Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 00:05:17 EDT From: Gwen Subject: Re: computers in chemistry I have been using computers in many different ways with my high school students for several years now. When former students return at fall break, or some other occassion during their freshman year I always inquire about the amount of computer usage in their chemistry class/lab. It is interesting to hear what they say. Many of the larger universities do not require much beyond word-processing of lab reports. Many of the smaller colleges (primarily private schools) and some of the other universities have some labs which use computer interfaced equipment as well as software such as Hyperchem. Most of these students take a computer to college with them; this includes engineering majors to English majors. They are so used to doing practically everything with the computer. How students use computers in my course (see course material at URL below): wordprocessing of most work handed in, other than reqular lab write-ups which are handwritten in the lab book spreadsheets for organizing data, as well as calculating frequencies and energies of the different wavelengths of light obtained with the spectroscope and various spectrum tubes internet for accessing the various notes and labs I have put on the web, and for obtaining information regarding various assignments SuperCard for preparing a presentation desktop publishing (Pagemaker) for project presentation Vernier lab interfacing-use of thermisters, pH probes, pressure sensors, and interface to the digital Spect 20s email to contact various scientists for information regarding selected topics or for sending me assignments, such as their "letter to the editor re an STS issue" or a "summary of a lecture" by a visiting professor from a local university. My school primarily has Macs with approximately 100 hooked up to the internet. About 90% of our 200 students have computers at home, and about half of them are on aol or a local internet provider, so it makes the assigning of activities using email or the web quite feasible. Oops, I knew I would leave something out. I also give the students an assignment using MathCad. It is to use the Balmer-Rydberg Equation to calculate the initial energy level of the electron for the lines they saw for the hydrogen spectrum tube. The kids also use graphing programs (Kaledaigraph--sp?) and graph their absorbances for their known concentrations to obtain a Beer's Law Plot. I realize that I am blessed much more than most high school chemistry teachers as I have 3 PCs and 6 Macs in my classroom, plus next year there will be a set of 6 laptops available to use for whatever. The students here at the Governor's school come to us with a wide range of experiences with computers. Seven different school systems send us students and these systems really provide differing amounts of computer instruction and usage. Some kids have seldom used a computer outside of a "keyboarding" class in the 6th or 7th grade whereas others have been regular users in their reqular classrooms since primary grades. The main computer course at Governor's School is one of application...wordprocessing, spreadsheets, data bases, graphing, SuperCard, web page production, email, and the like. There is a programming class for those students whose interest lies in that direction...it is C++. I believe that I am preparing the students who take my classes for the main kinds of computer usage that they will need in freshman chemistry at the college and university level. Please advise if anyone has suggestions as to what else I should include. I have students who attend some pretty competitive colleges and I don't want them to be less prepared than their classmates who are from more urban areas. I hope this isn't too long. Gwen : ) ************************************************************************* Gwen Sibert : Chemistry Roanoke Valley Governor's School BITNET: sibert@vtvm1 2104 Grandin Road, S.W. INTERNET: sibert@vtvm1.cc.vt.edu Roanoke, Virginia 24015 (USA) gsibert@pen.k12.va.us gsibert@rvgs.k12.va.us (540) 853-2116 FAX: (540) 853-1056 http://www.chem.vt.edu/RVGS/RVGS-home.html Entropy Needs No Maintenance ************************************************************************* ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 08:16:19 -0400 From: Brian Tissue Subject: Re: BT: Paper 4-GRL :What about the Costs of NOT using technology? >Brian Tissue has raised some important questions. At some point it is >appropriate for us to ask ourselves if some "Evil Genius" has tricked us >into thinking that Teaching using IT is so fantastic. (apologies to Descartes). > >However, I do have some questions/comments on the paper. First, as to the >ability of any new technology to deliver information effectively, There are >248 papers that report "no significant difference" between various kinds of >technological delivery of information, and standard lectures. see >http://tenb.mta.ca/phenom/phenom.html for references. By the way, this >includes the use of radio and correspondence classes from as far back as >1928. So from this there should be a net cost savings if you use IT to >replace Lecture rooms, without a loss in the quality of the education, since >there is the cost of heating and cleaning the large building, matenance, etc. > >Second, and more importantly, There is nothing mentioned concerning the cost >of NOT using technology. Students need to know how to work with, and use >technology. At some point, they will have to learn, be it on the job, on >their own, or in college. If we don't use technology, it will save >universities money, at the expense of a loss in value of the degrees we >offer. (anecdotally, in the last 5 years, the only chemistry major that had >more than one job offer upon graduation was a student that was a dual comp. >sci, and chemistry major) > >Last, some of the costs Brian mentions, particularly for Faculty time, >involves redistribution, not added costs. While this may have a significant >impact on Faculty, it doesn't necessarily raise the overall costs. > >Sorry to be so long - I Can't wait 'til the 17th. Thanks to Brian for a >thought provoking paper (which is what I think he intended.) > >George R Long, Ph.D. >Department of Chemistry, Indiana University of Pennsylvania George Long raises several issues concerning the use of information technology in education: effectiveness of different delivery methods, the cost of NOT using technology, and redistribution of faculty time. On this second point, I personally don't think that NOT using technology is an option. I do make an over-simplified classification between using technology to teach, such as multimedia presentations; and students using technology tools as they learn, such as spreadsheets, etc. I will address this issue in more detail in my next reply to Mary Swift's questions. I don't doubt that distance education can be as effective as traditional lectures, but I do doubt that it can be significantly cheaper. Distance delivery methods replace classrooms with a different infrastructure, which can require highly skilled technical support in addition to the hardware. It might replace classrooms (which probably have the most efficient space utilization on a campus) but not faculty, support staff, faculty offices, and laboratories. I don't think that new technology allows an educator to teach any more students than was possible in lectures, if anything it is probably less. I don't have any numbers, but I also have the impression that correspondence courses have a higher drop-out rate than traditional education. Distance education makes a lot of sense in a lot of situations, but I don't think it is cheaper. I do see redistribution of faculty time as an additional cost. If faculty members are teaching full time, then adding new tasks, such as keeping up with technology or posting class information on a web page, requires spending less time on former tasks. If these former tasks were necessary, which I assume they were, then additional faculty or staff members are needed to teach the same number of students. If the time redistribution is from research or service to teaching, then I would agree that there is no direct cost. Unfortunately, I think the trends in most institutions are to do more research or extracurricular activities that generate revenues. If anyone knows of counter examples please post them to the list. The increasing sophistication of scientific tools requires educators to spend more time to learn to use the tools well, to be able to teach students how to use the tools effectively. In this regard, the cost of education increases analogous to Ziman's view of science. Concerning the thought-provoking, one of the reasons I wrote this paper was to think about good reasons for justifying expenditures on information technology. Rather than claiming cost-savings that don't materialize, I think we must justify reallocating resources for the right reasons. With long-term planning we can then avoid hitting a brick wall in the future. Brian *************************************************************** Brian M. Tissue phone: (540) 231-3786 Assistant Professor of Chemistry FAX: (540) 231-3255 Virginia Tech e-mail: tissue@vt.edu Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212 http://www.chem.vt.edu/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 08:47:56 -0400 From: Brian Tissue Subject: Re: BT - Paper 4-MLS: teaching technology >As chemists we always teach/taught technology. In the past it might have >limited to spectrophotometers or liquid chromatographs, etc but we taught it. >How many of us are old enough to remember the sessions in general chemistry >on use of the slide rule? Granted computer technology (IT) is taking more >time to teach, but is this 'bad' considering its (potential) power? How >different is teaching computer technology from the past models of chemical >education cited? >Mary L. Swift >College of Medicine, Howard University I think teaching computer skills is a direct extension of teaching other learning and work tools, such as a slide rule, graphing calculator, etc. In this regard, if it was necessary to teach the slide rule in the past to teach chemistry, then it follows that it is necessary to teach (selective) computer skills now to teach chemistry. It's also easy to make the analogy of information technology being the latest "instrumentation" for scientists to do their job. In this regard, I think that most chemistry programs omit several types of tools that graduates going to industry will use; such as groupware, laboratory information manangement systems (LIMS), and electronic laboratory notebooks. How to pick the instrumentation and technology to incorporate in a curriculum is difficult, and is probably limited more by practical constraints; such as cost, specialized space, or teaching interests; than by pedagogical issues. To tie in the theme of my paper again, the greater sophistication and specialization of modern instrumentation (including the information tools mentioned above) requires a larger time commitment by educators to