active learning experience during class while also sharply reducing .... View Of The Computer Assisted Learning Studio From The Front Entry. The classroom at ...
Using Computer Assisted Collaborative Learning For High Quality Distance Education N. A. Pendergrass Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Gregory Sun Engineering Program University of Massachusetts Boston Abstract This paper describes a high quality distance learning course in undergraduate signals and systems which is being taught at UMass Dartmouth and is being shared with UMass Boston. The course uses computer assisted, collaborative learning techniques over two-way compressed video. Students in this course spend most of their class time working in groups on problems or interactive demonstrations. Often they use simulators with audio input and output. This gives students an active learning experience during class while also sharply reducing the amount of information which must be sent in broadcast fashion through the video system. By using collaborative learning methods, the negative impact of the video system is greatly reduced in the classrooms at both ends. There are many logistical issues in designing a distance learning course using collaborative learning methods for a subject like linear systems. This paper describes the layout of a computer assisted learning studio. It also discusses the teaching methods used. These were optimized together for maximum effectiveness of this distance learning course.
Introduction In July of 1995, the University of Massachusetts Boston began implementing a plan to build a four-year BSEE program from their established two-year undergraduate program. During the start up phase, the three other campuses with engineering programs in the University of Massachusetts system are providing core courses for the junior year over two-way compressed video. The Linear Systems course described in this paper is one of the courses being provided by UMass Dartmouth. It introduces students to important systems concepts and methods of analysis including Fourier, Laplace and Z-transforms. Linear Systems is an important undergraduate course in Electrical Engineering but, because it is
required for the degree, classes often have a wide range of student motivation and capability. Furthermore, the objectives of the course include developing effective thinking processes for solving problems and building a useful intuition about system behavior. This combination of circumstances has caused section sizes in the course at UMass Dartmouth to be kept traditionally below thirty (30) so that the usual lecture based instruction could be reasonably successful. With the addition of a distance education component in this undergraduate course, however, special measures were needed to ensure that students succeeded in the course without compromising the educational objectives.
The Choice Of Teaching Methods The standard lecture is probably the simplest class to extend to remote sites with two-way video. Unfortunately, the addition of a distance learning component to a lecture class only aggravates many of the educational difficulties inherent in the lecture method of teaching, especially for undergraduates. For example, concerns about the video camera and the needs of remote students substantially increase the burden on the instructor and this further diminishes instructor interaction with students at both ends. In addition, after the novelty wears off at the remote end, undergraduate students have even more trouble maintaining the motivation and energy required to stay awake and follow a video lecture. Furthermore, the feedback loops between remote students and other students and the instructor are constrained by the video system. Because of the physical separation inside and outside of class, the remote students in a lecture course may not become aware of a difficulty in their thought process until several classes have passed. This is a significant problem for a course like Linear Systems where it is important to find and correct faulty thinking quickly. Collaborative learning techniques, on the other hand, reduce the emphasis on the instructor as the center
of the educational experience [1]. Students learn from problems, from each other, from the textbook and from the instructor or TA who are walking around. By making the distance education course student centered rather than instructor centered, less information has to flow through the limiting video system to the remote student. Since most class time is spent on group problem solving, the video system is used less and has lower negative impact at both ends. The details of the teaching methods and classroom design adopted for this course were strongly influenced by discussions with faculty in the Physics and Math Departments at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. They were involved with the innovative introductory studio courses developed there (See for example reference [2]).
Implementation The Linear Systems course was thoroughly revised during the summer of 1995 to use computer assisted collaborative learning methods at two sites simultaneously. It was piloted with 32 students in the fall of 1995 using the compressed video equipment in the new classroom as described below but without actually transmitting to students at a remote site. This allowed experimentation with course methods and equipment without risking undue hardship for remote students if something did not work well. The first remote students will be involved in the course in the fall of 1996. The pilot course was extremely useful in developing confidence in collaborative learning methods. In addition, considerable insight into the utility and limitations of the two-way compressed video system was learned from studying several lecture based distance education courses which started in the fall semester. Room layout and presentation methods were strongly influenced by feedback from instructors and students who used the video systems in lecture courses. Class sizes are anticipated to be a maximum of 40 at UMass Dartmouth and 8 at UMass Boston. There will be an instructor and one TA at UMass Dartmouth so that close attention can be given to the progress being made by each group. A TA at the remote sight will circulate among the groups there and take care of the logistics of solving equipment problems, proctoring exams and accepting homework. An important part of that TA’s duties will be to provide feedback on the effectiveness of the remote class.
A Typical Class A typical hour and fifteen minute class in the revised course begins with a two minute reading quiz over the assigned material. The quiz is usually followed by a short presentation which provides a context and motivation for the group problems that follow. Students spend most of their class time working in assigned teams of two on problems or interactive demonstrations. These are designed to lead students in steps through details of the material. They are usually asked to solve problems using procedures developed in the text. If a development or proof is important, then a similar one, or an important part of it, is assigned. After every problem, a student is picked at random to present results to the class. Students simply put their solutions under the document camera at the front of the room and describe what they did. With the zoom lens, almost any hand drawing or equation is presentable. If an incorrect approach was used, it is discussed and a student from another group is selected. The document camera really accelerates student presentations. Approximately a quarter of the classroom problems use a computer to accelerate the solution process, to improve visualization or to improve the connection between reality and the concepts of the course. Audio input and output are often also used in computer activities to help develop student’s intuition. For example during part of one class, each team records their voices on their computers and convolves the waveform with an impulse response which they generate. They listen to their voices played through the system and compare with results of other groups. In another computer activity, the teams put their voices through a sampled data system with a serious aliasing problem and listen to the terrible result. After studying the spectrum of the signals, they fix the system by choosing an appropriate sample rate. See reference [3] for a more complete description of the computer activities and hands on projects which have been developed for the class in MATLAB and SIMULINK for computers with multimedia sound.
