download Chapter 4 Visions of Future Uses
In section II.C.1 [(in the document], we described the process (diagrammed in Appendix 3) whereby the Lehigh Lab selects which technologies will receive focus and support. In that same section, we mentioned that we would like to see this process expanded to include efforts to better discern areas of faculty and student interest. To help facilitate this change and to shape our recommendations for the direction our campus might take in the near future, we asked faculty and students to identify their perspective (‘already using’; ‘not using, but want to’; ‘unsure’; or ‘will not use’) on nine different areas where technology is having, or might have, the most powerful impact on education. We then asked respondents to describe their own vision of how technology might impact teaching and learning on our campus.
Capturing an entire campus’s view of education’s future is difficult, but a few trends emerge from the responses to the questions we posed. In what follows, we look most closely at the areas where faculty and students see a common future. To do this, we have focused primarily on the “not using, but want to” and “will not use” responses. It should be noted that responses in the “already using” category mirror, and nicely supplement, the conclusions in the earlier section on current uses of technology on our campus.
To help refine our sense of the future uses of technology on our campus and shape our recommendations for the direction we might take, we asked faculty and students to identify their perspective (‘already using’; ‘not using, but want to’; ‘unsure’; or ‘will not use’) on nine different areas where technology is having, or might have, the most powerful impact on education. We then asked respondents to describe their own vision of how technology might impact teaching and learning on our campus.
From the survey...
Q: The following list includes some areas where technology is changing or may change the way you learn. Which of these are you using, or do you hope to use, in your learning?
Blended/hybrid courses (with a face-to-face AND a significant web-based component)
Fully online courses (with no face-to-face component)
Social computing (using computer technology to facilitate interaction and collaboration, including virtual conferencing, group work on shared documents, online communities, Facebook or MySpace as learning communities, etc)
Personal publication and broadcasting (the use of computers to publish or broadcast text, audio, or video, e.g, ePortfolios, online journals, blogging, podcasting, video podcasting, YouTube, video blogging, etc)
Mobile educational content and services (delivery of educational content and services via cell phones, portable audio players, etc to enhance instruction, communication)
Educational gaming (the use of computer games to promote learning, enhance engagement,etc)
Virtual reality and enhanced visualization (the use of technology to create simulations, display complex data, detailed maps, etc)
Context-aware environments and devices (classrooms and other spaces that respond to users, 'smarter' classrooms, clickers)
High performance computing (using high power, networked computers to solve complex computational problems)
Figure: Faculty Responses
Figure: Student Responses
Figure: Side-by-side Comparison of Faculty and Student “Not using, but want to” Responses
Virtual reality and enhanced visualization (defined in our survey as “the use of technology to create simulations, display complex data or detailed maps, etc.”): Only about a sixth (17%) of both faculty and students report that they are currently using such forms of technology in teaching and learning contexts, but 35% of faculty and 61% of students report that they want to use such forms in the future. This is indeed an area of great educational promise and should be a focal point in the coming years. For example, one faculty member observed the possibility of using “simulations for specific lab instrument training (offline), including ‘expert’ database type information. This would make the actual lab time working with the instrument more valuable” (Associate Professor, CAS-Natural Sciences and Mathematics). To bring about these possibilities, we first need to address several obstacles, some of which were pointed out by other faculty. First, we need to develop physical spaces that can accommodate visualizations and simulations that require equipment more robust than a desktop computer. One faculty member (CAS-Arts and Humanities) wrote, “I would like to have access to a lab that would enable me to run simulations,” implying that existing facilities may be inadequate. The other limitation is related to the time and effort needed to develop such resources, as one faculty member in RCEAS observed: “Impressive examples, e.g., simulations and animations, that I've seen on various websites appear to have involved extraordinary effort by the professor to create.” In sum, if this as an area that Lehigh wants to explore, we need to provide adequate physical resources and staff support for faculty who commit to the creation of such resources. A simpler starting point would be to help faculty discover existing simulations, virtualizations, visualizations, etc. that have been developed by other universities as shared learning objects. A recent Lehigh Lab Forum (“OpenCourseWare: MIT, MERLOT and More”) started this conversation and more is planned to help faculty locate such resources and incorporate them into their teaching.