develop the expertise to be able to teach students these modern tools. A key point is that educators must not only be able to use technology, but to know how to use it properly in order to teach students how to use it effectively and efficiently. Brian ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 09:01:49 -0400 From: Brian Tissue Subject: Re: BT: Paper 4 - JNS Dark rooms & Cost of Using IT >The problem of students taking notes in a darkened room is not new. I have >seen all too many instructors think that the room lights must be off in >order for the students to properly view a video tape presentation or a slide >using an overhead projector. When it comes to $10000-worth of IT that is >wasted because of a lighting problem, would not a simple solution, such as >desk lamps at each desk be a means to allow the use of the IT? All of these types of problems can be solved. My main point was that incorporating new technology can involve a lot of time, i.e. personnel costs, to shake-out the bugs. The Scientific American article that Theresa mentioned ("Taking Computers to Task" available at http://www.sciam.com/0797issue/0797trends.html) referred to these costs as "futzing," and put the cost at $5600 per computer per year (this futzing cost is included in the cost data in the figure in my paper). In the case I mentioned, installing track lighting on dimmer switches was opposite to physical plant's cost-cutting plans of eliminating incandescent lighting. Brian *************************************************************** Brian M. Tissue phone: (540) 231-3786 Assistant Professor of Chemistry FAX: (540) 231-3255 Virginia Tech e-mail: tissue@vt.edu Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212 http://www.chem.vt.edu/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 09:08:17 -0400 From: Brian Tissue Subject: paper 4, BT: Your paper on costs >Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 10:23:08 -0500 (CDT) >From: "Dr. Neil Kestner" >To: tissue > >I found your paper extremely useful and relevant. I agree with you on >almost everything. There are huge costs and we need to justify them. I >have been working with NLII and notice you quote some of those papers. >You might also look under the Jan 1997 program of NLII under educom's/nlii >reference. It has another paper on productivity but what it really refers >to is issues on the adoption of new technology (both costs and >infrastructure as well as policy). > >There is one point on which I must disagree. Unfortunately it makes >another pessimistic point whereas you had it as a bright spot. At the >send of your section on science education you pushed for the studio >model as a great cost savings. I know a fair amount about this as I have >had long conversations with Jack Wilson and also the people here at PSU >doing it. It is very expensive in both time and equipment. Jack Wilson >was able to show it saved costs at RPI because and it is a very important >condition, that they previsously had many, many discussion sections >taught by faculty. At LSU, for example, we have no discussion sections >and only lectures of about 230. At Penn State they have lectures of >300-400 and discussion sections the first semester only. With those >cost, there is absolutely nothing that can save costs. That is the >depressing aspect. In fact Penn State is building a 900 seat >auditorium. I fear that once we agree as faculty to these huge section >sizes and relatively little support for the students, no one will give us >more money to go back and do it right. I do know that Virgina Tech in >Chemistry is getting money to reduce class sizes based on retention >improvements. As far as I know this is one of the few examples of a >university correcting a bad situation. >Thanks for a great article. You are right on target. We need to think >this through carefully. > > If you think the rest of the conference should read this feel free to forward it. > >Neil R. Kestner >Louisiana State University, Department of Chemistry >Baton Rouge, LA 70803 >phone: (504)-388-1528 Fax: (504)-388-3458 >home page: http://kestner.chem.lsu.edu Brian Tissue forwarded the above message to chemconf97 on 6/17/97. *************************************************************** Brian M. Tissue phone: (540) 231-3786 Assistant Professor of Chemistry FAX: (540) 231-3255 Virginia Tech e-mail: tissue@vt.edu Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212 http://www.chem.vt.edu/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 09:26:53 -0400 From: Brian Tissue Subject: Re: BT: Paper 4 - TGC: The Costs of Incorporating Information Technology in Education >In response to Erik Ricker's partial comment: "...spark the interest of the >student." > >THAT is an important component at my medium-sized state school. Engaging >students is a relatively significant component in my department. For the >ones who have the abilities and who have already decided their major, some >of this may just appear to be "bells and whistles" (Ricker, again). But for >the students who are capable and yet are going to decide based on what lots >of us use as a basis for decision---what is enjoyable---having some of >these bells and whistles available in a chemistry program may not be so >bad---or may even be good since so many of the most important concepts are >VERY difficult to picture. > >Brian Tissue has done an excellent job in Paper 4 of describing the push we >are all feeling for IT from other educators and the society at large. Not >mentioned, as I recall, is the push we are feeling from the commercial >sector. This is the same behometh that has us now using $90 freshman >textbooks (and $100 organic texts...). I know; I know; it is not one >entity; it is the free-enterprise system), but who out there gets even $70 >worth from the $90 text? So why are we surprised that IT is being "sold" as >the next natural step? > >chm_tgc@shsu.edu >Dr. Thomas G. Chasteen, Graduate Advisor >Associate Professor of Chemistry >Department of Chemistry >Sam Houston State University Multimedia add-ons are increasingly being added to texts, driving up the educational costs directly paid by students. How many students, especially freshman, know how to really study from a text, much less visualization tools on a CD-ROM, or the Internet? This topic brings me back to an eariler posting on departmental audits. At what point in a chemistry curriculum do we expect students to be able to do algorithmic problem-solving, construct mental models of abstract concepts, apply existing knowledge to new problems, or write grammatically correct? I don't know the answers to these questions, but I do think that they and other questions are important for a department to ask. A coordinated (not necessarily integrated) curriculum could help reduce the costs borne by students by requiring the right tools for the learning tasks at hand. Brian *************************************************************** Brian M. Tissue phone: (540) 231-3786 Assistant Professor of Chemistry FAX: (540) 231-3255 Virginia Tech e-mail: tissue@vt.edu Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212 http://www.chem.vt.edu/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 09:15:08 -0500 From: Theresa Julia Zielinski Subject: TJZ - Re: computers in chemistry Thank you Gwen for your summary below. You are clearly providing a leadership model for us to use in our teaching. I think we should aim high and make sure our students use the skills they bring from their high school. I also think we must help those students who do not have these skills to acquire them as quickly as possible. There are many paths to accomplishing this goal. Mine is by imbedding the usage as part of a normal course so that the students perceive it as a skill like reading and writing. Thanks again Gwen Theresa Theresa Julia Zielinski Professor of Chemistry, Niagara University Visiting Professor of Chemistry, U. Wisconsin - Madison ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 10:42:00 EDT From: to2 Subject: Paper 4: Curriculum Changes and the Effect on Student Learning Brian Tissue wrote in his paper: >In my opinion, the best case for using computer technology was made by a >faculty member from the music department. Computer technology could convey >annotated experiential material, e.g., a symphony, that was not possible >otherwise. It seem to me that we should focus our IT efforts on providing valuable educational experiences that can not be done otherwise, rather than computerizing lecture notes or creating electronic versions of paper textbooks. We ought to be able to do at least as good as the music faculty, no? Tom ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom O'Haver Professor of Analytical Chemistry University of Maryland Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry College Park, MD 20742 Maryland Collaborative for Teacher Preparation (301) 405-1831 to2@umail.umd.edu FAX: (301) 314-9121 http://www.wam.umd.edu/~toh ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 11:01:00 EDT From: to2 Subject: Re: TJZ - Re: computers in chemistry Wow! Maybe I should send my students to Gwen Sibert's high school! But seriously, kids these days are growing up with this stuff (I do volunteer work with an elementary school that integrates technology routinely into the curriculum and whose teachers and students have created an award- winning Web site). When these kids, and Gwens's kids, get to our colleges, won't they expect even more sophisticated integration of technology, instrumental and computer? I have heard that some college-hunting students specifically investigate the computer facilities on campus - and maybe check out some of our course Web pages. We do all have course Web pages, don't we? Tom ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom O'Haver Professor of Analytical Chemistry University of Maryland Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry College Park, MD 20742 Maryland Collaborative for Teacher Preparation (301) 405-1831 to2@umail.umd.edu FAX: (301) 314-9121 http://www.wam.umd.edu/~toh ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 11:12:06 -0400 From: "Harry E. Pence" Subject: Re: BT: Paper 4-GRL :What about the Costs of NOT using technology? George Long asks why we should use instructional technology. Since I have commented several times that I recognize that IT is not a panacea, you might well ask why I continue to invest all the effort necessary to use it in my classes. There are two reasons: my students are more enthusiastic and I'm teaching more chemistry. As one of my students said, applications that I talk about in class become real when you can actually see them. I feel less like I'm teaching an applied math class and more like I'm teaching chemistry. I could do some of this with live demos (and I already do) but there are many cases where this isn't possible. I can't bring a sulfuric acid plant into class, but I can show students a picture and describe how it works. I can't detonate several tons of perchlorate in class, but I can show them a movie of what happens when that does happen. I feel as though I'm really teaching