Message from the President, Ken Weaver
I am delighted to announce the formation of a Long-Range Planning Committee to review the mission, vision, and operations of CTUP. The committee, under the capable leadership of President-elect Mary Allen (California State University-Bakersfield) as chair, has started its deliberations, which will be conducted mostly via the Internet and will conclude by the 1997 business meeting when Mary assumes the presidency. The other members of the committee are Jay Brophy (University of Central Florida), Sue Dutch (Westfield (CT) State College), Eric Landrum (Boise (ID) State University), Pat Mattimore (South San Francisco High School), Theresa Wozencraft (Midwestern (TX) State University), and myself as ex officio. This important process is in the hands (and minds) of capable, dedicated individuals who bring to these deliberations a wealth of knowledge, experience, and CTUP involvement.
The committee’s charge includes but is not limited to the following:Technology and Teaching
Teaching in a Multimedia Classroom:
Some Lessons Learned
Virginia Andreoli Mathie
Virginia Andreoli Mathie is a Full Professor and Department Head of
Psychology at James Madison University. She served as CTUP coordinator for the
1981, 1993, and 1994 SEPA meetings and is currently President of APA's Division
Two. She was President of the Virginia Academy of Academic Psychologists in 1988
and has chaired and served on several committees of the Virginia Psychological
Association. Her teaching interests are in the areas of critical thinking and
the use of technology. Her current research examines the differences between
acknowledged and unacknowledged rape victims.
Since 1993 I have
taught social psychology in a 104-seat, auditorium-style multimedia classroom
with electronic keypads at each seat. At the room’s front are two 6' x 8' rear
projection screens and an instructor's podium housing two IBM PS/2 Model 57SLC
multimedia microcomputers, a document camera, and videodisc, videotape, and
audiotape players. The IBM systems will soon be replaced by two Dell 5133/GXMT
Pentium multimedia computers with Videoblaster cards and 1 GB JAZ drives. The
primary software has been Asymetric's Toolbook, a Windows-based presentation
package, although we are now planning to increase our use of Gold Disk's Astound
and Microsoft's Office Pro.
Multimedia classrooms are becoming common
(see Kalmback, 1994; Wright, 1993). One of its greatest strengths is the visual
and interactive capabilities (see also Jones & Smith, 1992; Stoloff, 1995;
Welsh, 1993; Wright, 1993). With relative ease, I can incorporate my own or
commercially-available animation, graphics, video or audio clips, and still
pictures into presentations to maintain interest and enhance the material’s
retention.
I control what is visible on the screen with a click of the
mouse, thus allowing me to break down complex material into more understandable
components. I like this capability better than showing an overhead transparency
with everything on it (or trying to hide part of it with paper and watching the
fan blow the paper away!). I can visually focus students' attention on what I
want to discuss, and students are not distracted copying an entire transparency
while I'm trying to highlight a particular point.
I also like the fact
that I can be flexible about presenting material. I can proceed through lists or
screens of material in a linear fashion or can skip back and forth at the click
of the mouse between parts of a screen or between screens to parallel the flow
of discussions, questions, or answers. Because my files are stored on a network,
within seconds I can open files from previous lectures and refer back to
material in them.
One of the most exciting and unique aspects of our
classroom is the electronic polling system. I can pose questions with several
response alternatives and ask students to enter their responses on their keypad.
The computer tabulates responses within seconds and displays on the screen a
frequency distribution and barchart. In an anonymous and non-threatening manner,
students obtain immediate feedback on what other students think, often leading
to lively discussions about the response differences. I have used this
technology to ask questions about controversial issues, to demonstrate a variety
of concepts, and to test students' understanding of key concepts (Brewster, in
press). Students seem to enjoy this feature of the classroom the
most.
Students can guide the WWW search during class from the classroom
computers, and the results are immediately available to students for discussion.
Information that is "hot off the press" can be incorporated into lectures with a
few clicks of the mouse.
The need to prepare
classroom materials in advance and organize them in an orderly, logical manner
has required me to think more carefully and critically about the material I am
teaching and how concepts relate to one another. While teaching, the
organization helps me stay on task or get back on track after interesting
discussions.
While these are some of the strengths of
our multimedia classroom, some drawbacks warrant attention. Multimedia
classrooms are expensive and may require renovation. All faculty who teach in
the classroom should have compatible computer systems in their offices to insure
materials are completely transportable to the classroom. Duplicating the
computer systems for many faculty can be expensive. Furthermore, computer
equipment becomes outdated very quickly. The institution must be willing to
maintain and upgrade computers in the classroom and in faculty offices on a
regular basis. Money should also be available to train faculty to use the new
systems.