Context-aware environments and devices (“classrooms and other spaces that respond to users, ‘smarter’ classrooms, clickers, etc.”): There is currently a growing level of interest in student response systems (“clickers”) and Lehigh should continue with its plan to offer a recommended clicker system for the campus by Spring 2008. Other new devices promise to simplify faculty manipulation of classroom technology by improving user interfaces, making classroom controls more portable, and customizing classroom settings to individual users. However, as there is no clear consensus on what devices will become the next set of standard equipment in our classrooms, we encourage the Lab to use its experimental classrooms to test the usefulness, usability, and scalability of these devices. Also, as the next generation of classroom technology is identified and as current classrooms need upgrades, we urge the university to develop a clear plan for how new technologies will rollout and communicate this plan to faculty and staff. Doing so will help ensure that faculty have an opportunity to become familiar with their teaching environments, for reluctance in this area is often connected to the frustrations when classroom technology requires long setup or prolonged attention during class sessions. As one professor observed,
“In the ideal world, we will not ‘see’ the technology. Does any common citizen know how a phone call gets routed? Not likely. The same transparency should apply to technology. We will benefit from its use, but not be acutely aware of its presence.”
Another noted,
“Right now I think we need a massive and urgent overhaul of all classrooms to consistent and modern standards. Tech should be an invisible but nontrivial part of this, but getting rooms that are climate controlled, comfortable visually, have flexible seating is desperately important.”
In light of such considerations, we hope that the university acts on the promise of these technologies, but that it continue to follow good practice by ensuring that such classroom enhancements serve to reduce the barriers between faculty and student, not increase them.
Online Learning (“a class with no face-to-face component”): Almost half (42%) of the faculty and student respondents share the view that they do not want to be involved in fully online courses. However, a number (17% of faculty and 15% of students) are already involved in such classes and there are others (14% of faculty and 22% of students) who are not, would like to be. These numbers reinforce our view that Lehigh, as a primarily residential university, has niche uses for online learning, particularly in some graduate and professional settings (where distant and online courses maximize flexibility) and for select undergraduate courses offered during the summer (helping students meet requirements while working, thus allowing faster progression to upper division courses in their major). While there is clearly still more room for growth in such courses (offered and taken by those in the ‘not using but want to’ category), there also appears to be a clear upper limit on how much of a Lehigh student’s education should be online. These facts should be part of Lehigh’s planning for the future and should be taken into consideration by our Distance Education Steering Committee.
Blended Learning (“a class with a face-to-face AND a significant web-based component”): Almost a quarter of faculty and students report using blended learning approaches already and another quarter reported that they are not but would like to. A smaller number (20% of faculty and 17% of students) reported that they will not use this approach. A third of each group is unsure. As stated earlier, blended learning seems to be an excellent area for growth for Lehigh, because it entails an application of technology in ways that can best enhance what remains the most prized form of education on our campus: students actively learning in the presence of faculty. The potential for such use is stated well by one faculty member who said:
“I see technology primarily as a way to enhance communication or the flow of information among class participants (including myself). We can continue discussions, post additional reading, examples, websites etc. It gets them to continue their thinking beyond the 50 or 75 minutes we have together. When this can be done without being cumbersome, it greatly facilitates learning.”
Another faculty member pointed out that such approaches “could help deliver content and free up class time for interactive activities” but also added that this approach “does not simply require technology, it requires a change in how students are asked to learn. […Students] are reluctant to go out, search and learn content on the web and spend the class time interactively.” (Professor, CAS-Natural Sciences and Mathematics). We would add to this observation that it also requires a change in how faculty teach. Effective blended courses require a different course design, well-structured online activities, and a rethinking of how to work with students during class meetings to capitalize on the work done online. As one faculty member observed:
“My courses are primarily social-constructivist in nature. Course content materials are often presented through online readings, Web-based interactivities, simulations, data collection activities, and Web-based presentations. Face-to-face class time is used to engage in inquiry-based activities and discuss educational issues that are raised in the readings and Web-based materials. My goal in class and through Web-based discourse is to create an intellectually stimulating atmosphere where students are engaged in critical thinking about authentic pedagogical issues. I use a variety of questioning strategies to challenge students to delve deeper into critical education issues that teachers encounter in their classroom situations. I am always interested in trying out new technology tools to meet these goals.”
Other faculty expressed interest in enhancing in-class time moving into the online setting items such as simulations, tutorials, discussions, homework sets, and peer review. Lehigh is already well situated to support course changes of this kind and we recommend significant development in this area in the future.
Personal publication and broadcasting (“the use of computers to publish or broadcast text, audio, or video, e.g., ePortfolios, online journals, blogging, podcasting, video podcasting, YouTube, video blogging, etc.”): Providing venues for students to disseminate their work to audiences beyond the classroom often raises the quality of student work, for students benefit from a heightened sense of accountability (as their work becomes public) and a diminished sense of alienation (as their work can begins to have real significance in the world beyond the campus). Faculty at Lehigh are exploring the publication possibilities by developing class websites that organize and present student work, by creating and sharing audio and video, by publishing student award winning papers in a digital form, by inviting students to contribute to our digital libraries, etc. From our survey, we see that many more (34% of faculty and 36% of students) of those who are not doing this are interested in moving into this area.