chemistry now, and I'd never go back to the old ways. Brian Tissue's article is really excellent, and I wish to focus in on one aspect of his discussion. In a reply he says >I don't doubt that distance education can be as effective as traditional >lectures, but I do doubt that it can be significantly cheaper. One of the major changes that has happened without most people being aware of it has been the transformation of instructional technology costs from long-term expenses to the supplies category. Equipment is becoming obselete so rapidly that by the time you have something set up you should probably begin to consider replacing it. As one computer exec said, "The operational definition of infinity is 18 months." (There is another argument here, regarding WHY the cycles are becoming so short. Is it driven by the greed of computer companies, the pace of technology development, or the demands of the consumer. I don't want to look at that, since whatever the reason, the new product cycle time seems to be getting consistently shorter, regardless of the reason, and there is no indication that this will change.) Most of the people who see large savings in distance learning seem to assume that once you pay big money for the initial investment, you can sit back and use the facility for the next ten years, that is, the amortization period for the purchase is ten years. If you change the amortization period to two years, or even three years, the costs skyrocket. In addition, there is a general tendency to underfund the costs for training and support. Finally, when the telephone companies decide to recoup their total line costs, instead of subsidizing the process, this will also raise the cost. Of course, one way to minimize all these costs is to focus on one-way, non-interactive delivery. This is the same model of TV courses that failed many years ago, but at least it's cheap. Distance learning can (and already does) make some real contributions to higher education. I fear that many of the enthusiasts (especially politicians) are supporting it because they expect large savings. If, as I suspect, these large savings prove to be a myth, this support may evaporate, leaving traditional methods underfunded and badly damaged. In the meanwhile, the real contribution that distance learning can make will be lost, as the former supporters claim that they have been mislead, and announce that they never really supported this dumb idea anyway. I hate to suggest a depressing scenario, but I've been around too long, and I'm afraid that I've become a little cynical. ;-) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | Harry E. Pence INTERNET: PENCEHE@ONEONTA.EDU | | Professor of Chemistry PHONE: 607-436-3179 | | SUNY Oneonta OFFICE: 607-436-3193 | | Oneonta, NY 13820 FAX: 607-436-2654 | | http://snyoneab.oneonta.edu/~pencehe/ | | \\\//// | | (0 0) | |_______________OOO__(oo)__OOO____________________________| ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 12:23:54 -0400 From: Brian Tissue Subject: Re: BT: Paper 4 - JNS Dark rooms & Cost of Using IT I'm forwarded the following message from Christina A Bailey . I've added a couple of comments at the end. >With all of the talk about "dark" rooms, I haven't seen any mention of >the system we are using for our studio classroom environment. That is, >we have a Robotel system which links all of the computer monitors to the >instructor's computer for simultaneous feed of information. We use an >Elmo presenter in conjunction with the Robotel and thereby have >capabilities for video, demonstrations, magnification of detail, >overheads, opaque projection, etc. An added perk is that the instructor >can "control" the monitors in the entire room. This can be done for the >entire room, for individual monitors, for small groups, etc. The >instructor can also screen individual computers and relinquish control to >another computer in the room. We have had no need to darken the room for >any purpose. All of our lighting is through recessed ceiling fluorescent >fixtures. > >And now, of course, the cost - $500 per station for video capabilities. >Sound can also be included for an additional cost as can testing >capabilities, direct communication with each station, etc. The nice >thing is that the master control unit has all of these capabilities which >can be added on at a later date. > >The Elmo projector we have cost less than $5000. Our university AV >services were so taken by the unit that they are buying several for >general use. > >General information about our studio classroom environment (general >chemistry for engineering students) can be found at >http://www.calpoly.edu/~cbailey/studiochem.html > >Thanks. Tina The first comment that I'll make about this impressive classroom (64-seat, 32 computers, and lab instrumentation, see the above URL for pictures) is that it is being used in a new studio format that puts the technology to good use. It would be hard to justify the cost of such a high-tech classroom for a traditional lecture format. An additional cost not mentioned is the instructor training needed to use such sophisticated systems effectively. Brian *************************************************************** Brian M. Tissue phone: (540) 231-3786 Assistant Professor of Chemistry FAX: (540) 231-3255 Virginia Tech e-mail: tissue@vt.edu Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212 http://www.chem.vt.edu/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 11:46:42 -0600 From: John Moore Subject: Re: computers and software Last spring at UW-Madison we required students in a 270-student class to use web-based pre-lab materials that included quizzes that checked whether they had done the assignment. These same materials but without the quizzes were available to all students (1500) in the same course and were assigned via the lab manual. THe campus system was not brought down. This fall we expect to be requiring all students in this course (2200) to use such materials. They will need to use either the 40-seat chemistry computer room, one of the computer rooms around campus, one of the computer rooms in the dorms, or their own computer (wired through the dorms). These materials do include significant video and do not work well via a modem connection. We have for some time required two programs (Lake Study and Periodic Table Live) available from JCE Software for everyone in our large general chemistry course. Lake Study needs to be done during the first two weeks of classes and is accessible from several campus computer rooms as well as our own. It is not Web-based and therefore does not cause network problems. Periodic Table Live will have CDs available for checkout in computer rooms, because it does require video. It is not Web-based either, and so students must use either our computer room or certain others that are willing to check out the CDs. WE have spent some time working with local computer center people to get this all arranged. We expect that our web-based system will work, given the large numbers of computer rooms on campus. However, none of the other departments are doing anything like this yet. We want to be first on the block and let them worry about finding additional resources later. In some cases we will also tell students that they can purchase their own CD or CDs if they cannot easily use the campus facilities. John John W. Moore Professor of Chemistry University of Wisconsin-Madison 1101 University Avenue Madison, WI 53706 Phone: 608-262-5154 FAX: 608-265-8094 Email: jwmoore@chem.wisc.edu World Wide Web: http://www.chem.wisc.edu/people/faculty/moore.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 11:46:43 -0600 From: John Moore Subject: Re: using the www There are several answers to Peter Gold's question. First, material that can be delivered via the web can also be delivered via CD-ROM. JCE Software is doing this with both the Periodic Table software and video that we have published separately on Videodisc and computer disks, for example. Those students who have high speed access to the Web can use it. Those who do not could purchase their own CD (for $35-$50, say). Second, material can be delivered by a composite system. Video on a CD-ROM and things that are going to change more often via the Web. That is, put on the CD those things that need to be on a CD for speed and put on the web those things that people will want to customize. JCE Software is also preparing a number of CDs with video on them that people could use in this way. Third, with NSF support, U Wisconsin-Madison has collected a large amount of video that is available for people to build into their own lessons. Dave Whisnant has been adapting some of the video to his own use, for example. We are also in a position to shoot new video as needed to supplement what is already available. This can be added to either of the two types of delivery systems mentioned above. It seems to me that ultimately (in the not too distant future) computer rooms will become less relevant and the students' own computers will become more important, for just the reason Peter mentions. Universities cannot afford to set up the large numbers of computers needed in computer rooms. John John W. Moore Professor of Chemistry University of Wisconsin-Madison 1101 University Avenue Madison, WI 53706 Phone: 608-262-5154 FAX: 608-265-8094 Email: jwmoore@chem.wisc.edu World Wide Web: http://www.chem.wisc.edu/people/faculty/moore.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 13:18:07 -0400 From: "L. Peter Gold" Subject: Re: Paper 4: Curriculum Changes and the Effect on Student Learning At 10:42 AM 6/17/97 EDT, to2 wrote: > >It seem to me that we should focus our IT efforts on providing >valuable educational experiences that can not be done otherwise, >rather than computerizing lecture notes or creating electronic >versions of paper textbooks. I agree completely but that's not what tends to be done. An example: Some years ago we had a lecture demonstration device for general chemistry to illustrate the kinetic theory of gases. It consisted of a glass plate that sat on an overhead projector. Small steel spheres were set on the glass plate and the plate was made to vibrate by a set of transducers. What appeared on the screen was a model of a gas: "molecules" moved and collided with each other and the "walls" of the container. It was clear that the molecules moved in straight lines until they collided, that there was a distribution of velocities, and that if the "temperature" was increased (by increasing the power to the transducers) the average velocity increased. If a mixture of large and small balls was used it was strikingly clear that the average velocity of the larger balls was lower than that of the smaller balls. With various accessories one could model effusion and also the effects of intermolecular attractions, including condensation so that the viewers could see the effects impressively and clearly. It was a wonderful device but it finally wore out to the point where our electronics shop could no longer keep it working. We purchased a somewhat different device which we still use. It works, but