1. Steve Wolfman UW CSE Education & Educational Technology Research Group
Classroom Technology
Steve Wolfman
UW CSE Education &
Educational Technology
Research Group
Education Technology

2. Educational Technology
…in the winter of 1813 & '14 … I attended a mathematical school kept in Boston…On entering [the] room, we were struck at the appearance of an ample Black Board suspended on the wall, with lumps of chalk on a ledge below, and cloths hanging at either side. I had never heard of such a thing before. [Samuel J. May, 1855]

3. Technologies in the Classroom

4. Challenges for Classroom Technologies
“Raise the floor” [Nass]
Don’t “lower the ceiling” [Nass]
Sculpt an effective design space
Secure adoption!

5. Our projects Classroom Presenter Classroom Feedback System
Initial development at MSR
Classroom Feedback System
Structured Interaction Presentations

6. Classroom Presenter Initial problem Later
Develop a distributed presentation space for use in a distance learning class
Later
Many of the same issues / challenges in large lecture classroom

7. Large lecture classes Challenges Maintaining attention Communication
Feedback from students
Flexibility in presentation materials
Conducting activities in class

8. Background studies Studied UW CSE PMP Greatest pain in distance course
Interviews, Surveys, Observations
Greatest pain in distance course
Presentation environment
“PowerPoint is a pain for the same reason it’s a pain in a non-distance course, the slides impose a rigid structure on the lecture and make it more difficult to adjust to the interactions that occur during it.”
“PowerPoint sucks the life out of a class.”

9. Important features Wireless Integration of High Quality Ink and Slides
Multiple views
“Performance UI”

10. Classroom Deployments
Spring 2002
Database (Masters)
Summer 2002
Introductory Programming (142)
Fall 2002
Introductory Programming (Ext 142)
Introductory Programming (143)
Algorithms (417)
Software Engineering (403)
Languages (413)
Compilers (Masters)

11. Results Observation, instructor comments, logging
Positive reception from instructors
Sustained use of writing through full term
Wide range of use
Highlighting / Attention
Derivations / Diagrams
Recording comments
Student response:
less no
change
more
Attention to lecture 4%
39%
57%
Understanding of lecture 2%
52%
46%

12. Results System easy to use Flexible navigation important
Superior to shuffling transparencies
Auxiliary inking surfaces useful
Whiteboard, border, mylar
Pen based UI for navigation and controls is critical
Generally works well (large buttons, workflow)
Remaining issues

13. Questions What is the educational impact of Presenter?
Across different disciplines, teaching styles
Different components of the system
UI Issues for delivering presentations
Future development plans
Integration with viewer devices
Expand use of ink
Manipulatives to go beyond virtual whiteboard

14. Classroom Feedback System
Student feedback does not scale
Encourage participation
Ease of expression
If the method does scale, how does the instructor make sense of it

15. Design choices Low attention requirements
Embed in context of the slide
Slides are the mediating artifact
Fixed feedback
Avoid having to compose questions
Instructor control of feedback
Example, More Information, Got It
Slow Down, Question, Explain, Cool Topic

16. Experiment Roughly 12 students given laptops to use in class
3 week deployment in CSE 142
4 weeks no intervention
2 weeks Tablet PC
3 weeks Tablet PC + feedback system
Extensive observations, logging, surveys, interviews

17. Results Mixed results Interactions did increase
Classroom culture not what we had expected
Instructor goals different than expected
Interactions did increase
Pre CFS: 2.4 (spoken) episodes per class
With CFS:
2.6 (spoken) episodes per class
14.8 (feedback) episodes per class
Discovered new interaction patterns

20. Structured Interaction Presentations
Assume students have wireless devices
Build interactive activities into lecture
Computer support to overcome logistical barriers

21. Why Computer Support? Facilitate execution Unify design
Enforce polices

22. Why Structure? Attain broader participation and more input
Achieve specific goals
Spread cognitive effort over planning time
Mediate classroom activity
Share activities across instructors and across terms
To make point: ask “Could someone please ask a question.” immediately after “clear guidelines”. Hopefully, no response. Point is that the way to encourage *all* students to participate is not to tell them they can, but to tell them how to participate and set aside time for that participation (i.e., tell them that they *should* or *must* and make time for it).
Also, relate some examples from the summer/winter studies that point to this; e.g., instructors’ comments that they have trouble dealing with unsolicited feedback “on the fly”
dedicated time
required participation
clear guidelines
assess specific aspects of class
reinforce particular ideas

23. Example: America Before Columbus [Cross and Angelo]
How many people lived in North America in 1491?
How many years had they been there by 1491?
What significant achievements had they made in that time?
On to the vision

24. Your Impressions of America Before Columbus
About how many people lived in North America in 1491?
About how many years had they been on this continent by 1491?
What significant achievements had they made in that time?

25. Your Impressions of America Before Columbus
About how many people lived in North America in 1491?
About how many years had they been on this continent by 1491?
What significant achievements had they made in that time?
% completed
% completed
% completed

26. How many people?
, ,000 1,000,000 10,000,000
From
400 To
2,500,000

27. “Solving” Natural Language
Problem: handling free text responses in class is impractical
Solution: “distributed student computation”
allows rapid, in-class turnaround
can be pedagogically sound

28. Significant Achievements
Get together with your neighbor and:
rate the significance of each achievement
note if an achievement repeats an earlier one

29. Significant Achievements
Get together with your neighbor and:
rate the significance of each achievement
note if an achievement repeats an earlier one

30. Significant achievements

31. Credits University of Washington
Ruth Anderson, Steve Wolfman, Tammy Vandegrift, Fred Videon, Ken Yasuhara
Microsoft Research, Learning Sciences and Technology Group
Jay Beavers, Jack Davis, Randy Hinrichs, Alvin Hui, Chris Moffat, Steve Wolfman

32. UW CSE Education & Educational Technology Projects
Professional Masters’ Program
Tutored Video Instruction Program
CSE 142/143
Classroom Assessment Tools