courses here from
3 to 4 credits, and I am responsible for designing a way to
do this for our writing courses. He asked me to think up a
plan for this conversion that used computers. The idea was
this: the increase to 4 credits can be justified by
increasing student workload. However, a proportionate
increase for writing teachers would be very expensive--
somewhere in the neighborhood of $250,000. Given that we are
talking about Big Money (for us), why not think along
completely new lines? Why not think about ways computers can
make teaching more efficient, and so not increase teacher
workload proportionately? Why not put some of the money into
hardware instead?

This is an obviously dangerous idea. My first recommendation
is still to reduce class size by 1/3 to make up for the
increased workload. I'll argue for this until the end. I've
put it into my report.

However, where grows the danger, there too grows the saving
grace. (Where is that from?) I have also presented another
plan, along the lines the vice-provost wanted. Here are some
parts of it.

"Networked computers make it possible to carry on
discussions, exchange papers and respond to papers outside
of class time. With a carefully planned curriculum,
carefully designed and equipped classrooms and careful
training of writing instructors, it is possible to increase
both the amount and the kinds of writing we ask of students
without proportionately increasing the workload of
instructors. I must stress that this is possible only under
optimal conditions."

I believe this.

Following this opening, I listed almost every benefit of
computer-enhanced learning I could think of. I included a
lot of auxillary benefits--benefits which accrue in the
process of using computers to write but which are not the
aim of the course. I focused on the way the expanded
communication possibilities would allow for increased
cooperative work at every point in the writing process. I
emphasized the potential of electronic conversations, file
transfers and mail. I stressed the ways in which networked
computers offer choices that are simply unavailable in
traditional classrooms.

I also put some "principles" in--principles that ensure
"optimality." Here's how I started:

"The ways in which computers benefit the teaching of writing
are very different from the ways in which they benefit
physics courses or courses in computer-assisted design. To
secure these benefits, certain principles must be kept in
mind--principles which sometimes have a direct impact on how
to decide on budget priorities.

"Computers enhance the teaching and learning of writing in
two basic ways: (1) They make revision easier, and so allow
the immediate and efficient application of what is being
learned to what is being written. (2) They increase the
opportunities for and kinds of communication among students
and between students and teachers. All other benefits are
secondary in relation to these two."

Then come the other principles. The needs of users should
control planning decisions. Access is critical. The learning
curve for the use of computers should be kept as short as
possible. Teachers need special, additional training in the
use of computers to teach writing. Classroom layout and
furniture are of critical importance. Reliable and timely
technical support is crucial. --If you've read my postings,
you know what I said in the principles section. (Lots of
critical crucialities.)

The first version of computer enhanced learning in my
proposal was for five multi-use computer classrooms in which
all scheduled meetings of writing courses would take place.
I also included a second, less preferred version which had
classes meeting only 1/2 to 2/3 of the time in the computer
classrooms. This plan would require three classrooms. I gave
several arguments in favor of multi-use classrooms:

"Teachers and students learn to use the machines more
quickly in multi-use classrooms. As a consequence, they
learn to use the machines more effectively. Teachers may
plan and modify their courses in light of their knowledge of
what the students need instead of what the lab schedule will
allow. They may choose to meet electronically or face-to-
face in whatever size group is most useful."

I also included an itemized budget. The first plan would
cost about $750,000. The second, about $500,000.

In a kind of appendix, I described a plan which used the
laboratory model, and I explained why this would not work as
a way of moving our courses from 3 to 4 credits.

I concluded the report this way:

"If the University can raise the funds, we can create an
excellent computer-enhanced writing program, a program with
a solid intellectual grounding in the teaching of written
reasoning which also uses state-of-the-art technology to
enhance learning. Anyone in the world would recognize the
excellence of such a program.

"If the University cannot raise the funds, we should build
on our strengths more slowly...We have an excellent program
now...We should not jeopardize this program by encumbering
it with inadequate technology that it cannot use well."

It was hard for me not to end up longing for new computer
classrooms. I think some of the administrators on campus
have such longings themselves. I think they will probably
look for some external funding. I am not optimistic about
their finding it.

A more likely scenario would be one classroom next year or
the following year. Another one later. And so on, until the
revolution has come and we just provide docks for student
laptops.

I've discussed the proposal with the director of University
Computing, with a supervisor of campus labs and with the
campus network specialist. We had great discussions about
how we envisioned cooperating with one another. We even
agreed that we might need to think of new models for
cooperation between Big Computing and the Composition
Program when it comes to managing the classrooms.

I wish there were some profound way of wrapping this all up,
but now that I'm home I'm immersed in the little things.
I've lost a lot of that view from 30,000 feet, the purity. I
am more and more a sinner, caught in Heideggerian falling,
deepening the ruts of my daily routines. When one arrives
home, the mystery of the ordinary seems profound and
inexhaustible; after a few weeks, it's an effort to recall
that vision of things.

Thanks to everyone who invited me to visit; I wish I could
have accepted each invitation. And thanks, too, to all my
hosts; you made a stranger feel more welcome than you know.
And thank you to everyone who sent me encouraging messages
about these postings. It was a pleasure to write for you.

"I was back...I had my home to go to, my place to lay my
head down and figure the losses and figure the gain that I
knew was in there somewhere too." (J.K.)

Jim Crosswhite   jcross@oregon.uoregon.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU