Synchronous Distance Delivery of an Electrical and Computer Engineering Program

Synchronous Distance Delivery of an Electrical and Computer Engineering Program Cherian Mathews University of West Florida Pensacola, FL 32514 cmathews@uwf.edu Abstract - This paper describes the synchronous distance delivery of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) courses between the main campus of the University of West Florida in Pensacola and the Fort Walton Beach (FWB) campus. The FWB campus is located about 55 miles from the main campus and is in an area that contains a number of high-tech industries and is in close proximity to Eglin Air Force Base. Given the high-tech industries in the area, the university determined that it would be beneficial to extend its ECE program to FWB via distance delivery. With financial support from industries in the FWB area, synchronous delivery of ECE courses to the FWB campus began in the Fall of 2002. This paper describes the technologies used for synchronous distance delivery, changes in teaching methods induced by distance learning technology, a discussion of the benefits and limitations experienced, and feedback on the program from students at the remote campus. It also describes steps being taken to mitigate some of the limitations experienced so far: one of these steps is a new requirement for students in the program to have tablet PCs. This is expected to facilitate better interaction between faculty and students at the remote campus. Index Terms distance learning, distance learning technologies, synchronous delivery, teaching methods for distance learning. INTRODUCTION Several authors [1,2] have reported their experiences with synchronous distance education. The term synchronous implies that the distance learning environment is real-time: students at the host and remote sites are able to hear and see the instructor and the equivalent of the instructor s blackboard in real-time. They can ask questions and hear responses from the instructor regardless of the campus at which they are located. In contrast, the asynchronous mode of distance delivery involves video streaming or DVD-based delivery of classroom content. Students view transcripts of class sessions whenever they choose; the live interaction with the instructor and ability to have physical interaction with classmates is absent. This paper describes experiences with synchronous distance learning at the University of West Florida (UWF). The main campus of UWF is located in Pensacola. UWF also has a branch campus at Fort Walton Beach, about 55 miles away from the main campus. The Fort Walton Beach (FWB) community is in close proximity to Eglin Air Force base, one of the largest air force installations in the world. This location has attracted a number of high-tech industries to the FWB area. UWF has offered baccalaureate programs in Electrical and Computer Engineering for a little over ten years. Over the years, a number of our engineering graduates have found employment in the high-tech industries in the FWB area. Employers in the FWB area appreciate the supply of qualified engineers from UWF. Feedback from employers shows that they have been very happy with our graduates. The demand for engineers in FWB, and the support of local industries were factors that led UWF to consider expanding its engineering program offerings to FWB via distance learning. After discussions with the Engineering Advisory Council, the engineering program expansion to FWB became a reality in the Fall 2002 semester. Synchronous distance delivery was the format adopted for the delivery of lecture-style courses between the two campuses. Generous financial support from private industries helped establish brand new laboratory facilities at the FWB campus (students are thus able to take lab-based courses at their home campus). Since the program expansion, an instructor from the main campus has driven to FWB once a week to conduct labs there. A full-time faculty member was hired at the FWB in 2003, and another will come aboard this year. This is expected to reduce the need for faculty travel between the campuses to conduct labs. In the initial semesters of the expansion, all of the distance delivery was from the main campus to FWB. Since the hiring of the faculty member at the FWB campus, some courses have been delivered in the opposite direction (with the instructor at the FWB campus). The development of this paper is as follows: The following section describes the technologies used to enable synchronous course delivery between the two campuses. It is followed by a section describing logistical changes and changes in teaching methods that have occurred in the distance-learning environment. The next section looks at the distance learning technologies employed by UWF in comparison with other distance learning technologies. It is followed by a section cataloging responses from students at the FWB campus to a survey on their experience with distance learning. Actions being taken by the program to mitigate some of the limitations of the distance learning environment are also discussed. The paper finally closes with some concluding remarks. F1H-7