not as well as the one it replaced. It occurred to us that this demonstration would be ideal for computer modeling and so we looked for a computer demonstration. We found several but none of them came close to being clear enough to replace even our inferior replacement mechanical device. Some had elaborate provisions for calculating things like velocity distributions and averages but the visual effects simply did not show up. (This was about two years ago; if there is now something better available I'd love to hear about it.) There are lots of computer demos for general chemistry that generate pictures of orbitals, allegedly will great precision. But for general chemistry at least, a simple hand-drawn sketch is all one really needs. The kinetic theory application -- where the capabilities of the computer can really be used to advantage -- has been pretty much neglected. Tom O'Haver, and the musicians whom he cites, have the right idea: The primary contribution of computers should be in those applications in which they can do the job uniquely well. ------------------------------------------------------ L. Peter Gold phone (814) 865-7694 Professor of Chemistry fax (814) 865-3314 Penn State University 152 Davey Lab Internet: LPG@PSU.EDU University Park PA 16802 ------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 13:23:03 -0400 From: Brian Tissue Subject: Re: BT: Paper 4-GRL :What about the Costs of NOT using technology? Harry E. Pence wrote: >One of the major changes that has happened without most people being aware >of it has been the transformation of instructional technology costs from >long-term expenses to the supplies category. Equipment is becoming >obselete so rapidly that by the time you have something set up you should >probably begin to consider replacing it. As one computer exec said, "The >operational definition of infinity is 18 months." I think people are beginning to accept that information technology is becoming a permanent part of the budget. 32. Oberlin, J. L. "The Financial Mythology of Information Technology: Developing a New Game Plan," CAUSE/EFFECT 1996, 19(2) issue of Summer 1996, 10; http://cause-www.colorado.edu/information-resources/ir-library/abstracts/cem 9624.html. I'm glad that I'm not an administrator, because making the permanent resource reallocations to fund IT will not be an easy job at any level in an institution. >Distance learning can (and already does) make some real contributions >to higher education. I fear that many of the enthusiasts (especially >politicians) are supporting it because they expect large savings. If, as >I suspect, these large savings prove to be a myth, this support may >evaporate, leaving traditional methods underfunded and badly damaged. In >the meanwhile, the real contribution that distance learning can make will >be lost, as the former supporters claim that they have been mislead, and >announce that they never really supported this dumb idea anyway. There also seems to be a mad rush by universities to set up distance-learning courses to capture market share. Unfortuanately, this approach squeezes out some of the really good reasons to do distance education, e. g., supplying specialized course offerings. Brian *************************************************************** Brian M. Tissue phone: (540) 231-3786 Assistant Professor of Chemistry FAX: (540) 231-3255 Virginia Tech e-mail: tissue@vt.edu Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212 http://www.chem.vt.edu/ ------------------------------ ^^^^^^^^ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:15:39 -0500 From: George Long Subject: Re: BT: Paper 4-GRL :What about the Costs of NOT using technology? Brian Tissue Writes > >I don't doubt that distance education can be as effective as traditional >lectures, but I do doubt that it can be significantly cheaper. Distance >delivery methods replace classrooms with a different infrastructure, which >can require highly skilled technical support in addition to the hardware. It >might replace classrooms (which probably have the most efficient space >utilization on a campus) but not faculty, support staff, faculty offices, >and laboratories. I don't think that new technology allows an educator to >teach any more students than was possible in lectures, if anything it is >probably less. I don't have any numbers, but I also have the impression that >correspondence courses have a higher drop-out rate than traditional >education. Distance education makes a lot of sense in a lot of situations, >but I don't think it is cheaper. > I tend to disagree, though I'll admit that many of the costs have not been completely considered, and are difficult to assess. Whether or not universities are involved in distance education in a big way, the facilities generally exist to support this activity, so for example, things like faculty offices are not an >added< cost of distance education (unless of course the number of faculty are increased, etc) . Can technology allow faculty to teach more students ? Yes, only if the current limiting factor is the size of the classroom. My friends involved in distance ed also say that in fact the number of courses you teach must be reduced, because the time involved in doing distance learning courses is about double of a traditional course. So while you may be able to increase the number of students in your class from say 75 to 300, teaching that 300 will require double the time (assuming the content is already in place) if you can't effectively double your class size, you won't save money on faculty time. Perhaps there is someone participating that can speak to this issue from direct experience ? It is also true that dropout rates are very high in distance ed programs. However the coralary to this is that the students that stay involved are very motivated, and will take the responsibility to learn upon themselves. Alot of the work of learning can be redistributed among the students themselves, so, for example, the instructors' email load is not unmanagable. **************************************************************************** George R Long, Ph.D. Department of Chemistry, Indiana University of Pennsylvania Indiana, PA 15705 grlong@grove.iup.edu, http://www.iup.edu/~grlong/ Technology has made the world a neighborhood, now it is up to us to make it a brotherhood - Dr. M.L. King **************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 15:03:55 -0400 From: Brian Tissue Subject: Re: BT: Paper 4-GRL :What about the Costs of NOT using technology? >It is also true that dropout rates are very high in distance ed programs. >However the coralary to this is that the students that stay involved are >very motivated, and will take the responsibility to learn upon themselves. >Alot of the work of learning can be redistributed among the students >themselves, so, for example, the instructors' email load is not unmanagable. I recently read about a professor who split a statistics class in half, and taught half by lecture and half by distance education. The students taught by distance education did significantly better than the lecture group on a common exam. The professor speculated that the distance-ed students did better because they had to work together to learn. (S)he was planning to test next year if cooperative learning or technology made the difference. Unfortunately I can't find a reference, but I think there was an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education in the last couple of months. Brian *************************************************************** Brian M. Tissue phone: (540) 231-3786 Assistant Professor of Chemistry FAX: (540) 231-3255 Virginia Tech e-mail: tissue@vt.edu Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212 http://www.chem.vt.edu/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 16:03:11 -0400 From: Brian Tissue Subject: paper 4 - CB: Expense of Studio Classroom Below is another message from Christina A Bailey , California Polytechnic State University. Brian >I agree that the initial investment is very high but we have built a >prototype integrated classroom which will be utilized by a major portion >of our general chemistry population (about 1000 students per academic >year - quarter system). Should this experiment succeed in any way, it >will provide a model for a reconsideration of construction and pedagogy >for the beginning of the next century. It also provides an environment >for technological-educational experimentation which is sorely needed in >the sciences especially at state institutions like ours. > >As far as training is concerned, that is my job for the next two years. >While it was difficult to get my established colleagues to "buy into" >this project, the administration was enthusiastic and we started off >modestly with three 64 seat sections this spring. During this summer >quarter I will be offering instruction to my colleagues on the >construction of web pages, use of various types of software and >hardware, and using the web in instruction - all in the studio >classroom. In the fall there are five faculty members involved with the >7 sections we will teach (we also have 2 undergrad students as TAs per >section). Since this is a course for nonmajors, my hopes are that when >the imposing portions of the technology are passed, more of my >colleagues will see the advantages to our students of offering such >pedagogy. As it is, our 300 chem and biochem majors are already >questionning why they haven't been the recipients of such instruction. > >So - yes, it is expensive. BUT - things can be done gradually and we >can learn from each others successes and mishaps. >Tina ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 19:04:15 -0400 From: "Richard O. Pendarvis" Subject: Re: BT: Paper 4-GRL :What about the Costs of NOT using technology? Our school has had some experience with distance education in an oceanography course. The distance ed. version consisted of a box of videotaped lectures and associated films. The dropout rate is somewhat higher in the distance learning version ;the grades are dramatically lower in the distance ed. version. IMHO, the outcome will depend on a lot of varables including the background, ability, and motivation of the students. I think that a lot of those doing studies find what ever they expect to find. Our school tends to have a lot of students at the lower end of the background, ability, motivation curve. These methods will be more successful with brighter and more motivated students. /* Richard */ #include - - ____ | | _ | | Organic Chemistry / \ |_| | | || CAI Programming / \ | | / \ || Pizza / \ / \ | | _||_ Star Trek (_________) (_____) |______| _/____\_ Doberman Pinschers --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Richard Pendarvis, Ph.D. 3001 W. College Road | | Associate Professor of Chemistry Ocala, FL 32608 | | Central Florida Community College EMAIL: afn02809@afn.org | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 21:49:24 -0400 From: "Harry E. Pence" Subject: Re: BT: Paper 4-GRL :What about the Costs of NOT ... Recently I was chatting with a man who does research on the