🚀 go-pugleaf

A repost from alt.uu.future - this article has had propagation problems:

From: terry@npd.Novell.COM (Terry Lambert)
Subject: Re: Further on - A great idea
Organization: Novell NPD -- Sandy, UT
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1992 22:42:04 GMT

In article <1992Jun16.093010@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov> shirley@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov (Bill Shirley [CSC]) writes:
>I agree, many classes would be better in an email format, possibly using
>(and sharing) a newsgroup for administative purposes (new class offerings,
>etc.)

	I *disagree* here.  Email distribution has a number of problems:

	1)	Archival of classes for reuse.

	Currently, usenet information (yes, even postings by me!) are being
	archived to optical disk by at least 2 corporations that I am aware
	of.  One is editting the information into a "best of" form, wherein
	the data is edited for content.  The other is archiving it verbatim,
	and makes disclaimer for profanity, etc.

	Archival is a strong argument.  It means that the "University" never
	need lose a facultly member or class contents once a class has been
	"taught", as long as there are "canonical" sites for class materials,
	which must also include test/correction mechanisms.

	2)	Strict reliance on start dates.

	With mailing lists, one is required to "enroll" in order to "attend"
	a class.  Miss the "enrollment" date, and you miss several classes,
	or worse, are disalloed from "attending" until (and if) the class is
	reoffered.  If I have to reinstall my system due to a crash, I can
	miss tests.  A moderated newsgroup [where the instructer is the
	moderator] gets around this problem.  Questions and answers can be
	handled in a per session "digest" format by the instructor.  This
	allows the instructor to get ideas across without interruption;
	coupled with the fact that information is likely to be boiled-down
	off-line by an instructor, I see this as one of the greatest
	strengths of this approach.  This doesn't even touch on the fact
	that, given sufficient time, all relevant questions will either be
	answered in the digest or obviated by course materials.

	3)	Propagation delay.

	It may take some time to propagate mail.  There is an excellent
	story by Issac Asimov about a spacecraft marooned out by Pluto
	(or on Pluto, I forget which) where the speed of light causes
	the round trip delay to be too long to provide a soloution for
	the astronauts in time.  The soloution was (obvious to one of
	the characters mom's, the town gossip) to have both sides talk
	continuously rather than waiting for a response.  Communication
	doe *not* have to be synchronus unless we force it by way of the
	medium organization we provide.


>Also, many "classes" may want to have prerequisites, or suggested previous
>courses (I feel this obvious, but had to state it anyway).  Though inclusion
>in a class should not be strict (pupils may aquire knowledge elsewhere),
>suggested prior knowledge is a must in providing useful information.

I would suggest that we provide an automated testing mechanism, or as
automated as possible.  I am not suggesting that "multiple guess" tests
in any way, shape, or form, provide a substitute for essay questions or
programming assignments, to mention two, but providing such testing as
the nomnitive norm will allow us to have cannonically correct answers.
In this fashion, we will not suffer a loss by not having the testing
mechanism sufficiently distributed (ie: one hard drive somewhere).  In
addition, we will not require international email traffic if we can
establish more than one "testing center".  Automation of testing has the
additional benefit of allowing me to "take the class" 2 years after it
was "taught", with the only penalty being active "participation" in the
"discussion".  This would solve the prerequisite problem by providing
a mechanism for cross-reference suggestion that another class would perhaps
be more suitable for the individual asking the question [hopefully with a
set of class materials already in place for used by the "student"].

If we do not pace the classes to be [initially] taught as rapidly as a
"normal" class is taught, we provide the opportunity for a massive amount
of discussion to take place; this would allow discussion to take place
using a "hyper-text" style front-end at a later date, and could therefore
allow the student to skip the questions which they don't personally want
the answers to, which are outside the scope of the "class" proper.  It 
should be noted that *any* discussion or clarification could be viewed as
being "outside the class proper".

If the intent is to provide a tool which may be used to learn, rather than
targetting a particular system of accrediation, we are not in danger of
having to deal with being used as a "diploma mill".  The idea of being
able to get a diploma in this fashion is highly seductive; however, there
are other avenues.

One mechanism for accrediation that would not require appreciable work on
the part of the "Usenet University" would be cooperative testing at an
accredited institution.  You could learn what needed to be learned to pass
the class "on line", and test at a University without having to attend
class there.  Many Universities allow "testing out" of classes already,
and this could be a suitable venue for gaining the knowledge needed to
take advantage of these programs.  Thus you take the class on line, but
pass it and get graded off line.  Generally, these testing programs are
much less expensive than attending the class, then testing.

Conceivably, given the amount of "pounding-into-shape" an interactive
cirriculum would take, if course materials (sylabus, daily lesson plans,
testing materials, etc.) were widely available, there is no reason that
they would not be adopted as part of a traditional Universtiy program;
this would probably require academic involvement on the length and level
of class offerings to make it viable.


This type of medium for teaching would definitely help me with my worst
failing, which is knowledge of terminology.  I have only "failed" in an
educational situation when the class was moving too slowly to suit my
tastes, and I set out on my own with the reference books.  As a result,
when the terminology used on the test did not match that with which I
was familiar, I "failed" to solve that test problem.  This was usually
when the instructor did not use the same terminology as the book.  I feel
that this type of environment stands a good chance of "homogenizing" the
terminology used, especially if the information gathered is then applied
to more traditional programs.



					Terry Lambert
					terry_lambert@gateway.novell.com
					terry@icarus.weber.edu
---
Disclaimer:  Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of
my present or previous employers.