Equipment can malfunction. I always go to
class prepared to have nothing work! Although it does not happen often, when the
system does crash, it is very disruptive. I also have less time to interact with
students before or after class because the limited time between classes is
needed to set up or log off of the system. During class, monitoring several
pieces of equipment can detract from interacting with students.
Our classroom has a large fixed podium at the front of the
room to house the equipment and fixed seats to accommodate the keypads.
Sometimes the podium seems like a barrier between me and the students. I need to
get out from behind it to connect with students during discussions but this
makes it difficult to operate the equipment. The fixed seats make it difficult
to have students engage in group discussions or exercises.
Multimedia
classrooms require a large investment of time to learn new software; think about
graphic design, organization, and illustration; and prepare materials. After
spending hours designing a screen that takes minutes to present, I feel
compelled to use everything. I must make a concerted effort to promote
spontaneous discussions.
In summary, multimedia
classrooms can enhance teaching and learning, but we must be aware of their
problems and limitations to avoid disappointment. I have found teaching in our
multimedia classroom to be a challenging yet rewarding adventure.
References
Technology: Teaching’s Servant or Master?
Edward P.
Kardas
Edward P. Kardas is currently chair of the
Department of Psychology and Sociology at Southern Arkansas University. He has
been developing and using computer-based materials for teaching psychology since
1989. He is co-author (with Tommy Milford) of Using the Internet for Social
Science Research and Practice (Wadsworth, 1996) and author of the
Instructor’s Manual for Sternberg’s (1995) In Search of the Human Mind.
Furious debate centers around the proper role of new technology in
teaching. The pace of technological change has quickened to the point that
standard models of research and evaluation can hardly keep up. Teachers'
adoption and ownership of technology is also highly variable. Given the need to
constantly upgrade and the mergers/acquisitions of technology companies, the
uncertainties surrounding the production and future of hardware and software are
not comforting even to the most technically sophisticated teachers. Waiting for
“the dust to settle” seems a logical response to many teachers, but doing so
either delays necessary action or provides teachers an excuse to avoid using
technology. However, rushing to adopt is also risky, as newly-purchased software
or hardware may quickly become obsolete or not adequately meet the instructor’s
needs. So what are teachers to do?
In any era the fundamental principles
of teaching are the same. Knowledge is passed on from teacher to student. But,
much more than that is going on. For example, good teachers come in many styles
and so do students. Recognizing such diversity is the first step in teaching as
any parent knows. The strategy that worked with the eldest does not necessarily
work with subsequent children. Since Piaget, we know that doing and teaching are
nearly synonymous. Good teaching enables students to DO things and makes their
learning richer and easier. Good teachers also care about their students'
learning. Many times such care is seen in the nature of the social bond between
teacher and student. How can technology help teachers become better
teachers?
Often teachers forget that they too are learners, that
technology is another tool, one they must learn to use. Unfortunately, computers
have yet to reach the level of sophistication of hand tools. We all know what to
do and not to do with hammers, for instance, but most of us are still learning
what to do and not to do with computers. We tend to overlook our long experience
with the familiar tools of our culture. Thus, we expect to master the computer
without remembering how long it took us to learn to drive nails
properly.
The right way to use a computer to teach does not exist.
Rather, we should know enough about our hardware and software so that we can
then adapt it to the successful ways we have been teaching ALREADY. It is a
mistake to believe that a magical combination of hardware and software is going
to solve all of our teaching problems. Instead, we should realize that those
problems will be solved as they always have been, through good teaching. The
trick today is to make good teachers use technology, not to expect technology to
make good teachers.
If we do not master technology, it will surely master
us. Teaching is no exception. If you want to use computers to teach, then you
are going to have to learn about them. If you do, a time will come when you will
realize how computers can serve you.
So where to start? Today, the
answer seems to be the World Wide Web because its structure deals nicely with
problems of distribution and compatibility. Connect yourself to the Internet,
get a browser, learn HTML. Soon, you too will see how that technology can serve
you and your students. In my general psychology course, for example, students
obtain lectures, movies, graphics, and other materials from the web and also
communicate with me via e-mail.
A Distance Learning Faculty Guide
Michael Clay and Robert
Grover
Michael Clay is Director of Tele-Educational Support Services and Robert
Grover is Professor of Library and Information Management at Emporia State
University.
“Moving from being the sage on stage toward being the
guide on the side” accurately conveys the transition teachers make as they move
from the traditional to the distance learning classroom. Effective teaching
strategies in a traditional situation may not transfer to a distance education
environment. In a distance learning setting, many of the students’ visual and
auditory cures cannot be captured by the technology and thus are not observed by
the instructor. Resulting isolation and frustration may overwhelm the learning
process.