strategies that students use to cope with college. He asked me if I would like to know how to insure that my students would form study groups, read the textbook, do homework, etc. I, of course, was very enthused and asked for the secret. His answer was, "Give poorly organized lectures that they can't understand. Students will pursue effective learning strategies as a matter of survival. The worse the lecture, the better their work habits become." I'm not sure if he was pulling my chain, but from his other comments, perhaps there is more truth to this than I would have guessed. Thus, when I hear that students are doing better or worse, I keep in mind that what we do in class is possibly the least important part of the learning process. So assessment is much more complicated that we might expect. Harry Pence -------------------------------- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 08:50:00 EDT From: to2 Subject: Re: Paper 4: Curriculum Changes and the Effect on Student Learning Peter Gold writes: > ...we looked for a computer demonstration [to illustrate the kinetic > theory of gases] ... but none of them came close to being clear > enough to replace even our inferior replacement mechanical device. > The kinetic theory application -- where the capabilities of the > computer can really be used to advantage -- has been pretty much > neglected Great story. Computer software bested by mechanics - I love it! The kinetic theory of reaction is another example. Andrew Montana's "Organic Reaction Mechanisms" had one nice example (a photolytic halogenation reaction, I believe) but I have not seen many other examples. Reaction animations usually just show an isolated successful collision and don't give any hint that most collisions are unfruitful. I'm sure you've all seen the type of reaction animation movie that shows two molecules colliding and reacting and the products moving off. Some time ago I showed such an animation to a group of our graduate students and I asked the following simple question: "What is it that brings the two reactant molecules together?" They stammered and mumbled and eventually said things like "VanDerWaals" and "London disperson forces", "coulombic attaction", and "polarizibility". As Marge Simpson would say: "Hmmmmm". Colorful anthropomorphic imagery is often used to describe molecular mechanics, especially in popular trade books. For example, David Suzuki, in his book "Genethics", writes about the role of enzymes in DNA replication on page 38: "...the enzyme swoops in on the DNA double helix like a bird of prey...and thrusts a shoehorn-like extension between the strands, prying them apart". Elsewhere in this book, molecules are said to "embrace", "weld", "fuse", "grip", "release", "align", "attach", "recognize", "hover", "slide", and "move away". I was using this book in a non-science major class recently and I asked the following questions in a class discussion (and on an exam): "How to molecules 'know' where to go? What is their method of propulsion? Do they have motivation?" I got some pretty interesting answers. This eventually lead to a discussion of the meaning of temperature and effect of temperature on living creatures and on chemical reactions. I used a social analogy. How do people find their mates, that is, what is it that brings two people together so that they meet for the first time? Once they do meet, there are of course specific attractions (or not, as the case may be), but in order to meet thay have to be in the same place at the the same time. In this case some students may have romantic notions of star-crossed lovers, but eventually they grudgingly admit that random chance is the major player here. Anyway, the point of all this is that the capabilities of the computer can really be used to advantage in understanding and demonstrating random kinetics and the behavior of large ensembles - conceptual statistical mechanics, if you will. Why have we not seem more examples of this as the computational capabilities of our hardware has increased a hundred-fold in the last decade or two? Tom ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom O'Haver Professor of Analytical Chemistry University of Maryland Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry College Park, MD 20742 Maryland Collaborative for Teacher Preparation (301) 405-1831 to2@umail.umd.edu FAX: (301) 314-9121 http://www.wam.umd.edu/~toh ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 10:06:50 -0400 From: Brian Tissue Subject: Re: BT - Paper 4: good computer demos Tom O'Haver wrote: >Anyway, the point of all this is that the capabilities of the >computer can really be used to advantage in understanding and >demonstrating random kinetics and the behavior of large >ensembles - conceptual statistical mechanics, if you will. >Why have we not seem more examples of this as the computational >capabilities of our hardware has increased a hundred-fold >in the last decade or two? Roy Tasker's work (http://chem.st.nepean.uws.edu.au/VisChem/) also comes to mind as very well done computer animations. I would answer Tom's question of why there are not more quality simulations to be the high cost. Producing professional-quality animations is extremely time consuming, i.e., expensive. This time cost includes learning the production software; creating the animations; converting material to new or different formats: Beta, VHS, QuickTime, Shockwave, etc.; and the pedagogical learning curve to learn how to do these things well. Maybe someone else could comment on the payoff for producing this type of material, my guess is that it's not quite as lucrative as a good computer game. Brian *************************************************************** Brian M. Tissue phone: (540) 231-3786 Assistant Professor of Chemistry FAX: (540) 231-3255 Virginia Tech e-mail: tissue@vt.edu Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212 http://www.chem.vt.edu/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 09:28:02 -0500 From: Theresa Julia Zielinski Subject: tjz - paper 4 - random kinetics TOH today wrote >Anyway, the point of all this is that the capabilities of the >computer can really be used to advantage in understanding and >demonstrating random kinetics and the behavior of large >ensembles - conceptual statistical mechanics, if you will. >Why have we not seem more examples of this as the computational >capabilities of our hardware has increased a hundred-fold >in the last decade or two? I wonder, is the software called Boltzman(?) put out by Trinity(?) software useful for what you describe here? Theresa Theresa Julia Zielinski Professor of Chemistry, Niagara University Visiting Professor of Chemistry, U. Wisconsin - Madison ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 10:27:37 -0400 From: Jack Martin Miller Subject: Re: Paper3: discussion cont Sorry for the delay --- I've been away. >Our thanks to Jack Martin Miller for sharing his >survey. It appears that his students too are >excited by computer technology and what to sue it >to learn to solve chemical problems - a phenomenon >reported by others in this conference. > >Could you describe Skill Builder? Skill builder is a program written by J. Spain and his colleagues at Clemson (Jspain@clemsm.edu) for individualized assignments in Freshman Chemistry. There was a paper this past year I believe in J. Chem. Ed. Students buy a disk, do their assignemnmts and hand the disk in to a TA and the marks are directly recorded. Did the students >mention the WWW and / or e-mail? yes --- they use both -- many faclty require e-mail use for notification of assignments etc -- the best way I found to ensure that they log in regularly. >What uses, if any, are made on your campus of >these in chemistry teaching? increasing use of the WEB, both for lecture support materials (if on server on campus --- too slow sometimes to pull big graphics files from elsewhere) and for assignments, while e-mail use varies from intensive to minimal depending on course and instructor. Some use listserv to distribute materials to students in the course --- I simply use Eudora Pro --- each course has its own mailboxes and student questions etc. come in to me and if appropriate I circulate to the class with either identiy removed to protect the inocent or with their name still on it if they deserve the credit. > >On the scale of comfort, is 5 high or low? 5 is high > Jack Martin Miller Professor of Chemistry Adjunct Professor of Computer Science Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada, L2S 3A1. Phone (905) 688 5550, ext 3402 FAX (905) 682 9020 e-mail jmiller@sandcastle.cosc.brocku.ca http://chemiris.labs.brocku.ca/~chemweb/faculty/miller/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 10:40:05 -0400 From: Michael A Vaksman Subject: Re: Paper 4: good computer demos - costs It's possible to somewhat reduce the production costs (and time spent by faculty) by hiring grad students to make the most time-consuming animations etc. That's what we have done being involved in creation of multimedia modules in fluid mechanics/thermodynamics. Michael Michael A. Vaksman Assistant Professor of Chemistry University of Detroit Mercy POBox 19900 Detroit, MI 48219-0900 (313) 993-1048 vaksmaM1@udmercy.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 10:19:06 -0500 From: Paul Kelter Subject: Re: Paper 4: good computer demos - costs TOUCHE'! WE TAKE THAT ONE STEP FURTHER - WE HIRE UNDERGRADUATES TO DO OUR ANIMATIONS - THEY ARE COMPUTER-SAAVY AND ARE NOT DISTRACTED (DURING THE SUMMER) BY THESIS WORK. WE HAVE FOUND THAT A GOOD VIDEO CAPTURE BOARD AND EDITING PROGRAM (USEABLE ON NEARLY ALL MID-RANGE COMPUTERS) SAVES 99% OF THE TIME AND INCREASES INTEREST (ON A NON-MOLECULAR SCALE, IN WHICH ANIMATION IS POSSIBLE) PAUL ______________ Paul Kelter Associate Professor of chemistry University of Nebraska Lincoln, Nebraska 68588-0304 pkelter@unlinfo.unl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 12:42:06 -0400 From: "Richard O. Pendarvis" Subject: ROP Re: BT - Paper 4: good computer demos On Wed, 18 Jun 1997, Brian Tissue wrote: > Producing professional-quality animations is extremely time consuming, i.e., > expensive. This time cost includes learning the production software; > creating the animations; converting material to new or different formats: > Beta, VHS, QuickTime, Shockwave, etc.; and the pedagogical learning curve to > learn how to do these things well. Maybe someone else could comment on the > payoff for producing this type of material, my guess is that it's not quite > as lucrative as a good computer game. > Brian The payoff depends a lot on how you go about it. I collaborated with a friend to write a qualitative analysis simulator for DC Heath's Holtzclaw text. My part in it was over 3000 lines of C code just for animation plus a lot of alpha testing and debugging. From DC Heath we split about $4000. I gave a talk on this work at the Orlando ACS meeting. Most of my software has not made a cent. The real payoff is the use my classes have made of it. I have decided to work in a less time intensive manner using Illuminatus 3 for the present. /* Richard */ #include - - ____ | | _ | | Organic Chemistry / \ |_| | | || CAI Programming / \ | | / \ || Pizza / \ / \ | | _||_ Star Trek (_________) (_____) |______| _/____\_ Doberman Pinschers --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Richard Pendarvis, Ph.D. 3001 W. College Road | | Associate Professor of Chemistry Ocala, FL 32608 | | Central Florida Community College EMAIL: afn02809@afn.org | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 12:39:40 -0500 From: "Dr. Neil Kestner" Subject: Paper 4- Distance Education Costs Many have commented that our universities are getting into Distance Education because it will save money. Usually that is not the case but this subject has been well researched and is on going. We know distance edcuation costs better than traditional costs. The best single reference on the subject is Sir John Daniel's book "Mega Universities and the Knowledge Media" with lots of economics from books by Bates and Rumble. There are also some projects underway on costing by Frank Jewett of California State in association with NCHEMS and others. One of the best places to track this down is the Educom National Learning Infrastructure Initiative reports (see educom web site, www.educom.edu under NLII). The bottom line is that distance education is more expensive unless you can get ecomonies of scale as they do at Open Universities(Sir John's school is Open University of UK) or even University of Phoenix with their reduced faculty costs. One issue of interest to this group specifically is the role of web materials and related media put out by publishers. The Brown textbook sells 70-80000 copies and that puts it in the range where there are economies of scale. We have been working with Prentice Hall on that web site and it is impressive what they they do commerially. I plan to expand on this theme at my talk for the University of Wisconsin Distance Ed meeting in August. The issue with commercail web sites is if they well be accepted and used to the same extend as our own personalized sites (or in combination)? Neil Neil R. Kestner Louisiana State University, Department of Chemistry Baton Rouge, LA 70803 phone: (504)-388-1528 Fax: (504)-388-3458 home page: http://kestner.chem.lsu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 15:55:49 -0400 From: Brian Tissue Subject: Re: BT: Paper 4- Distance Education Costs Neil Kestner wrote: > We know distance edcuation costs better than traditional costs. >... >The bottom line is that distance education is more expensive unless you >can get ecomonies of scale as they do at Open Universities(Sir John's >school is Open University of UK) or even University of Phoenix with their >reduced faculty costs. Some of these cost issues really depend on specifics, which makes it difficult to compare delivery modes fairly. I think papers 10 and 11 will demonstrate that ~100 students equates to an acceptable economy of scale when they are spread throughout 20 different institutions. If the alternative to distance education is to not offer a valuable course, then comparing the cost of a distance-ed course to the average or typical per student cost is not really fair. Maybe George Long or some of the other participants in the on-line chemistry course will comment on the costs/benefits of running the course, either now or during the discussion of their papers. As I wrote in my paper, I wasn't TRYING to be pessimistic by focusing on cost, (things are bad enough with Harry Pence being cynical ;-) ). I just think we have to focus on the right reasons to justify the expenditures on technology. Other contributors have commented on the need to use information technology appropriately for the pedagogical reasons, and that point is just as important concerning the costs. Being able to do something that was not possible before makes a strong case for using information technology. Brian ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 13:13:43 -0700 From: "Pastorek, Christine" Subject: Re: cp: BT - Paper 4: good computer demos Some chemist should offer the first level of a really gross chemistry reaction game for free on the internet and then offer more advanced levels for a small fee. Facetiously yours? Chris Pastorek ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 20:41:40 -0400 From: Mary Swift Subject: MLS: gen discussion, delayed Sorry that this is coming in late but I have been away. With regard to programming, at the risk of repeating myself, most chemists will not need to program anything in a 'gut level' language (C, C++, or heavens forbid Assembly language). They may need to 'push' an application with scripting or writing a macro. It is the latter that should be done in chemistry. Some of the examples shared on this list are so controlled ^^^^ that they should not be called programming. Chemists interested in advanced areas of chemical computational research will much finer programming skills than most of us can offer and it these select few who should seek out instruction from computer scientists. Mary ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 20:03:38 -0500 From: "Dr. Neil Kestner" Subject: Paper 4- Economics I agree with Brian that economics should not be the major point. I am afraid if that dominates we will do nothing but we need to be realistic also. As to getting economies of scale, we at LSU think that with 6 of us we can do a good web site for the 2500 students. I think sharing the work is the essential point and hope we will hear more about that later. It is interesting the really big distance education providers like Open Universities have big design teams that take 1-2 years to develop their courses. Most of the people I know in this country working in traditional universities seem to be doing it themselves with little support. Am I reading that right? That is the situation at LSU. Neil Neil R. Kestner Louisiana State University, Department of Chemistry Baton Rouge, LA 70803 phone: (504)-388-1528 Fax: (504)-388-3458 home page: http://kestner.chem.lsu.edu -------------------------------- Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 08:13:48 -0500 From: George Long Subject: paper 4, GRL:economies of scale First thanks to Brian for the plug of paper 10 and 11. I have to admit, that I (and I believe no one) had considered the costs of the on-line courses or projects. Speaking kind of off the cuff, the advantage, at least to my university, was that students could have an enhanced curricula, for example, a course in environmental and industrial chemistry for our students, without hiring an environmental chemist. It cost only 1/4 of my work load. Of course, doing the webpages, etc, that are involved cost me a great deal more time, but I'd attribute that to personal scholarship, which I would have done in some form anyway. (and some of the people involved from industry donated their time. In the case of the pchem projects, the advantage of linking the classes was improved materials and learning environment for the course, including having me do a better job of teaching, thanks to support and help from my collegues. here, the only costs were the administration time, which is part of my scholarship. Perhaps this speaks for using teams of specialized teachers in education? **************************************************************************** George R Long, Ph.D. Department of Chemistry, Indiana University of Pennsylvania Indiana, PA 15705 grlong@grove.iup.edu, http://www.iup.edu/~grlong/ Technology has made the world a neighborhood, now it is up to us to make it a brotherhood - Dr. M.L. King **************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 10:46:28 -0400 From: Aline Harrison Subject: LH-Scholarship Hi, Fellow Faculty! George Long just posted a message re: economics of our olcc courses & other on-line...as mostly scholarship, etc on his part. My school at this time gives no promotion/tenure credit for such activities. I would be interested to know if others do....or is everyone at their top rank and doing this work in place of research? Cheers and thanks! Lindy Harrison York Coll of PA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 16:15:47 -0500 From: Marcy Towns <00mhtowns@BSU.EDU> Subject: Re: LH-Scholarship Lindy--its part of our Vita. Marcy. Marcy Hamby Towns Ball State University Cooper Hall Muncie, IN 47306 765-285-8075 765-285-2351 (FAX) 00mhtowns@bsu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 16:46:31 -0500 From: Theresa Julia Zielinski Subject: tjz - Re: LH-Scholarship Lindy Put everything in the vita. If we push with all of the work we do we can make the standards different for those who are coming up behind us. Saturate the administration with your work of all kinds. I think that folks who are not doing this stuff do not fully understand the time, effort, and scholarshop required to do this well. We need to educate them. Theresa Theresa Julia Zielinski Professor of Chemistry, Niagara University Visiting Professor of Chemistry, U. Wisconsin - Madison ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 16:32:54 -0500 From: Leonard Archer Subject: Promotion/Tenure Credit vs. Scholarship Lindy Harrison wrote: >George Long just posted a message re: economics of our olcc courses & >other on-line...as mostly scholarship, etc on his part. My school at this >time gives no promotion/tenure credit for such activities. I would be >interested to know if others do....or is everyone at their top rank and >doing this work in place of research? My institution allows faculty (who request it) release time, prior to the offering of a distance learning/on-line course, for the preparation efforts required. Usually 3 hours/term is allowed for a course offered during the next term (or can be taken during the same semester if you desire). I am on a state-wide faculty technology committee recommending this same consideration for each state university as we coordinate a state-wide effort in distance learning. Distance learning has been viewed in the past by many administrators as only a passing trend. The day of the fixed position university is waning (cite the Western Governors University). Far sighted administrators are now just beginning to realize this fact and are scrambling to secure a portion of the distance learning audience. Credit for such activities generally depends on the local environment and the specific mission of the university (teaching or research oriented). A younger faculty person has to size up the local climate regarding the worth of development for newer teaching technologies. Chairperson and department colleague support are critical. Many schools (mine included) readily consider such teaching technology usage and development as a significant contribution towards tenure and promotion decisions, while others are more traditionally inclined (ie. research, publish, or perish). A story was related to me at a meeting yesterday about an agressive project to be undertaken by Microsoft's Bill Gates (The "I'll Buy Everything" Guy!). It seems that he has intentions to create an international distance learning enterprise that will create slick courses for the top 25 enrolled university classes