I think that trying to gather information from the whole Caltech community by asking the Vice Provost to send an e-mail to everyone is appropriate. However, do faculty read their Directory e-mails? Is there a better way to encourage faculty response? For graduate students, I can send a reminder about the e-mail sent by the Vice Provost via our weekly graduate student announcements. Also, my understanding is that Melany Hunt is significantly revising the TQFRs. Perhaps we could ask that a specific question be added regarding how technology was helpful in the class and how it could have been used more effectively.
Moodle is a constantly evolving program that has an ever-growing functionality. Is it feasible to have IMSS identify the top ~10 functionalities that Caltech faculty would like to see, then make/design solutions before a campus wide launch? Can IMSS commit to supporting (within reason) new functionalities as faculty begin to use Moodle and test its limits?
We should certainly make use of the work that other schools/groups have done in setting up Moodle, such as at UCLA's Office of Instructional Development (http://www.oid.ucla.edu/units/tec/tectutorials/tecmoodle). Specifically, I can help with contacts at UCLA and perhaps arrange for some grad students working on Moodle at UCLA to give tutorials to our IMSS staff, if that would be useful.
My understanding is that one convenient feature of Moodle is that, like access.caltech, it allows for a single log-on for a wide variety of features, including all classes that a student is enrolled in. Thus, though it may not be efficient for Moodle to be used for quick survey in a single class, if its being used (to varying extents) in most classes and students can use a single log-in, then it may be worthwhile. Moreover, this could make it particularly useful for students to coordinate their schedule between their several classes. In addition to helping with timelines for problem sets and exams, this could be useful from the TA/faculty point of view, since it might facilitate better coordination of assignment timelines, especially among core courses.
As a result of a recommendation by the Academic Policies Committee last year, Moodle is already being implemented to a limited extent this year. Courses that were using it (at least in part for students to report the number of hours spent on homework) as of early this term include:
Bi/Ch 110
Ch 021A
Ch 001A
Ch 112
MA 002A
MA 112A
MA/CS 006A
ME 019A
Ph 106A
Ph 125A
Ph 129A
Ph 136A
The chair of the undergrad Academics and Research Committee (ARC) indicated that video taped lectures would be quite useful. In fact, she prefers having an online video so can go at own pace, as well as several of the reasons listed under point 7 of the previous meetings minutes.
One of the topics addressed by The Horizon Report (Educause) that Rich Fagen posted is Collaboration Webs. Virtual meetings and conferences are useful on the research side, and could play a limited role in classes. Perhaps more relevant, are online documents that can be jointly edited. Caltech is small, and so students can often meet face-to-face when working on projects. However, timing is often an obstacle, so the online group editing features provided by google documents (http://www.google.com/google-d-s/intl/en/tour1.html) may be useful for some classes, especially when preparing joint powerpoints. This also saves us from having to e-mail large files back-and-forth.
A major concern about implementing any new educational strategy at Caltech is coordination across the entire Institute, including the Core Curriculum, TAs, and faculty. The appointment of two Vice Provosts, including one for primarily academic/educational concerns, represents a major first step. However, there still remains a deficiency of staff dedicated to pedagogy and educational issues, specifically. I think that Caltech is nearly unique in this deficiency. In addition to whatever other recommendations we eventually make, I think that we should seriously consider suggesting a 'Caltech learning center'. Although our temporary task force is a good starting point, a learning center which constantly monitored and assessed the quality of teaching and learning in Caltech's educational program and provided assessment and recommendations for improvement, would represent a major improvement. Such a center could also serve as a hub for future discussions of teaching technique and new faculty/TA support as well as discussions of how to continue to implement technology to enhance our educational programs.
Note that the concept of a 'Caltech learning center' was discussed with the WASC accreditation committee during their visit last week. Moreover, other committees are likely to address the issue over the course of the year, and a joint resolution in support of a learning center by, at least, the Educational Technology Task Force, the Academic Policies Committee, the Graduate Study Committee, the Graduate Student Council's Academics Committee, and the undergraduate Academics and Research Committee would likely help this important concept to gain traction.
Sincerely,
Jai Shanata
G4, Chemistry
GSC Academics Committee, Chair
No comments:
Post a Comment