SYNCHRONOUS DISTANCE LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES The heart of the distance learning system is the SMART Sympodium, an interactive pen display and multimedia lectern manufactured by SMART Technologies Inc. [3]. The interactive pen display is a touch sensitive computer screen that replaces the traditional blackboard. It is connected to a computer in the lectern and provides capabilities not available in a traditional classroom. The user can open the SMART board software and write notes on the display screen using the supplied stylus. Buttons above the display allow the user to change the color of freehand text that is written using the stylus. The user has the ability to open a file containing class notes (such as a powerpoint document or a pdf file) and annotate on top of it. The user can switch back and forth between the pages of a class session (all of the text generated during a class session is available). At the end of a class session, the user has the ability to store the lecture in pdf format and make it available to students. Any software application (e.g., simulation tools such as ORCAD, or programs such as MATLAB) can be used during a class session. Simulation results or figures generated by the software can be annotated using the pen display and integrated seamlessly into the lecture. The multimedia lectern also contains a document camera that is integrated with the interactive pen display. An external laptop can also be used in conjunction with the display. The content of the interactive pen display is projected on a large screen in the front of the classroom. All the material presented during a class session is viewed by students on this projector screen. Figure 1 shows the interactive pen display and stylus. The SMART notebook software screen is visible in the picture, with freehand text within the window. The interactive pen display and the SMART notebook software have rendered the blackboard obsolete in our classroom. The widespread use of 200 of these units at Texas A&M is reported in [4]. It appears that the Sympodiums are being used to facilitate multimedia content in the classroom, and not for distance learning. The distance learning (DL) classrooms at the main campus and the FWB campus are equipped with the SMART Sympodium. A high-speed internet connection links the two campuses. A Microsoft NetMeeting session is used to transmit the content of the interactive pen display at the host site to the remote site; the same information thus appears on the projector screen at both campuses. The DL classrooms at both sites are also equipped with cameras that provide images of the instructor and students. Students at the remote site are able to see the instructor on a TV screen mounted beside the projector screen. The instructor is able to see the students at the remote site on a large plasma screen at the rear of the host classroom. The students at the remote site are thus incorporated quite well into the classroom at the host site. Sensitive microphones mounted close to the ceilings of both DL classrooms transmit sound between the two classrooms. The images from the cameras (video of instructor and students) and the sound information from the microphones is transmitted between the two sites using codecs manufactured by Polycom (there is a codec at each site). Students at the remote site can ask questions just as if they were in the host classroom (they do not have to push any buttons or speak into a microphone; the microphone at the front of the classroom picks up the sound). The DL classrooms are equipped with desktop computers for each student. Figure 2 shows a portion of the front of the DL classroom. The SMART sympodium is visible on the left side of the picture and the microphone baffles are visible at the top of the picture. Part of the projector screen is visible, as are the student computers. FIGURE 1 THE INTERACTIVE PEN DISPLAY AND STYLUS. Texas A&M University has adopted the SMART Sympodium as an enabler of rich multimedia content in the classroom. FIGURE 2 FRONT VIEW OF THE DISTANCE LEARNING CLASSROOM. The responsibility for ensuring that the DL link between the two campuses is operational rests with the Information Technology Services (ITS) department. ITS also staffs the DL F1H-8

classrooms at both sites with facilitators. The facilitators provide technical assistance during class sessions and are the first line of contact when problems occur. They also provide some administrative support in the form of distributing and collecting exams, mailing materials between the two campuses etc. to this material. Students are responsible for keeping up with announcements and updates on the D2L system. D2L allows the instructor to send group email to the entire class. D2L thus helps improve student access to course materials and facilitates communication between instructors and students. CHANGES IN TEACHING METHODS The introduction of new technologies in the DL classrooms has provided opportunities to enrich the content of a class session. One of the ways I have improved classroom productivity is by using typed up skeleton class notes in conjunction with the Sympodium. The notes, hardcopies of which are made available to students, contain theorem statements, problem statements etc. During the class session I fill in the gaps in the notes (e.g., by working out the stated problem) by annotating the electronic version of the notes using the interactive pen display. Students are able to follow along by watching the projector screen. I find that the skeleton notes concept works better than a completely canned powerpoint style lecture. The notes free the students from having to write down problem statements, copy circuit diagrams etc. The time saved can be spent on group problem solving. I often let students work on a problem for some time and consult with classmates before I work