and make them readily available on the Microsoft network for college credit and, of course, a tuition/fee (we all know Bill Gates' success in economics)! What will short-sighted university administrators think of that one? The critical element for the success of our individual campuses in distance learning instructional technologies will be the quality factor and the additional value-added education we can provide. The high enrollment classes can be packaged for web distribution, the specialty courses are much harder to deliver in this way (at least economically). The transformation has begun. I see big changes on the horizon for higher education. __________________________________________________________ Dr. Len Archer Chairperson, Department of Chemistry Missouri Western State College 4525 Downs Drive, St. Joseph, MO 64507 816-271-4468 (work phone), E-mail: archer@griffon.mwsc.edu __________________________________________________________ ----------------------------- Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 13:00:01 -0400 From: Bob Olsen Subject: Papers 1 & 4 - BO: virtual office hours, newsgroups, etc. One aspect of Scott Van Bramer's paper that I thought might elicit more response was the use of "virtual office hours". This combined use of e-mail and a web is clearly superior to simply corresponding with individual students electronically in that informative threads are available to everyone in the class (and are available for the entire semester). It seems to me that the benefits of this sort of exchange could be expanded further by allowing students to participate more fully in the evolution of the threads, which brings up the question of the relative (de)merits of the various ways in which this might be done (e.g., listservs, local Usenet newsgroups, mail-to-html archivers, etc.) and the related question of whether the option of anonymity encourages greater participation. Some ChemConf participants have probably used one or more of these approaches to archiving ongoing electronic discussions in their courses and I would like to hear about their experiences. In paper 4, Brian Tissue comments that an on-line newsgroup doesn't make sense for his senior instrumental analysis course since they work together in the laboratory each week. I infer from this comment that the level of student interaction in this course is already quite high, so that adding an electronic forum would be largely redundant. Have others found this to be the case? Bob Olsen olsen@dynamics.vassar.edu Department of Chemistry ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 14:43:13 -0400 From: "James N. Stevenson" Subject: jns Re: Papers 1 & 4 - BO: virtual office hours, newsgroups, etc. At 01:00 PM 6/22/97 -0400, you wrote: >One aspect of Scott Van Bramer's paper that I thought might elicit more >response was the use of "virtual office hours". This combined use of e-mail >and a web is clearly superior to simply corresponding with individual >students electronically in that informative threads are available to >everyone in the class (and are available for the entire semester). It seems snip >Some ChemConf participants have probably used one or more of these approaches snip I have not used anything of that sort but intent to in a rather forced situation coming up this fall. I will be teaching organic chemistry to students here in Austin and simultaneously, via compressed video conferencing, to a group in Ann Arbor, Michigan. I plan to use a Web page and e-mail for sure. The students will get updated course information (assignments and the like) from the Web page and will contribute homework via e-mail. I plan for all the students to hand in homework electronicly, not just the ones in Ann Arbor. I am not dealing with a great number of students (<15) and those two communication means might be sufficient. I would like to use a listserv, if I can get one set up here. Since I am fairly new to the development of Internet-based materials and since I am no SVB, I am a bit apprehensive as to how it will all come out. I have been investigating the type of software that the students could use to communicate structures and reactions, but have not made a decision about the recommended software. I am constrained by a strong desire to keep the cost low for the students. Since the "lectures" are done on the live conference, there will be the opportunity for interaction (questions, answers, and discussion) during the class time. I've gotta go .... I have a lot of work to do to get ready for this! Sincerely, James N. Stevenson E-mail: jims@austin.concordia.edu Concordia University at Austin or: ctxstevenjn@crf.cuis.edu 3400 IH35 North Phone/voice mail:512-452-7662 Ext.1209 Austin, TX 78705-2799 Fax:512-459-8517 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 16:02:32 -0400 From: Rohan Abeyesundere Subject: RA- Re: Papers 1 & 4 - BO: virtual office hours, newsgroups, etc. Starting about a year ago, I have been providing my email address in the class policy statements that I hand out to my students. I have had very few of my own students make use of the "virtual office hours". This is despite my telling them that I look at email at least once a day. The low number of students using email is probably because I work at a 2 year institution and many of my students dont have or dont use email. Perhaps those of you working at 4 year institutions have more students using email as a way of contacting you. - Rohan ----------------------------------------------------------------------- R. Abeyesundere email: rohana@umd5.umd.edu Chemistry Department WWW: http://www.wp.com/ROHAN/ Montgomery College phone: 301-251-7637 51 Mannakee Street Rockville, MD 20850 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- On Sun, 22 Jun 1997, Bob Olsen wrote: > One aspect of Scott Van Bramer's paper that I thought might elicit more > response was the use of "virtual office hours". This combined use of e-mail > and a web is clearly superior to simply corresponding with individual > students electronically in that informative threads are available to > everyone in the class (and are available for the entire semester). > > Vassar College Poughkeepsie, NY 12604-0233 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 23:11:16 -0400 From: "Lynn E. Maelia" Subject: Re: Papers 1 & 4 - BO: virtual office hours, newsgroups, etc. I have used listserves in all of my classes: chemical principles, = instrumental analysis, and natural science seminar. There was an added = incentive to send e-mail to the listserve since participation points = depended on it. The Juniors in the seminar course used the listserve = the most. Since we meet only once per week to hear seminars, we don't = get a chance to discuss the merits of them. The listserve let us share = our critiques of the talks. The listserve is not anonymous, but that = did not seem to hinder people from sharing, even when the comments were = not all positive. =20 The freshmen were more tentative, but they did use it, especially before = a test, or for pre-lab questions. The instrumental analysis class didn't use it at all, since the class = was very small and in-class interaction was already quite high, as Bob = suggested. I have given my students my own e-mail address and that has been used = frequently for more personal comments, such as why the student missed = class, etc. I have told them that I would be on-line the night before a = test, if they have any last-minute questions, but that kind of "virtual = office-hour" never found any takers. I would like to establish a = chat-room for use the week before a test so that students can get = answers when I cannot physically be there for them. =20 I have found the electronic messenger to be very useful in keeping me in = contact with my classes. They know that they should check it often, = since I give hints and reminders about quizzes and tests via the = listserve. Since the listserve is closed and I subscribe each student = myself, I know that each student will get my message. =20 Lynn Maelia Department of Chemistry Mount Saint Mary College Newburgh, New York maelia@msmc.edu maelia@sprynet.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:09:43 -0400 From: Michael Chejlava Subject: Papers 1 & 4 MJC Comments from Bob Olsen about e-mail The use of e-mail both in and out of class for discussions has been studied by several people in several subjects. This has been done in teaching studios where there are hard wired desktop computers and also now with laptops using wireless networks with either IR or radio links. Here are some references. Here is one using laptops with an IR network http://hed.info.apple.com/wireless.html Here is a Web page with many references using several technologies including the studios (AKA "Smart classrooms). http://www.wam.umd.edu/~mlhall/teaching.html Here is the address of a Web Book on the Swithed On Classroom By Kent L. Norman, a psychologist and U. of Maryland. It includes discussions of a piece of software that allows in class communications and the setting up of chat-rooms etc. for class use. http://www.lap.umd.edu/SOC/sochome.html Here is one using a wireless radio network in engineering. http://www.coe.ou.edu/coe/laptop/lap_test.htm Here is a list of laptop campuses that require the purchase of laptop computers. http://www.vcsu.nodak.edu/offices/itc/notebooks/other.htm At the current time I am not using any of this, but the above references , and many others I have not included, have made it clear to me that the use of e-mail is the way to go. At the current time I use spreadsheets and statistical software in lab and plan to us LabSystant much more. I now use it in only one lab. LabSystant is an interesting program that checks students calculational results. I am limited to this since our computers are old (386's) that we got through the DOE ERLE program. We are just getting windows on these. I would love the e-mail conferencing to let students work on lab reports. Now when I have group projects in lab where 4 or 5 students pool their work they complain that they cnnot find any time to meet. This would solve this and I could also eavesdrop on their converations and make suggestions if they get too far off base. This will only work if all students have ready access to computers. At the current time our computer labs close before or at 11:00 PM, when many students are just getting ready to work. So going to a laptop campus is prbably the best way to go since it provides all studnets with 24 hour access to current technology. One question to all out there. Is their anyone who has been or is at one of these laptop campuses? Also, are the results really as good as reported? -- Michael Chejlava Department of Chemistry & Environmental Science Lake Superior State University Sault Sainte Marie, MI ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 17:05:57 EST From: "Karen J. Brewer" Subject: Re: Papers 1 & 4 - KJB: virtual office hours, newsgroups, etc. I have used a listserv in some of my classes. Most recently I used one for the purpose of following up on student literature presentations and discussions that we had