To assure a supportive learning environment, the instructor
must provide ample opportunity for interacting with students in different ways.
The instructor must plan in advance to place the learner, rather than content,
at the forefront. Thus the focus in distance learning is uncovering the
learners’ understanding of the subject matter rather than covering content.
Following are suggestions for preparing instructors for televised
interactive instruction:
1. Planning should begin early during the semester
preceding the offering of the course.
2. Provide workshops to
experience teleteaching from the instructor’s and student’s perspective.
3.
Develop a learning environment that actively engages the student. This might
require rethinking instructional strategies where an additional emphasis is on
the student–student interaction with both course and individual ideas.
4.
Provide an experienced teleteacher or instructional design specialist for
assistance.
5. Modify overhead transparencies for television projection.
Include no more than five lines of print with five to six words per line.
6.
Provide students handouts so they can concentrate on the instructor instead of
taking notes. Presentation software can print out the content of the visual for
duplication.
7. Since student-teacher interaction is hindered by the
television medium, student-student interaction should be enhanced. Each class
session should include such formal interactions to try out ideas and participate
in discussion.
8. Discussion takes longer when teaching at a distance.
Students are hesitant to use the microphones, and it takes time for the video
and audio technology to switch to the student speaker. The instructor must be
prepared to wait.
9. The instructor cannot see the looks of puzzlement or
hear the whispers or comments which indicate misunderstanding. They must make
numerous mini-assessments to insure that the students are grasping the
material.
10. Be prepared for the technology to fail. Have alternative plans
if the system is down such as the availability of an audio-only speaker backup
system.
The responsibility for learning shifts from the instructor to the
student in the distance learning course. The following list of ideas may help in
this transition:
1. Students registering for the on-campus presentation of
the course should be informed that it is a distance learning course so they
don’t feel that they are “guinea pigs.”
2. Course design must include
sufficient time for warm-up social activities and practice with using the
microphones and being on camera. Fostering student rapport and comfort with the
technology creates a sense of a learning community.
3. Classroom protocol and
appropriate behavior must be established during the first session. Clearly
establish start and end times and course requirements and expectations. Tell
students how to contact the instructor for questions and help.
4. From the
start the instructor shows students how the course is designed to encourage
their active participation and self-directed learning skills.
5.
Demonstrations should be planned early in the course to foster student-student
and student-instructor interactions.
6. Students must be more aggressive in
providing personal as well as anonymous feedback regarding understanding of the
content. Private comments can be made via telephone, fax, or e-mail; public
comments can be made via class.
7. A collaborative small group project can
provide the means to address a variety of student learning styles.
8. Two
students should be designated as group facilitators to adjust the camera and
microphones and assist with distributing and collecting papers.
9. Students
should honestly evaluate the learning activities used during the
course.
Regional Psychology Convention Highlights
Eastern Psychological Association,
March 29-31, 1996, Philadelphia, PA
Friday: CTUP Workshop–“Pedagogical, ethical, and legal issues in
grading.” CTUP Regional Meeting. CTUP/Division Two–Psych Follies with Joe
Palladino and Mitch Handelsman and social hour
Saturday: CTUP Symposium–“Diversity in classroom: Faculty,
student, curricula, content, and pedagogy.” CTUP Conversation with a
Distinguished Teacher of Psychology–Margaret Matlin. Division Two/CTUP G.
Stanley Hall Lecture: Susan K. Whitbourne, “Identity and changes with age”
Midwestern Psychological Association,
May 2-4, 1996, Chicago, IL
Thursday: CTUP/Psi Chi Forum–“Getting a job with a B.A. in psychology.”
CTUP Symposium–“Psychology and the information superhighway.” CTUP/Psi Chi/Psi
Beta/ CUPP Planning Session
Friday: CTUP
Professional Development Symposium–“Letters of recommendation from four
perspectives: Undergraduate student, graduate student, writing the letter and
the letter in promotion and tenure.” CTUP/CUPP Symposium–“Student development of
professional standards.” Division Two/CTUP G. Stanley Hall Lecture:
Michael Domjan, "Learning and behavior systems"
Saturday: The Creative Classroom for
demonstrating teaching techniques.