Lehigh already provides extensive support for faculty who wish to create websites capable of showcasing student work. And, in spring 2007, Lehigh became an iTunes U campus, providing both public and private areas for the collection and distribution of audio and video podcasts. This is a promising area development, as 64% of students have a portable mp3 music player, and others can access such content on their personal computers. One faculty member pointed this possible application: “One area of growth I see is the sharing of performances and compositions by our students and faculty with the rest of the world via iTunes or other network sharing devices.” (Professor, CAS-Arts and Humanities). Another described the potential in this way:
“I would someday like to teach an Early American literature class that uses a wiki to help students sort through the primary documents from the colonial period. There is a wealth of material from the Early American period, but I have found that there are relatively few exemplary texts that really excite students about the study of Early American literature. Instead, I believe, the real excitement of the period comes from immersing oneself in the many different texts of the period. I think that a wiki would help students to have this experience. Students could research a variety of primary documents (which are already on the web) and then work together as a class to organize and structure those documents into a wiki database that would then reveal the exciting points about the Early American period.”
Visions such as these are educationally exciting and we feel faculty who see student work moving in this direction should receive support to make such visions a reality.
In addition to podcasts and websites, Lehigh Lab will also soon announce a campus-wide ePortfolio system that will allow students to post and share their work, both in access-controlled groups and on the internet world at large. Such a resource will, we hope, change the way students think of their classroom work, as such work becomes more public and perhaps even part of what students share with prospective employers. We hope that the Lab work closely with other campus units such as the Dean of Students Office and Career Services to ensure that these resources are used appropriately and effectively by our students.
Another application of this use of technology is increased faculty publication and broadcasting in these new forms. Several faculty are already active bloggers, others are beginning to explore podcasting more seriously. Several professors are already using such resources to share content, provide more frequent verbal feedback to students, and give students a voice in the classroom. Others recognize that new technologies may enable them to do more easily what was more burdensome in the past, e.g. the faculty member (Professor, CAS-Natural Sciences and Mathematics) who wrote, “Years ago I tried successfully to videotape classes and have them broadcast in the evening for students who missed class. I found little effect on classroom attendance and students did use that resource. But the effort involved in doing it and the quality of the videotaping eventually caused me to stop. I'd like to see that supported but clearly it is a major undertaking.” Newer technologies of vodcasting and webcasting may simplify this process and allow this professor to regain the benefits found from capturing class sessions. If Lehigh wishes to adopt a resource for recording and broadcasting lectures, such technologies exist to simplify the process. This is something that should be investigated further.
Educational gaming (“the use of computer games to promote learning, enhance engagement, etc.”): Although very few faculty and students are currently using computers in this way (5% and 8% respectively), students in particular view this as a promising direction, with 43% expressing interest using this in the future. Faculty who have experimented with such uses report increases in student engagement. For example, one Assistant Professor in CBE reports: “It is my belief that effective learning in my Marketing Strategy course occurs when the students actually experience the strategic market planning process. A large portion of the course involves The Marketing Game!, a computer-simulated business game in which teams of students manage their own firms competing with one another in an industry. The game gives them a 'hands-on' opportunity to analyze markets, competitive forces, and target market needs, plus practice in forecasting and budgeting.” The Lehigh Lab recently held a Forum on “Educational Uses of Gaming” that, we hope, has started a conversation about the benefits of such uses, but more needs to be done if we wish to move seriously in this direction. The next steps will include learning more from faculty who are using such games and working with faculty from the College of Education and the department of Computer Science who are knowledgeable about the theory behind the creation and academic deployment of educational games.
Mobile educational content and services (“communication or delivery of educational content and services via cell phones, portable audio players, etc.”) has a similar profile of interest on campus: very few are using technology in this way (3% of faculty; 9% of students), but 17% of faculty and 34% of students report that they would like to start doing so. Part of existing use in this area was captured in to our previous discussion of personal broadcasting, where we discussed the use of iTunes to podcast content to students in a flexible manner. But this area holds an additional promise, especially given the near ubiquity of cell phones (approximately 98% of Lehigh students carry one), which move with students throughout their day and carry the potential for instant, individualized communications or information delivery. Lehigh, like other campuses, has only recently begun seriously countenancing the possibilities for communication with students using text messaging. Several campus organizations (especially in athletics and student services) have started to collect information from students on how, and whether, to contact them in this manner. Also, President Gast recently convened a task force to examine how campus announcements are made and how to take advantage of text messaging and other technologies for this end, resulting in a request to the entire campus to provide instant messaging contact information for use in the emergency circumstances. Little is being done, however, in terms of educational delivery, and the Lehigh Lab could productively experiment with various educational uses of this promising approach to communicating with students.