during class. In the past there were always unresolved issues. This year the students were to further investigate these issues and discuss them via the listserv. They often contacted the authors by e-mail in the follow up investigations. It was a small class and the students interacted with each other a lot. I found that this did prompt some follow up discussions but not very much took place via the internet. Usually a question would appear on the listserv and then maybe one answer. To a large degree the students preferred to talk to each other in person. ********************************************************** Karen J. Brewer Associate Professor Department of Chemistry Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212 (540)231-6579 http://www.chem.vt.edu/chem-dept/brewer/brewer.html ********************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 08:47:54 -0400 From: Joel Caughran Subject: Re: Papers 1 & 4 - BO: virtual office hours, newsgroups, etc. On Sun, 22 Jun 1997 13:00:01 -0400 Bob Olsen wrote: > One aspect of Scott Van Bramer's paper that I thought might elicit more > response was the use of "virtual office hours". This combined use of > e-mail and a web is clearly superior to simply corresponding with > individual students electronically in that informative threads are > available to everyone in the class (and are available for the entire > semester). It seems to me that the benefits of this sort of exchange > could be expanded further by allowing students to participate more > fully in the evolution of the threads, which brings up the question of > the relative (de)merits of the various ways in which this might be done > (e.g., listservs, local Usenet newsgroups, mail-to-html archivers, > etc.) and the related question of whether the option of anonymity > encourages greater participation. Here at the University of Georgia we are using usenet newsgroups to facilitate class discussions in Chemistry. We have found them to be very successful in our large lecture sections. Students are able to post questions and continue discussions. In some cases, the professor has stated in class that he will not respond to message until there has been some discussion by the class on the topic. Our studnets are not able to post anonymous messages, but many shy students have said that they are more likely to post a message to the group that ask it in class or visit office hours because they don't feal threatened. Not allowing anonymous messages also prevents some studnets from posting "Professor so-n-so is a such-n-such". > Some ChemConf participants have probably used one or more of these > approaches to archiving ongoing electronic discussions in their courses > and I would like to hear about their experiences. In paper 4, Brian > Tissue comments that an on-line newsgroup doesn't make sense for his > senior instrumental analysis course since they work together in the > laboratory each week. I infer from this comment that the level of > student interaction in this course is already quite high, so that > adding an electronic forum would be largely redundant. Have others > found this to be the case? We have seen a similar trend between large and small classes and have drawn the same conclusion. We have also noted that Honors classes are less likely to use the groups that the regular sections. In this case we are not sure if the students have already formed study groups or so independent in their studies that they don't see the value. Joel Caughran =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Joel A. Caughran caughran@sunchem.chem.uga.edu Chemistry Learning Center Department of Chemistry voice (706) 542-1906 University of Georgia fax (706) 542-9454 Athens, GA 30602-2556 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 16:08:54 -0700 From: "Pastorek, Christine" Subject: Re: cp: CHS -- Virtual office hours My own anecdotal observation over the last three years is that the best junior level chemistry majors form study groups (especially for p. chem) and also communicate with many instructors and each other by email. I see students making the most out of discussing p.chem.-they will come to my class the next day and want to know my opinion on something because they were "arguing" about a p.chem problem-I think that this is exciting! I get questions by email- especially before an important assignment is due-at all hours of the day and night from all students, not just those at the top. Chris Pastorek Chemistry-Oregon State Univ. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 09:03:44 -0400 From: "Carl H. Snyder" Subject: CHS -- Virtual office hours >Joel Caughran wrote: >drawn the same conclusion. We have also noted that Honors classes are >less likely to use the groups that the regular sections. In this case >we are not sure if the students have already formed study groups or so >independent in their studies that they don't see the value. Back in the '93 ChemConf, I presented a paper, #11, that showed that the major users of electronic-mail were students in the second quartile. The top students made little use of it, even though I awarded a small amount of extra credit for use. Subesquent observations support this conclusion. Based on several anecdotal bits of evidence, I doubt very much that the top students were using study groups. My own sense is that the top students are, indeed, independent to the point that e-mail, electronic study-groups, and the like offer little to them in their studies. This raises a question: Does anyone have any correlation between student rank and *voluntary* use of study groups or cooperative education? This might correlate with electronic communication usage. Carl H. Snyder Internet: CSNYDER@miami.edu Chemistry Department Phone: (305)-284-2174 University of Miami FAX: (305)-284-4571 Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA http://www.miami.edu/chm/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 10:15:59 -0400 From: Leon Combs Chemistry Subject: Re: Papers 1 & 4 - BO: virtual office hours, newsgroups, etc. We at KSU (~13,000 students, no dorms, programs through M.S. degrees) have tried various methods of computer-interaction supplements for various classes with mixed success. Bulletin boards have been used in biology, chemistry, and computer science courses with almost zero participation by students unless it is a required aspect of the course. I have used e-mail for some time and thought that such would be very helpful since most of our students work, but unless such is required it is used only by about 10% of the stuents. The most successful course in using the bulletin boards was a biology class with required usage -- ten points. The teacher was extremely busy replying to questions and comments. I have used the web course in a box (wcb) which is being developed by VCU for two quarters. The wcb has several sections including a listing of all students in the class, a discussion forum, a section allowing listing of web sites for various topics, and a section allowing the students to develop a simple web page. I required the students to develop web pages which got many of them interested in using the other aspects of the program. I also used the wcb in class by going to some of the sites that I had chosen to help them understand some concepts. Many more students used the wcb than used the bulletin board for my class (freshman chemistry for science majors). Still, the most users were the better students in the class and the use of the discussion forum was minimal. I also had a link from the wcb so that students could truly anonamously do course evaluations but that was used sparingly. We will keep trying various methods including the wcb but so far it seems that our students must be forced to begin using the technology. Perhaps after a few years of usage the methods will become more routinely used by the students. Leon Leon L. Combs, Ph.D. Tel: 770-423-6159 Professor and Chair, Dept. Chemistry FAX: 770-423-6744 Kennesaw State University e-mail: lcombs@ksumail.kennesaw.edu 1000 Chastain Road http://science.kennesaw.edu/~lcombs Kennesaw, GA 30144-5591 CARPE DIEM ---- CORUM DEO ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 09:39:31 -0400 From: Jack Martin Miller Subject: Re: cp: CHS -- Virtual office hours >My own anecdotal observation over the last three years is that the best >junior level chemistry majors form study groups (especially for p. chem) >and also communicate with many instructors and each other by email. I >see students making the most out of discussing p.chem.-they will come to >my class the next day and want to know my opinion on something because >they were "arguing" about a p.chem problem-I think that this is >exciting! I get questions by email- especially before an important >assignment is due-at all hours of the day and night from all students, >not just those at the top. > >Chris Pastorek >Chemistry-Oregon State Univ. > This has been my experience as well with inorganic and analytical chem. at the thrid and 4th year level and also in grad courses. If there are good students in a course groups form automatically and questions are generated - and for these e-mail is great. If there are no "class leaders" this doesn't seem to happen spontaneously. Jack Martin Miller Professor of Chemistry Adjunct Professor of Computer Science Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada, L2S 3A1. Phone (905) 688 5550, ext 3402 FAX (905) 682 9020 e-mail jmiller@sandcastle.cosc.brocku.ca http://chemiris.labs.brocku.ca/~chemweb/faculty/miller/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 09:53:53 -0400 From: "Carl H. Snyder" Subject: Re: cp: CHS -- Virtual office hours My own experience has been mostly with nonscience students in a freshman-level course, but also including a semester or two of sophomore-level organic . That might explain at least part of the difference, i.e, my own observation that top-level students don't use electronic communication as much as the second quartile. Carl H. Snyder Internet: CSNYDER@miami.edu Chemistry Department Phone: (305)-284-2174 University of Miami FAX: (305)-284-4571 Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA http://www.miami.edu/chm/ ************************************************ >>My own anecdotal observation over the last three years is that the best >>junior level chemistry majors form study groups (especially for p. chem) >>and also communicate with many instructors and each other by email. I >>see students making the most out of discussing p.chem.-they will come to >> >>Chris Pastorek >>Chemistry-Oregon State Univ. >> *********************************************** >This has been my experience as well with inorganic and analytical chem. at >the thrid and 4th year level and also in grad courses. If there are good >students in a course groups form automatically and questions are generated >- and for these e-mail is great. If there are no "class leaders" this >doesn't seem to happen spontaneously. >Jack Martin Miller *********************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 16:48:43 +0000 From: DeGennaro-Al Subject: Email from Students <