out the problem myself. This brings active learning into the classroom. I have had a lot of positive feedback from students regarding my typed up skeleton notes. Of course, this effort to improve productivity comes only at the expense of significant time taken to prepare the notes. Another way that the technologies have contributed to an enhanced classroom experience is the seamless integration of software into a lecture. For example, after solving an electric circuit problem, the instructor can switch from the Smart board software to Orcad and simulate the circuit. The results of the simulation can be captured and incorporated into the Smart board session. At the end of class, the entire session (including simulation software screens) can be exported and made available to students in pdf format. In a typical class session, students may copy notes from the projector screen, work out a problem in their skeleton notes, and launch a software application to solve the problem. This enhanced classroom experience helps keep students engaged and allows them to participate actively in class. Figure 3 shows plots generated by the software program MATLAB during a class on digital filter design. After working out the details of the design, a MATAB simulation was run and the resulting plots were annotated and incorporated into the SMART notebook lecture archive. UWF faculty members across the campus have access to the Desire2Learn [5] online learning platform. The Desire2Learn (D2L) system can be used for online delivery of courses. However, in the context of the synchronous delivery of courses to FWB, engineering faculty have only used D2L to supplement instruction. I post course information, syllabi, homework assignments and solutions etc. on my D2L homepage. Only students registered for the class have access FIGURE 3 MATLAB PLOT ANNOTATED USING THE SMART SYMPODIUM. The distance-learning environment offers the opportunities to improve instruction mentioned above, but it also introduces some logistical challenges. Administering exams and quizzes at the remote site and getting these materials back to the host site in a timely fashion can be problematic. In the early days of the program expansion, instructors had to prepare exams a few days ahead of time and mail or email them to facilitators at the FWB campus. At the end of the exam, materials would be returned to the instructor via the postal service. This process required adjustments on the part of the instructor (exams from the remote site would be available for grading only after a few days), and was subject to vagaries in the postal system. I had technical support staff examine the possibility of printing materials from the Sympodium at the host site to a laser printer at the remote DL classroom. This was shown to be easily accomplished: as a result, I now bring an electronic version of my exam to class and send it to the printer at the remote campus a few minutes before the exam. The facilitator at the remote campus passes the exams out to students and collects them at the end of class. The delays introduced by the postal service were circumvented by using a high speed sheet-fed scanner at the FWB campus. At the end of an exam, the facilitator scans all the examinations and emails them to the instructor. Students at the remote campus have limited possibility of direct contact with the instructor at the host campus. In an effort to have more personal contact with students at the remote campus, some instructors occasionally travel to the remote campus and conduct class from there. I attempt to do this at least once a semester. Students at FWB thus generally have to contact instructors at the main campus via the F1H-9

telephone or email for help. This makes for less than ideal interactions between faculty and students at the remote site. Nevertheless, my grade reports over the last few semesters show that students at the remote site are able to perform just as well as students at the main campus. Table 1 depicts student performance at the two campus locations in an Engineering Math course I taught during the Fall 2004 semester. The main campus had 28 students (including 4 withdrawals), while the FWB campus had 12 students (no withdrawals). The table shows a fairly even distribution of passing grades between the two campuses. The main campus had a higher percentage of A grades, while students at the FWB campus had a higher percentage of B and C grades. Roughly the same percentage (about 67%) of students at each campus obtained a passing grade. While this study is limited to just one course, I think it is generally representative of fairly even student performance at the two campuses. TABLE I COMPARISON OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE AT THE TWO CAMPUSES Main Campus FWB Campus % of students with A grades 32.1 16.7 % of students with B grades 25 33.3 % of students with C grades 10.7 16.7 % of students with passing grades 67.9 66.7 COMPARISON WITH OTHER DISTANCE LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES Looking at the history of an institution s experience with distance learning is a good way to survey the progression of distance learning technologies over time. The computer science department of California State University, Chico provides details on its experience with distance learning in [6]. CSU began distance learning with the ITFS system in 1975, progressed to satellite delivery beginning in 1984, and transitioned to live internet delivery in 2000. ITFS (Instructional Television Fixed