Archive for November, 2007

Nov 20 2007

Visualize this! A visit to C.V.V.E. at the University of Kentucky

Two weeks ago I took a trip with some of my producer colleagues at KET to the University of Kentucky’s Center for Visualization and Virtual Environments (C.V.V.E.) We had received an invitation for a tour some weeks earlier and besides feeling curious about what we might see–none of us really knew what to expect!– we were hoping that the visit might spark our imagination and help us come up with some creative ideas for the video instruction we are set to produce next year. That it did!

As we were guided from room to room, grad students received us and introduced the projects that were being carried out. In the first room, ironically, the focus was not on visual but on audio research. There, we were shown how tiny microphones and speakers can be distributed at various points and synchronized in a way that allows a computer to locate and distinguish voices from within a group. This capability could transform any environment into a “smart” space which could detect and interact with individual visitors simultaneously. The technology opens up all kinds of possibilities: spoken commands from anywhere in the room could direct a computer to call up documents and files to a large screen, a “voice guide” could accompany and direct a person on a tour through a building, or a person could allow his voice to be amplified as he walked through the room but without the hassle of wearing a dedicated microphone.

The different stations of the tour were similar in that each featured an application of technology which in the near future might significantly change the way people interact with information and each other. Tele-immersion research being conducted at CVVE for example involves developing practical methods of transmitting images and environments to displays so that they are “view-dependent.” As the viewer looks at the screen from different directions, the image and light change to create a 3-D, immersive effect: objects, people, and backgrounds seem to be really there. Such a technology will take tele-conferencing to a whole new level. Board members might attend a meeting in which they are seated right across the table from one another, at least apparently so. In reality however they are sitting not only in different board rooms but in different countries as well, separated by thousands of miles. Because tele-immersion can re-create a sense of proximity and presence which we experience in real life, it will have many ramifications for distance learning as well. As we’ve mentioned before on these pages, one essential tactic for increasing achievement in K12 distance learning is removing the “distance.” Tele-immersion provides a way to make that possible.

There were many other cutting-edge projects which we were able to see in action. Research in 3D Face Recognition, 3D Data Acquisition, and the REVEAL project which will allow surgeons to train for and conduct surgeries in a much more efficient and sophisticated manner.

While touring the center, one can not help but notice how the visualization research going on there applies to such a wide range of disciplines: medicine, commerce, government, defense, and…. education.

I’ve been hopeful and excited about the potential of virtual environments in education –especially for language learning and cultural exchange– ever since I first started delving into Second Life at the beginning of this year. Toward the end of our tour at CVVE we were provided with a concrete example (on video) of how life-size, immersive visualization can work for learning. Researchers there had created an environment using a gaming metaphor: a student– equipped with only an armchair to sit in and a remote to direct his motion–took part in an Indiana Jones-type quest through a cavernous maze of tunnels and secret passages to locate and help decipher an ancient Greek tablet. As the student “walked” through the maze, he heard the voices of two guides who gave him advice on how to proceed and what to look out for– but all of the decision making was left up to him. Once he finally found the tablet, he was able to use his remote to pick it up, spin it around, and view it from all angles. As the doctoral student working on the project pointed out, such a close-up examination would be impossible in the museum where the actual artifact is on display: the piece is housed behind glass and cannot be touched (nor lifted up! It weighs more than a ton, I’m sure. :-) ) But how did she create such a realistic 3-D image of this massive relic? She confided to us that is was actually very easy: she simply located a 2D image of the piece on the web and downloaded it. No labor-intensive rendering involved! Again, we see ways of removing the distance out of the equation and allowing students to interact with content up close.

Before leaving one my colleagues made the observation that while the ideas there at the center were all very futuristic, the technology was not. Indeed, most of the projects made use of the most standard equipment, all of it very economical and run-of-the-mill. We were expecting supercomputers but found mostly low cost cameras and gear that seemed thrown together in an ad hoc fashion.

That realization alone made quite an impact on my thinking over the next days. I thought about how although for immediate, practical purposes we aren’t quite there yet with all the exciting new capabilities of visualization technology and virtual immersion, we are very close indeed. In the meantime I too want to make use of the tools at hand (in the spirit of the people at the CVVE!) but for our program the focus will be primarily on creating environments for language learning in which students can experience content first hand.

2 responses so far

Nov 15 2007

Ah, the possibilities! components of a k12 language program

Mind maps are great brainstorming tools, of course. Here’s a look at some brainstorming I’ve done using mindmeister. Just click on the map to navigate on your own. Drag the blue box to the right.

2 responses so far

Nov 13 2007

video instruction in a changed world

Not all distance-learning programs rely on video instruction as a component of their courses. In fact, most do not. Why not? Well for one, videos can be costly. Traditionally video involves a whole team of people who work together writing, producing, and packaging what becomes the final product: a complete series of lessons on tape, DVD, or web.

Video formats have been a part of KET Distance Learning since the beginning. KET’s innovations in video as a teaching medium (see below) allowed students even in the remotest areas of Kentucky the opportunity to connect with other learners of German (as well as other many other subjects)—an opportunity they wouldn’t have had otherwise.