Computer Assisted Learning Studios The details of the classroom design are important in making it easy to use. With a well set up room and a good two-way video system, one instructor can run the class locally and at a distance without assistance. TA’s are not necessary during class except to circulate among groups in the collaborative learning mode.
Figure 1. View Of The Computer Assisted Learning Studio From The Front Entry The classroom at UMass Dartmouth was completely renovated in order to originate the Linear System course using collaborative learning. The new computer assisted learning studio, shown in Figure 1, can seat a maximum of 40 students. High performance personal computers are used by students in teams of two. The computers are placed on the floor beside each five foot table and 17 inch monitors are mounted on top of combined stereo speakers in an effort to leave as much work space as possible. Each chair swivels and is on wheels to encourage student collaboration. The floors are carpeted to reduce noise during group work. This is especially important with the two-way video system because stray microphone pickup can be annoying. Computer screens are turned so that they can all be seen by the instructor during a mini-lecture. The computers are almost irresistible and communication is better if the students turn away from the computers when the instructor starts speaking from the front of the room. The front row of tables in Figure 1 are empty so that the first row students have a convenient writing surface when they turn for mini-lectures or student presentations.
PictureTel systems at both ends are used for twoway compressed video. Two ISDN lines have been found to provide very usable picture quality. The PictureTel system allows remote control of all cameras and displays by the instructor through a small, simple control panel. Figure 1 also shows a large video monitor in front of the closet door. A view of the remote classroom is presented on this display. It is also used to provide important feedback to the local presenter. A smaller “picture in a picture” display on this monitor shows what is being sent from the live site. This is especially useful because it can warn if the presentation is going off camera. The main camera, which is usually pointed at the presenter, is located on the wall above this display so that when the presenter looks at the monitor the students at the remote site feel eye contact. Figure 2 shows one of the authors, Dr. Pendergrass, at the instructor’s podium which is used for mini-lectures and student presentations. The two displays behind him show identical images. The large monitor serves the front of the room. The screen projection display gives a reasonable image size in the back of this long room but it is difficult to read in the first row. During a mini-lecture
or student presentation these screens show the presentation material. During group problems and questions from students, these displays show the remote classroom so that it can be seen anywhere in the room.
Figure 2. View Of The Instructor And Video Displays In front of the presenter and just to his right is a document camera. It provides enormous flexibility in presentation and most faculty use it to project their writing instead of using the board. This is true even without a remote class because the document camera is easier to use and the video screens are easier to see from all angles in the room. The studio at UMass Boston has the same equipment but it is presently set up for six students. Tables and three computers are arranged in a row in a portion of a larger room. The area is easily expanded as class sizes increase. The PictureTel system is placed close to the computers so that students and their computer screens are visible to the camera.
Observations Collaborative learning techniques produced a very flexible class environment with students actively engaged in their own education. There were also frequent feedback opportunities between instructor and students. The addition of groups at a remote site will change that class structure very little. In addition, classroom methods, video systems and room layout are well understood at this point. For these reasons results with the addition of the remote students in the fall of 1996 are expected to be similar to those obtained last fall. The pilot course was very successful despite frequent experimentation with teaching methods and the video systems. Student motivation with class material appeared to be very high. Students would frequently stay after class in their groups and experiment with a computer based activity or discuss a problem or
application. In fact, it became necessary to help some students with their priorities when they began cutting other classes to work on linear systems! In an exit survey, 91% of students indicated that they spent more time on the Signals and Systems course than they did on any other course that semester. Indeed, the course format appeared to force more preparation and encouraged students to keep up. In addition, students often went well beyond the requirements on assignments and spent much more time than needed, especially on computer projects. 73% of the students surveyed in the course also said that they preferred working on activities in class rather than listening to lectures, 71% said they preferred working in groups rather than doing problems or projects alone, and 91% indicated that computer projects improved their learning. While a formal assessment of outcomes was not done for the pilot course, exam performance appeared to improve. The nature and coverage of exams in the course were not changed from previous years and students still made many of the same kind of random mistakes. However, they improved a great deal in their ability to make progress on exam problems which were different from the homework. It was clear that the general class understanding of the relationships in the underlying theory was better than it had been for previous classes.
Acknowledgments Partial funding for this effort was provided by grants from The Davis Educational Foundation and The National Science Foundation, grant number DUE9551815.
References 1.
2.
3.
Smith, Karl A., “Cooperative Learning: Effective Teamwork for Engineering Classrooms,” Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference, November 1-4, 1995. Wilson, Jack M., “The CUPLE Physics Studio,” Core Engineering, School of Engineering, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1995. Pendergrass, N. A., “Using Computers, Simulators and Sound To Give Hands-on Experience”, Proceedings of the ASEE National Conference, June 23-26, 1996.