Service) is a microwave system [7] that allows courses taught at a host campus to be received on standard television receivers at branch campuses or other remote sites. An educational institution could obtain a license for up to four microwave channels from the FCC. A drawback of the system was that it provided only one-way transmission; students at the remote campus could see the instructor and view classroom content but could not interact with the instructor. CSU Chico discontinued use of the ITFS system in 1995. The ITFS system is still in use today e.g., in the South Carolina school system [8]. In 1984, CSU Chico began live delivery of courses via satellite to Hewlett-Packard employees at locations in five different states. ITFS provided limited capacity (only four channels), and limited range (the most distant ITFS site served by was 173 miles from the main campus). Satellite allowed transmission to much more distant locations. Satellite transmission is generally one-way (uplink sites are very expensive) and suffers the same disadvantage as ITFS. Since 2000, CSU Chico has used internet delivery via streaming video for distance learning. Course delivery can be live, or students can watch archived sessions at their convenience. During live sessions, students have limited ability to interact with the instructor by typing on their computer keyboards. A sample class session can be viewed at http://rce.csuchico.edu/online/demo.asp In contrast with the above modes, the UWF engineering program employs internet videoconferencing for distance learning. A dedicated high speed internet connection linking the main campus and the FWB campus enables live two-way audio and video communication between the campuses. Students at the remote campus can talk to the instructor, just as if they were in the classroom on the main campus. They do not have to type on their computer keyboards to communicate with the instructor. Students view course content on a large projector screen and not on a small computer terminal as would be the case with streaming video. The mode of delivery also requires students at the remote site to congregate in a classroom at the same time. This promotes interaction between students and the formation of study groups, which can prove to be vital for student success. The marriage of the SMART sympodium with the videoconferencing capability makes the system unique. It allows rich multimedia content to be incorporated in a class session, thus facilitating student learning. This is very important in the setting of undergraduate engineering education. Retention rates, especially in introductory engineering classes can be low, and the introduction of distance learning can exacerbate the retention problem. Anything that can facilitate student learning is extremely beneficial; the marriage of SMART technology with distance learning can prove to be very helpful in this regard. A disadvantage of the internet videoconferencing approach employed at UWF is that it allows courses to be delivered only to a limited audience (students at FWB). Internet-based streaming video allows delivery of courses to a global audience; it does not matter where the student is located as long as a good internet connection is available. STUDENT FEEDBACK ON THE DISTANCE LEARNING EXPERIENCE Students at the FWB campus were asked three questions in a survey that solicited input on their experience with distance learning. The first question was on student reactions to the live lecture environment currently in use, versus an asynchronous delivery format. Student feedback was overwhelmingly in favor of the live lecture format currently employed. Students liked interactivity provided by the twoway audio and video environment. They valued the ability to participate and ask clarifying questions during class. They liked the structure provided by having class meetings at specific times; this was seen as an incentive to attend class and avoid the procrastination that is possible with lectures that can F1H-10

be viewed at any time. They also found that lectures at specific times helped them better prepare for time-sensitive course landmarks such as exams, projects and homework. Students mentioned that they would like the benefits of having asynchronous access to course materials in addition to the live lectures. They mentioned that having access to archived lectures would enable them to review a lecture to clarify any doubts, or to view a lecture if they missed a class. The second question solicited student reactions to the SMART board technology and asked for comparisons to older closed-circuit television type technology. Several students picked up on the fact that the SMART Sympodium was not available in the first semester of the program expansion to FWB. Students at FWB saw images captured by a camera focused on a whiteboard as an instructor wrote on the board. Students identified numerous problems with this approach: the body of the instructor tended to obscure views of the board, it was a strain to decipher the text when the camera had a wide view of the whiteboard (a zoomed-in view provided clear text, but allowed for a view of only a part of the board), auto-focus hunt caused images to go in and out of focus, etc. They noted that the SMART board system avoided all these problems and they were very happy about this. Students appreciated the richness introduced by the ability of the instructor to incorporate Matlab and other simulation tools into the classroom experience. Several students noted