Of course some things were different back then… The program was televised live via satellite to participating schools. German classes in the various schools all met at the same time so that they could watch the show when it was broadcast. Is that amazing, or what? Today every school seems to be in its own little universe with a distinct timetable and any variation of block scheduling (with extended 90 minute classes), or regular scheduling (usually 55 minute classes,) or even a combination thereof (alternating between 90 and 55 minutes.) Some schools offer shortened class periods of 45 minutes. Others provide no time at all during the regular school day for German DL classes. Interested students have to meet before or after school and count on office staff somewhere in the building to help act as facilitators to download tests and enter grades. And then there are the students that are learning from home, either through home-schooling or cyber schools (like the Pennsylvania Leadership Charter School.)

W H A T has been going on here in the last ten years??!! A revolution?

And it appears that it is just the beginning. This trend in education towards individualized learning with more choice and greater local control will not be going away any time soon. Distance learning programs will have to keep pace.

Ironically enough, live broadcasts back in the nineties allowed for a more interactive format than what we have today. Back then, individual classes at the various schools were encouraged to call in to ask the teacher questions during the broadcast. Each episode featured a “school of the day” that would remain on the line for most of the lesson. Students interacted with the teacher as well as with other students who called in. In addition, KET pioneered a wonderful technological tool to allow student input: the KET keypad, a fully patented device that helped the KET distance program win national recognition (have a look here and here.)

But it was inevitable that the format had to change. School schedules were rapidly diverging from the norm. Dependence on satellite service also became an issue. It became necessary to go to pre-recorded video tapes.

That leads us up to today… Fortunately we can now rely on other means to achieve the all-important interaction that we need. The read- write web, or Web 2.0 , provides all kinds of possibilities. The question here is: Will video instruction continue to play a role, given the changed environment?

I think it can.

One important advantage of the video format is that it brings the image of the teacher to the learner and thus helps remove the distance out of the dl equation. Providing students a way of “getting to know” their teacher can’t hurt and may even make them more receptive to the course content. As different teaching styles work for different teachers, there is probably no one right way to approach video in a K12 DL course. Nevertheless we could probably come up with an outline of best practices for effective video teaching in the 21st century.

What items would be on such a list? At this point I can only come up with a few descriptors for an unfinished list, but I’d definitely like to expand on it. Here’s a start:

Video instruction in K12 distance learning should be…

-divided into shorter segments

-organized in a way that encourages student exploration

- easily accessible (available online)

-focused on student needs in DL (not driven by a textbook agenda)

-conducted by a teacher persona students can relate to

One response so far

Nov 06 2007

Carpe diem indeed

I started teaching when the mimeograph machine had been out of use for only a short time and still remember years earlier as a student smelling the freshly run-off dittos as the teacher passed them out. For these reasons and more I think you would agree I am entitled to provide a brief one-paragraph account here of the evolution of technology in our schools from 15 years ago to the present. Here goes:

Web 1.0 brought a universe of authentic content to our fingertips. It was liberating because it helped open up the walls of the classroom to the outside world. But it was just a first step. We still managed things pretty much as we had before…viewing content as something to be studied, static and separated from our touch. But then a whirlwind began to stir….or, rather, a tsunami? By allowing us to interact with content and create our own, Web 2.0 set off the revolution that we are now in the midst of.

Ho hum. It’s already an old story, I know.

But we need to rise to the occassion. With all the activity and innovation out there today, we have an opportunity as never before to MAKE UP for the distance in dl. We can provide our students–most of them in rural and remote areas–the opportunity to experience something that is a rare find even in the best schools: more personalized learning, collaboration, and interaction with the outside world.

We had better take advantage of this chance.

No responses yet

Nov 06 2007

That’s the ticket!– Loosely coupled teaching

Sure, I understand the phenomenon of mass collaboration. There’s no rocket science involved. It makes sense as a scientific theory. Why the hype?

Well, whenever you experience its workings first hand, you can’t help but feel a little awe-struck.

Case in point: As I’ve l been experimenting with a myriad of wonderful web tools out there — for the development of a new, single-year of curriculum (and desperately trying to narrow down my focus,) it has become clear that it will be necessary to keep things as flexible and open-ended as possible. There’s no way around it. Things are changing so quickly.

For some time I’ve been carrying around this urgent but vague notion about what is needed: something flexible and open-ended…okay, but what? And now I find that many others have been working on this idea all along: it’s called loosely coupled teaching. Last week I first encountered the term in a post on Scott Leslie’s blog edtechpost and found out that there is even a whole group of educators who blog about LCT ! Some great ideas there!

Loosely coupled teaching makes use of loosely coupled tools, i.e. individual platforms that exist on the public internet. On his blog, Leslie is compiling a list of best practice examples of courses “taught using contemporary social software/web 2.0 tools outside a course management system.” Leslie concentrates his interests mainly in the arena of higher learning, but no matter. LCT shows great potential for K12 and dl as well.

And so I am awed and thankful that this conversation has already been taking place. The ongoing collaboration could bear some substantial results.

No responses yet