Innovative Uses for Educational Technology Funds?
RumGunner asks: "I
work for a university, and we have a special 'technology' fee that is
charged to students, intended to be used for focus on new technology of
direct benefit to students either in the classroom or related
educational/learning activities. Every semester there is a request for
proposals on how to spend this money, and for the most part these
proposals are fairly lackluster. Since I know there are a lot of .GOV and
.EDU readers on Slashdot, I'm curious to see if anyone has any good
ideas for large (or small) scale applications of new technology for the
benefit of students?"
1. online course materials via products like Blackboard (grades, tests, syllabi, lecture notes, discussions, etc)
2. Wireless networking (encrypted and/or MAC filtered) in libraries and public places
3. Wireless laptops, either for everyone or for "borrowing" perhaps at the library or other public places.
4. Intelligent routing to prevent the gnutella users from sucking up all the bandwidth. You can do this without entirely blocking the ports, thus letting it happen but preserving the bulk of the bandwidth for other (presumably more legitimate) uses.
5. Internet stations placed in public places for general email and web.
6. IMAP mail (including a Web client) if you currently use POP.
You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
There's very little "new technology" coming out, scheduled every semester, that benefits students. Five years ago, just having computer labs probably would have been sufficient. These days, when the students all own computers, pagers, and cell phones, all the University can really do is provide connectivity.
There's no new technology that will allow the students to learn more, faster, and have a higher comprehension.
There is, however, scant use of existing technology. Why aren't all syllabi online? Can't past lecture notes and sample tests be posted online? How come half the universities still make students stand in line to sign up for classes? Why do you have to wander around with a slip of paper to drop or add a class? How come so few classes are taught online? I'm not meaning real-time, but a learn-at-your-own-pace? People like me, who have jobs and families and no good University nearby, want to take extra classes, and have the money, but can't find anyplace reputable to offer the courses.
There's little innovation because most people don't get what to do with it, or they aren't willing to spend the time to do it. I know of 3 dozen professors who received grants to make their classes available online, and in the end, all they had was about 20 pages of static HTML pages, which were never updated, became stale, and then were removed from being online when the web server was upgraded.
I'll end this with the worst funding request I ever read (and you're going to read it all):
"Here's a list of the things we want. (You don't need anything more than this, do you?)"
Attached was an excel spreadsheet with items and prices.
you can't beat this: stop charging them the tech fee. i paid it all four years and got nothing but crappy half-implemented services like "blackboard" (an assignment/notice/expensive software that only CS professors were willing to use/schedule web application). here's my advice, if you don't know what you're charging a fee for -- don't charge it!!! how would you like a government-gizmo-thingy-tax?
Wireless networking on the whole campus is nice, of course, but it isn't educational if there is no educational content or projects which make use of the network. Looking at stories about the bandwith demand at universities, I guess the networks are mostly there (although not always wireless), but the on-topic content is missing. I'd say, put the money into virtualizing lecture material and developing new forms of presenting educational material. Some things can be expressed much better in an animation or interactive 3d-model for example, ways of presentation which are usually unvailable today.
Example: My college needed an emulator to teach assembly language to students, and I SOOO wanted them to have an undergrad build one and open source it.
At colleges and universities, hardware has a clear purpose: students need to do research and write papers. There's a very high demand for that, even if technology isn't playing a direct role in education. And even there, it's often the case that hardware-focused programs waste money.
But in K-12 education, this problem is huge. It's one of the many bitter jokes behind Microsoft's school donation proposal: you can't just plop a lot of hardware in the middle of a school and expect magic.
Guess what? Computers do not magically make learning happen. Students aren't going to get anything out of computers unless either (1) they have an engaged, tech-savvy teacher who finds ways to use computers effectively as a teaching tool, or (2) they have the opportunity to experiment on their own, without having the computers locked off, crippled, or kept off limits for unstructured learning. For hardware to be useful, students need available expertise and, above all, access.
So, I'd suggest spending tech dollars on people. I'm thinking mostly of K-12 here:
Here's a thought. Ask the students what they think their money should be spent on. :-)