1. Development of an Integrated Local/Distant Mathematics Instruction Program: A Progress Report Paul Eakin Department of Mathematics University of Kentucky paul@ms.uky.edu

2. The work described here is a collaboration among:  Dan Chaney  Paul Eakin  Carl Eberhart  K.K. Kubota  Avinash Sathaye  Mary Bond  Jody Fast  Mike McKenna  Laura Spencer The developers freely share the software, texts, instructional materials, methodologies, etc. produced in this project for non-commercial educational use.

3. Development Strategy:  Develop on-campus versions of courses which employ the distance learning tools and techniques intended for distance learning  Unify DL and on-campus instructional development

4. Advantages:  Permits DL development with “safety net”  Provides conventional course as reference frame for comparison  Spreads development cost over both local and distant instruction programs.

5. Program Philosophy as Aphorism: “If we can’t make it work locally we can’t make it work at a distance”

6. Implementation:  Take a large enrollment course and develop “on-campus” distance learning version  Add/modify technology incrementally  Compare results, costs to concurrent conventional course and make certain two experiences are fully equivalent  Don’t offer off-campus until on-campus issues arising on-campus are fully resolved

7. Two courses in Fall 1999  Ma 123 (1 semester, general studies calculus course) –7 of 30 sections –All on-campus  Ma 322 (linear algebra) –4 of 6 sections –3 local and one distant

8. Development Platform: Ma123  3 semester hour intro calculus course  General studies  Approx 1200 students per semester in sections of about 35 first-day enrollment  Course generally not considered a success –poor success rate (high dropout/fail rate) –poorly prepared students –low student/faculty satisfaction

9. Ma123: Fall 1999  23 “traditional sections” of about 30 –taught by TA’s, PTI’s, and Faculty  7 experimental sections of about 30 –taught by 2 faculty and 2 TA’s  Instructors were volunteers, students were not.

10. Fall 1999 Format: Traditional format for Ma123  Commercial hardbound text ($70)  Undergraduates employed as homework graders ($350 per section)  3 (uniform) midterm examinations plus final  Class meets three hours per week of formal lecture by instructor

11. Fall 1999 Format: Development format for Ma123  “Free” text (html, softbound copy from bookstore ($6) )  web-based homework system used only for feedback  formal lectures on Internet and CD  3 (uniform) midterm examinations plus final  class time (3 hrs per week) used for recitation, collaborative work, etc.

12. Current Results in Ma123: Quite comparable to “traditional ”  Grades about the same  Student Satisfaction about the same  Drop-out rate about 10% higher  Success with non drop outs higher

13. Ma123 Results (continued)  weaker students have difficulty with video-based lectures (compliance)  Low-level students more responsive to video lectures done by graduate students  Very strong correlation among scores/attendance/compliance  High level of acceptance, success among compliant students

14. Current Results in Ma322 (linear Algebra )  Grades and student satisfaction high  High rate of compliance  Distant section performance same as on-campus  Drop rate about same as traditional (lower for distant section)  Covered substantially more material  Students don’t appear to have a preference among lecturers

15. Technology Issues:  Very few problems with web-based homework,  Video issues: –lab setup (viewers, sound) –off-campus bandwidth –Length of segments  logistics  “Too much data”

16. Costs: Instructional Effort:  Preparation of materials takes about four times the effort as simply teaching the traditional on-campus class  Takes less work to conduct individual section once materials are in place  Ma123 close to “break even” on net instructional effort this semester with seven sections

17. Costs: Resources:  ITV Studio (infrastructure)  High speed computer network (infrastructure)  computers, disk space, CD writer  Software: Adobe Premiere, Maple, WebEq, Perl, Netscape Composer, Microsoft Word, Adaptec CD Creator,  Supplies (tapes, CD blanks, printing)  Approximate non-infrastructure costs are approximately $20,000

18. Costs: Staff  Software development (staff)  Production of lecture tapes (staff)  Post Production conversion to digital format (staff)  Post production editing and posting (graduate students)  CDs are made by faculty  Estimated staff costs for fall 1999 are approximately $30,000 (direct)

19. Project Description:  Student View  Faculty User View  Materials Development Process

20. Student response to Ma123 as reported in the student paper

25. Primary Student Interface: Instructor’s Web Page  syllabus  links to html text  links to chat system and FAQ systems  links to “WQS” system for course materials (e.g. homework, review materials, video lectures, etc)