Rocky Mountain Psychological Association, April 12-14,
Park City, Utah
Division Two/CTUP G. Stanley Hall Lecture: Jim Korn,
“How do teachers learn to teach.” Groups Under Represented/CTUP Panel
Discussion–“‘Out’” in the academy: Mentoring lesbian, gay, and bisexual
students.” CTUP/CUPP Symposium–“Faculty evaluation: How and why.” CTUP
Roundtable discussion–”Using professional psychology training centers to prepare
students as scientists/professionals.” CTUP Teaching Take-Out–Demonstration of
classroom activities. CTUP Paper Session on Teaching Issues. CTUP/Division Two
Luncheon and Business Meeting.
Southeastern Psychological Association, March 20-23, 1996, Norfolk, VA
Division Two/CTUP/Psi Beta Film Festival. Division
Two/CTUP Invited Address–Margaret Matlin, “Gardeners, midwives, bankers...and
barracudas: Metaphors for college teaching.” Friday Morning Live: Demonstrations
of Psychology Activities; CTUP Discussion–Using the World Wide Web and
technology for instruction.
Southwestern Psychological Association, April 4-6, 1996,
Houston, TX
Thursday: CTUP Conversation Hour–“On becoming a chair: Life changes,
career changes, and task changes.”
Friday:
CTUP Symposium I–“Cheating, grading, and ethics: Issues in teaching.” CTUP
Invited Address–Rick Kasschau, “Psychology in high school: 911 or a perfect
5?”
Saturday: CTUP Symposium II–“Teaching
students with disabilities.” CTUP Teaching Activities Exchange poster session.
Division Two/CTUP G. Stanley Hall Lecture: Michael Domjan, “Learning and
behavior systems”
Western Psychological Association, April 11–14, 1996, San
Jose, CA
The April 10 Terman Conference features Sislena Grocer (APA Research Office), an expert in educational and career options for psychology students; Jane Halonen (Alverno (WI) College), a national leader in teaching critical thinking and quality undergraduate education; Gerard L. Hanley (CA State University, Long Beach), winner of multiple outstanding teaching awards and an experienced faculty development officer; Brian Little (Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada), winner of Canada's highest award for university teaching; and Robert J. Pellegrini (San Jose State University), 1996 recipient of the WPA Distinguished Teacher Award and a leading advocate-practitioner of correctional education. The WPA-CTUP program includes an invited address by Drew Westen, "Teaching contemporary psychodynamic theory in an anti-Freudian age: Is Freud really dead?," a Teaching Takeout session, "Demonstrations for the 1990s," a technology symposium, "Psychology's instructional software: How does it work? Does it work?," a last lecture symposium, a planning breakfast, and a social hour.
Bottoms Up
Pat Mattimore, South
San Francisco High School
At last August’s CTUP business meeting, Ken Weaver stated his belief that college professors should be willing to work with high school teachers because such partnerships benefit the profession. I would like to take a slightly more cynical view. College professors should work with high school professors because of what’s in it for them–namely fresh, exciting, creative approaches to teaching. I have been surprised at discussions on TIPS regarding teaching methodologies such as cooperative learning and integrated teaching. Many of the discussants have treated those topics as if they were novel. Those subjects and others have been in place and bandied about by high school and middle school teachers for years.
During last year’s APA convention, many presenters read prepared scripts to their audiences. Those presenters could not have survived in a high school classroom. In contrast, the high school teachers presenting at TOPSS sessions At my high school, we teach 25 hours per week, seeing 160 to 170 students per day. These students cover a much broader spectrum of academic background and motivation than the more homogeneous group that proceeds to college. Consequently, high school teachers must use a variety of pedagogical tools to provide alternatives to lectures.
My intent is not to denigrate college professors. Clearly, they have on the whole a far greater grasp of important psychological concepts than high school teachers. And partnerships between high school and university faculty are wonderful, but these connections are sometimes portrayed as “one-way streets” with the professors doing all the giving. High school teachers, however, are required to be trained as teachers to be licensed in their respective states. Because we are trained to use a variety of pedagogical tools, perhaps some things we do can be useful to college teachers as well.
Second Annual Membership Drive and
Professional Support Awards
Three awards are available to CTUP members for helping defray their expenses
attending a psychology or teaching conference of their choice in 1996-1997:
$300, $125, and $75. CTUP’s lifetime membership dues continue to be $10. If you
are a new member, you receive one entry in the drawing for joining and one
additional entry for each new member you sponsor. If you are an existing member,
you will receive one entry in the drawing for each new member you sponsor. All
CTUP membership forms must be postmarked by May 30, 1996 and sent to Mary Allen
(805-664-2366), Department of Psychology, California State
University-Bakersfield, 9001 Stockdale Highway, Bakersfield, CA 93311-1099, to
be included in this year’s drawing. The drawing will occur in June with winners
announced at the CTUP business meeting in August and in the fall newsletter. A
membership form appears below. Please copy as needed.