comments on 6/1 draft

Gregory A Jackson (gjackson@mit.EDU)
Fri, 02 Jun 1995 14:51:41 EDT

As usual, by URL. Overall I think the report has improved, but I still think
it's a very long way from the report the Committee should be publishing. The
two key omissions are still the same: a properly comprehensive treatment of
advanced technologies likely to affect education (rather than just the Web),
and an exposition of the Committee's puzzlements and disagreements (as Dick
Larson said in his message)

gj
e40-359a/MIT/Cambridge MA 02139
voice: (617) 253-3712
fax: (617) 258-8736
url: http://web.mit.edu/gjackson/www/
key: pgp@pgp.mit.edu

=====http://eddie.mit.edu:80/cevat/report/short.html

Under 1/first bullet, there's still the inconsistency between the "faculty and
teaching assistants" text and the 150k estimates, which are for faculty ONLY.
One or the other needs to change, or the estimates are inaccurately low.

2/first bullet, the commas appear to be outside the <i></i> pairs, and are
displaying oddly.

=====http://eddie.mit.edu:80/cevat/report/medium.html

Under 4, I've explored in somewhat more detail the best way to achieve this
end. I've come to think the right way is not to give each subject a Web page
-- this turns out to create all sorts of headaches if no one is responsible
for the unmodified ones -- but rather to Webify the current course
descriptions (which are now served as text through TechInfo). If the course
descriptions were webified, then there could be a clear hierarchy leading to
the Web information on every subject; for subjects with their own Web pages
(located centrally, or wherever) we'd simply add links to the subject's title
in the central collection. The likely result would be one or a few
centrally-maintained (by Academic Computing and the Registrar) Web pages of
course descriptions per Departments, with links to instructor-maintained pages
as those instructors desire. Much less maintenance and confusion this way.

Given this, I'd reword the recommendation as follows: "All MIT subjects should
have Web-accessible descriptions organized clearly and linked to MIT's
official Web pages. This might be done rather easily by converting what is now
in TechInfo into a different format. Instructors who develop more extensive
home pages and other Web-based documents for their subjects could provide the
appropriate information to Academic Computing staff, who would insert the
appropriate links into the central course-description pages."

=====http://eddie.mit.edu:80/cevat/report/long.html

I don't like this page much at all -- it needs to sing and inspire, and it
doesn't.