26. Student Interface: Instructor’s Web Page (part 1) System tutorial Course syllabus Visual class rolls Exam schedule

27. Class Roll:

28. Instructor’s Web Page (part 2) Link to wqs system server Student emails from homework system with responses Links to lecture notes for video lectures

29. Responses to Student Questions: Page references particular assignment Student query Instructor response

30. Instructor Web Page (part 3) Link to online text Link to wqs system Links to lecture slides for video lectures by chapter

31. WQS System: current login screen Students select video lectures menu or their class homework menu Group logins and work are encouraged

32. Typical Section Menu Chapter 1 homework Review for test II

33. Homework Page: Current Format Problem and answers System response Email window Student answer System answer

34. Most students print the problem sets out and record their solutions or solutions from class directly on the printouts

35. Video Lectures Menu Lecture Slides (html) Video of lecture segment (10-30 min)

37. How students watch the videos

38. Test Review with video solutions Problem statement with diagram Link to video solution Maple worksheet With links exported to html

39. Data Logs  Every student action is logged with time stamp  All activity credited to each member on group login  Total number of answers submitted (right or wrong) correlates very well with performance on tests

40. Log Data

41. WQS Video  Materials prepared by faculty  lectures by faculty and graduate students  tapes converted to ASF and edited by grad students and staff  separate video and homework (original system)  text/homework/video merged in next edition

42. Graduate Student Editing Video Files

43. WQS and Video Lecture Materials Preparation  Materials developed by faculty using a variety of standard tools (e.g. Maple, LaTeX, Perl).  Individual item described by a file called “data” in directory specific to item. It describes how construct the item.  locations placed in control file called wqs-dirs which is known to server and describes the section menu page

44. Faculty Preparing Materials coffee food CD burner and Blank CDs

45. WQS CDs  Natural corollary of HTML format –easily made at faculty desk, cheap –Students copy in lab on their own blank (15 min, $1)  Originated through necessity  Strongly favored by upper-level students who tend to live off-campus  Not used much by lower level students who tend to live on campus

46. Maple Source: Homework Problem Question Tag:( Q_ ) “SKIP” Tags Answer Tags: ( A_ ) Correct Answer Tag Code for Figure (section)

47. SAMPLE WQS TAGS  Q_ Question starts and runs to next tag  T_ Text starts and runs to next tag  A_ Answer choice for current question  A_ANS Correct answer for current question  SKIP Omit from here to next tag

48. To create and “post” a simple wqs homework set:  Source document is exported to html from Maple menu  exported html document is processed by a Perl script to: – create a “data” file which describes the final document to the server –place an entry in a control file which describes the menu

49. The “data” file which describes the final document These correspond to tags in source document These correspond to segments of html in exported document which were delimited by the tags

50. Sharing Materials: Paul’s control file Paul made homework set number 7 Ken made homework set number 8

51. Sharing:  Instructor A can use instructor B’s entire menu simply by copying B’s control file (with permission)  Instructor A can use any item in instructor B’s menu simply by copying the corresponding entry from B’s control file (with permission)  In either case student email from A’s students will be routed to A and activity logged for A

52. B’s Files control materials homeworklecture wqs ma123 Wqs system Student login To B’s class 1 2 3 4 5 Student Login To A’s class A’s Files wqs ma123 control 1 2 3 5 LOAD SHARING

53. Sharing: Laura’s Ma123 Control File and class menu uses materials developed by Ken and Paul

54. Sharing: Laura and Jody Do Ma123 lectures for all sections

55. Sharing: Control File for Joe Mahoney’s Paducah, KY Section of Ma322 Carl Eberhart created the homework for the Ma322 sections

56. Joe Mahoney and Avinash Sathaye did Videos for MA322

57. Planned changes for Spring 2000  Re-written, expanded text as multimedia document including homework, videos, reviews, etc. (unified format)  Continuous reporting of log data to students,  CDs available to students in advance

58. Unified Format: LaTeX math formatting Video link

59. Web homework is part of text in unified format

60. Unified Format  Puts all services (text, video lecture, homework, reviews, etc.) on one page  Moves “login” to end of process: gets students immediately to the subject matter  Nicer text through use of LaTeX  Shorter video segments  Development more complex

61. http://www.ms.uky.edu/wqs Paul Eakin Department of Mathematics University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40606 paul@ms.uky.edu