that the technology was excellent but that not all instructors took advantage of it. They noted that canned power-point lectures did not take advantage of the capabilities of the SMART system and tended to put students to sleep (such lectures could just as well be delivered asynchronously). They noted that lectures that took advantage of the capabilities of the system greatly improved the learning experience. Students also noted that failure of the communication link between the two campuse The third question asked students to identify limitations experienced in the distance learning environment and asked for suggestions for improvement. The number one limitation mentioned by students was the lack of access to the instructor. While students appreciated the availability of one full-time faculty member at FWB, this means of getting help was not as effective as being able to talk to the instructor directly. Suggestions for overcoming this limitation included having instructors conduct class from FWB once or twice a month, requiring instructors to maintain some office hours at FWB, and hiring tutors to help answer course related questions. Another problem experienced by students was the delay in getting graded materials back from the main campus. On several occasions graded materials were lost in the mail and students did not receive them. On other occasions, instructors reviewed tests or homework problems before students at the remote site had got their graded work back. Students did note that this situation has improved recently (the availability of scanners at both sites has helped in this regard). There was also an open question in the survey soliciting student comments on any issue related to the distance learning environment. The responses to the open question indicated that the students really valued the availability of the program at FWB. Several students said that they may not have been able to join the engineering program if not for the program expansion to FWB. The engineering program has recognized the following problems with the distance learning environment and has begun taking the steps identified below to improve the environment. One of the limitations of the system is that the distancelearning link is not 100% reliable. Loss of class time occurs if any equipment fails or if the internet connection goes down. There have been significant down times, especially shortly after deployment of the system. The ITS department is looking into procuring backup equipment to ensure that a critical piece of equipment can be replaced immediately in case of failure. This will help reduce the down-time of the link. Another limitation is that students at FWB do not have very good access to instructors at the main campus. Students at the main campus can walk into an instructor s office to ask questions. In contrast, students at FWB have to communicate with the instructor by either email or telephone. Neither mode is well suited for answering technical questions. This limitation is being tackled in a novel fashion. Effective Fall 2005, students in the engineering program will be required to have a tablet PC. The tablet PC will allow students to send freehand drawings and text to instructors via email. This will help improve the quality of communication between students at the remote campus and faculty at the host campus. The tablet PC will also allow an instructor to grade quizzes or exams that have been scanned and emailed to him without having to print them out. The electronic versions of the exams can be graded and emailed back to the facilitator for distribution to students at the remote site. This avoids the need for using the postal system to return exams or quizzes to students. CONCLUSIONS Student performance (in the classes I have taught) shows that students are able to learn the material and succeed in the distance-learning environment. Student feedback also shows that students at FWB are by-and-large happy with the classroom experience at the remote site. They have accepted some of the limitations and found ways to adapt to them. For example, the difficulty interacting with faculty at the main campus has led students to take full advantage of the office hours of the faculty member at the FWB campus. This situation will improve further once the second full-time faculty member arrives at FWB. The program also gives students access to a student tutor to help answer questions. I believe that part of the reason for the success of students at the FWB campus is that the distance-learning link is synchronous. Students at FWB participate in live classroom sessions. They do not view streaming video or DVDs of lectures. I think that undergraduate engineering students need F1H-11

these live class sessions and the ability to meet and interact with classmates to succeed and thrive. REFERENCES [1] Gloster, C and Doss, C. "A distance education course in computer engineering at NC State University", Proc. 1999 ASEE Annual Conference, Session 3220. [2] Anderson, R, Beavers J, VanDeGrift, T, and Videon, F. "Videoconferencing and presentation support for synchronous distance learning", Proc. 33 rd ASEE Frontiers in Education Conference, November 2003, pp. F3F-13 F3F-18. [3] http://www.smarttech.com [4] http://www.infocomm.org/newsnetwork/installations/index.cfm?o bjectid=071c3b00-6628-427f-b15a3140aa00d045 [5] http://www.desire2learn.com [6] http://www.rce.csuchico.edu/cen/background.asp [7] http://itfs.org/index/about_itfs [8] http://www.myetv.org/about_etv/distribution.cfm F1H-12