BOB JAFFE
I am trying to get off some general comments on Paul's
draft report before leaving for England. I got started
commenting on this page, but I'll probably digress.
*** About the draft of the _SPECIAL PROPERTIES____ page:
Regarding this page, I like the positive emphasis,
but somewhere in the report we will have to give a more
thorough critique including some of the disadvantages of web-
based learning which have to be considered in the design of
a successful educational application. I have in mind
1) I find it almost impossible to CONCENTRATE on Web based
material. The temptation to click and go looking for fresh
commentary gets in the way of thinking deeply about problem-
atic material. If I really want to understand something, I
have to turn off the browser and stare at an isolated screen
or a piece of paper. As a living example of this problem, I
can tell you that in the course of trying to write these
comments I have succumbed to temptation and wandered off to
the Berkeley Frog, a glossary, and several other irrelevant
links. Try studying Godel's theorem this way!
2) We should try to keep the distinction between EDUCATION
and INFORMATION clear. The Web provides a new medium
for mounting information. The medium is wonderful and lively,
but the challenge to transform information into education
remains unresolved. To make the Web work for us, MIT has
to find a way to bring our educational COMMUNITY to the Web.
exchange of information, but it's not so clear how education
takes place over the Web. I believe our greatest challenge is
to find ways to use the Web to educate people. I believe
that the notion of an "educational COMMUNITY" is central to
this challenge. We have to find ways to do more than just
put information up on the Web.
*** About the draft of the Future of WWW page:
Watch out how we refer to the people who started the Web.
I wonder if people want to think of themselves as "not
established segments of society" (whatever that is!). Others
might argue that "more established (and responsible) organ-
izaitons :== burocrats.
This page would be more useful if it made some projects
about the relative time scale over which improvements will
develop. For example, I imagine that integration of
browsers into PC software will develop very rapidly as will
special purpose server software (like the one that
is gathering these comments). However,
the discussions we had at our meetings indicated that
real-time video and audio downloaded to people's homes might
be some time off, and interactive video (as described by
Bill Mitchell, for example) lies farther out in the future.
Our recommendations should pay attention to these time scales.
We might develop broadly available text and graphics based
offerings in the short term, and take a longer-term approach
to (say) interactive video.
*** About the draft of the Non-Academic Uses of the Web page:
-> There's a problem with this page's title. In the Table
of contents it's called Typical Uses, but on the page only
non-academic uses are described.
-> On the subject of administrative uses. We weren't actually
asked to look into this, but I would strongly suggest that
one of our recommendations be that MIT's re-engineers and
IS people consider very seriously mounting many of MIT's
administrative processes as Web documents and Web forms.
Right now, I can download a Travel Voucher from TECHINFO, but
I must have EXCEL to read it, and no way to submit it
electronically. We can all imagine Web based forms and
reporting methods which will make travel/grades/advising/
appointment-procedures/grant-applications/etc (in short, all
the stuff of re-engineering) much simpler. We should call
attention to this on an optimistic note.
*** About the draft of the Special Characteristics of MIT
page:
(Additional) things that make MIT special --
-> MIT has vast name recognition. Someone said we rank
just below Coke and Mickey Mouse.
-> MIT is an extraordinary academic COMMUNITY including
students working, talking and playing with one another, faculty
and researchers. The community is much more than the sum of
its parts. Another university (e.g. Kansas State, or a virtual
university with no real cognate) would not have this resource
to tap into.
-> Personally, I think the combination of name-recognition
and an exciting community is a winner for new educational
markets. Almost anyone can offer Gigabytes of information
linked and cross-linked into a cacaphony. The challenge is
find a way to give access to MIT's community to groups who
will understand its virtues.
Disadvantages of MIT
-> We are a "mature" institution. We have a clear idea of
who we are and (more to the point) are not. Although indiv-
idual faculty and departments are entrepreneurial, as a
community, we seem to be risk-adverse when confronting new
teaching/educational paradigms. I wonder if our enough of
our faculty would be willing/interested in putting in the
time and effort to mount a serious experience in web-based
distance learning. I hope so.
-> We're pretty arrogant. We may have to learn to be more
temperate and patient in our interactions with more
diverse communities
inorder to profit from Web based learning.
*** About the draft of the Models of the Future page:
This is obviously an important page and deserves more
careful thought than I can give it before I leave for England.
I'd like to see some discussion of the MODEL(S) WE
RECOMMEND TO THE SENIOR ADMINISTRATION FOR ADDRESSING
NETWORK BASED LEARNING. What I mean is this -- It's not
apparent from the present draft what MIT should DO to
optimize our utilization of the Web (&c). I remember much
discussion of this in our meetings and would like to suggest
that MIT should respond QUITE DIFFERENTLY to (1) internal
MIT initiatives, and (2) distance learning.
On (1) I would suggest that we urge the Institute to adopt
a "facilitator" model: We cannot predict which of the ways
to use networks will flourish, we should let our faculty,
research staff and students experiment and develop course
material, virtual seminars... The Institute should concentrate
on providing the resources and support which will make
experimentation and development easy, including (a) netdrops;
(b) high bandwidth lines; (c) consultants and webmasters;
(d) development packages and other software; (e) training and
consultation; (f) grants and/or discretionary funds to
support development.
On (2) I think we need to take a much more deliberate and
organized approach -- otherwise MIT's engagement with the
Web will be as chaotic as anyone elses. I don't think
someone will spontaneously organize a "business plan" for
marketing MIT courses and continuing education to our
alums, for example. I would suggest that we recommend to the
administration several specific initiatives for possible
development of distance learning. Among the ideas discussed
at our meetings were: (a) a continuing associate with our
alumni/ae; (b) high school students accepted by MIT;
(c) AP high school students who might want to be associcated
with MIT in some electronic community; (d) our own students
off campus; (e) professionals seeking continuing education.
I've listed these approx. in order of decreasing "specialness"
to MIT. These initiatives should be evaluated the way
the Sloan School would approach them: they need market
research, a business plan, etc. We should not get into any
of that, but should push CMV to take a look at it.
Paul -- I think you are too pessimistic about our entry into
the distance learning market. Perhaps no one will figure out
a way to develop this into an income stream, but whatever MIT
may lack in versatility, it probably gains back because of its
reputation and name recognition.