Social Computing (“technology-facilitated interaction and collaboration, including virtual conferencing, group work on shared documents, online communities, Facebook or MySpace as learning communities, etc.”): While faculty are less familiar with this phenomena than students, there is clearly room for growth in this area, as approximately a quarter of faculty and students expressed interest in finding a way to use social computing educationally (we assume that more students are engaged in social computing, but are not yet using this space as part of “the way they learn,” as the question asked). Faculty are less familiar with this phenomena, but it appears there is room for growth in this area, as approximately a quarter of faculty and students expressed interest in finding a way to use social computing educationally. Some campus groups, such as Global Citizenship program are already using social computing in this way but we see this as an area where more can be done to promote various learning communities among students and faculty. It may make the most sense to start with some other small to mid-sized groups to see if such groups can benefit educationally from the powerful effects of social computing.
High-performance computing (“using high powered, networked computers to solve complex computational problems”).About a sixth of Lehigh’s faculty and students report that they already use computing in this way, and 20% of faculty and 46% of students report that they would like to do so. Lehigh has made great strides in the expanding our HPC facilities and we are unusual among colleges in the extent to which our facilities are available to graduate and undergraduate students. However, it is clear that more faculty and many more students would like to get involved. One event that we hope will help is the High-performance Computing Day, held each spring since 2006, that spotlights current practices and aims to raise awareness of the kinds of projects faculty and students can undertake using our computing facilities. Through this and other outreach activities, we hope that the trend continues toward additional activities and a broader base of users. The best avenue for exploring expansion, both of resources and of users, is through our High-performance Computing Committee, who will receive the data gathered through this survey and be asked to consider strategies and future directions. Also, based on existing projects on campus, it is clear that teaching and research advances in this area will be closely related to the creation of new simulations and visualizations (discussed above).
View all faculty responses on this topic (Q18 on the faculty survey)
View all student responses on (Q14 on the student survey)
View all staff responses on this topic (Q5 on the staff survey)
***ADDITIONAL DATA RELATED TO THIS TOPIC ***
Faculty Q17. The following list includes some ways technology is changing or may change the way we teach. Which of these are you using, or do you hope to use, in your teaching?
| … | Already using | Not using, but hope to | Unsure | Will not use |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blended/hybrid courses | 23% | 24% | 33% | 20% |
| Fully online courses | 17% | 14% | 28% | 42% |
| Social computing | 15% | 24% | 38% | 23% |
| Personal publication and broadcasting | 19% | 27% | 34% | 20% |
| Mobile educational content and services | 3% | 17% | 45% | 35% |
| Educational gaming | 5% | 17% | 37% | 40% |
| Virtual reality and enhanced visualization | 17% | 35% | 30% | 18% |
| Context-aware environments and devices | 9% | 38% | 37% | 15% |
| High-performance computing | 14% | 20% | 27% | 39% |
Student Q13. The following list includes some ways technology is changing or may change the way you learn. Which of these are you using, or do you hope to use, in your learning?
| … | Already using | Not using, but hope to | Unsure | Will not use |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blended/hybrid courses | 23% | 26% | 34% | 17% |
| Fully online courses | 15% | 22% | 21% | 42% |
| Social computing | 30% | 29% | 26% | 15% |
| Personal publication and broadcasting | 23% | 36% | 27% | 14% |
| Mobile educational content and services | 9% | 34% | 28% | 29% |
| Educational gaming | 8% | 43% | 29% | 20% |
| Virtual reality and enhanced visualization | 17% | 61% | 16% | 7% |
| Context-aware environments and devices | 22% | 45% | 24% | 10% |
| High-performance computing | 16% | 46% | 28% | 10% |
| … | Faculty | Student | Faculty | Student |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| … | Not using, but want to | Not using, but want to | Do not want to use | Do not want to use |
| Blended/hybrid courses | 24% | 26% | 20% | 17% |
| Fully online courses | 14% | 22% | 42% | 42% |
| Social computing | 24% | 29% | 23% | 15% |
| Personal publication and broadcasting | 27% | 36% | 20% | 14% |
| Mobile educational content and services | 17% | 34% | 35% | 29% |
| Educational gaming | 17% | 43% | 40% | 20% |
| Virtual reality and enhanced visualization | 35% | 61% | 18% | 7% |
| Context-aware environments and devices | 38% | 45% | 15% | 10% |
| High-performance computing | 20% | 46% | 39% | 10% |
