Supporting Classroom Interaction
With The Tablet PC:
Lessons Learned From
Classroom Deployment
Richard Anderson
Professor of Computer Science and Engineering
University of Washington
Classroom Presenter History
[2001] Development started at MSR as
part of DISC (Now ConferenceXP)
[2002] Development continued at UW
Deployment as a presentation tool in
distance and standard classes
[2003] Extensions to support
classroom interaction
[2005] Deployment in undergraduate
courses as part of regular instruction
Today’s Talk
Big question: Is there potential for fully
integrating student devices
into the classroom?
Classroom Presenter overview
(See Classroom Presenter 3.0 at Demofest)
Classroom Deployments
Impact
Thoughts on sustainable deployments
What Will The University
Classroom Look Like …
If all students have computational devices
Laptops, Tablets, Ultra light tablets, PDAs, Cell
Phones, Gameboys . . .
If the devices are all connected
If the devices are integrated into
classroom instruction
Wide Range Of Potential
Classroom Applications
Presentation
Demonstration
Simulation
Accessing external
resources
Note taking
Feedback
Active learning
Peer communication
Device Enabled Classroom
Can the integrated use of student devices
in the classroom enhance the
educational experience?
What have we learned from the
Classroom Presenter project that will help
us understand the broad question?
Why Ask The Questions
Integrated use of devices in the classroom
might improve education or address a
collection of challenges
Students are going to be bringing
computational devices to class – so lets
figure out how to take advantage of them
“Co-opt student devices for an educational
purpose”, S. Wolfman
Classroom Presenter
Distributed, Tablet PC based application
Instructor, Display, and Student machines
Synchronized navigation of slide deck
Instructor ink distributed in real time
to all machines
Student Submissions
Slides used to distribute activities to students
Student work sent to instructor
Instructor shows student work on the
public display
Classroom Presenter
Student
Instructor
Student
Public
Display
Classroom Presenter Project
Develop underlying technology around
Tablet PC and wireless classroom
Deploy in university courses
Key limitations (wrt broad vision):
Focus on instructor presentation and
interaction with student devices
Focus on homogeneous device deployment,
Tablet PCs
Unsustainable device model
Department owned tablets distributed at start of
each class
Key Results
Successful classroom deployments
Regular use throughout term
Computer Science courses
Algorithms, Data Structures,
Software Engineering
Analysis of deployments
Effective tool for achieving instructors’
pedagogical goals
Wide range of use
Deployment Details
Senior level algorithms class
Approx 20 students
Classroom set of HP TC1100 Tablet PCs
One tablet based lecture per week
Lecture – Activity model
Alternating lecturing with activities
Avg. 4 activities per lecture (50 min. classes)
4 min work time, 2 min discussion time
per activity
50% of class time associated with activities
Activity Examples
Pedagogical Contribution
Incorporation of individual artifacts
into discussion
Contrast with Classroom Networks (“clickers”) which
rely on aggregation of responses
Complementary approaches
Individual artifacts
Free form answers, exploration
Unanticipated results and misconceptions
Personalization
Ideal with pen based input
Individual Artifact Examples
What Technology Provides
Digital domain
Support for archiving, distribution, and analysis
Integration with lecture
Allows display with data projector
Efficiency
Reducing overhead of distribution and collection
Simultaneity
All students work at once to increase contribution rates and to
encourage independent contributions
Additional communication channels
Easier to express certain ideas
Overcomes communication barriers
Technology Examples
Classroom Presenter As A Tool
Are lectures better when delivered with a
chalk board or with PowerPoint?
Wrong question – both are tools, which can
be used well, or badly
Classroom Presenter has been used
in class to achieve specific
instructional goals
It is possible to assess whether or not
instructional goals are achieved
Assessing overall impact is much
more difficult
Instructional Goals Examples
High Rates Of Student
Submissions
High rates of participation in Algorithms and Data
Structures class (60 – 90 %)
No trends in participation rates
Time in class or lecture in term
Submission was anonymous, so students weren’t
required to participate
One incentive for students to participate was having
their work displayed
Importance Of Good
Pedagogical Practice
It is absolutely essential to base the use of
technology in teaching on sound
pedagogical principles
Classroom Presenter lessons
Importance of having specific goals for use of
technology and the activities
Value of planning how to work with student results
(and anticipating results)
Consideration of learning goals
Learning goals -> Assessing goals -> Activity design ->
Lecture content
Does This Scale To 300?
Issues
Wireless access
Device deployment
Cognitive load
Reduce number of submissions
TA Mediation
Sampling
Automatic clustering
Pedagogy scaling
Maybe aggregation is appropriate for this scale
What Are The Costs?
Infrastructure
Wireless + Data Projector
Instructor presentation device
Student devices
Mandated student devices
Non-mandated devices
Laptop
Small form factor
Fixed installation
What Are The Other Costs?
Instructor preparation
Loss of content coverage
Student idle time
Bringing devices to class
Power
Carrying device
Desk real estate
Distraction
Doodling
Outside communication
Assessment Of Costs And Benefits
Benefits
Classroom Feedback
Identified lack of
background
Confirmed
understanding of topic
Pedagogy
Active learning to
convey particular points
Engagement
Working on problem
instances to enhance
interest
Broad contributions
Student perceptions
Class structure
Costs
Instructor Device
Low (already in use)
Infrastructure
Low (already available)
Student Devices
Grant supported (High)
Instructor Prep
High (but should drop)
Loss of content
Minor
Idle time
Minor
Devices in class
Setup cost for TA/Instr
Doodling and other apps
Medium
Successful Sustainable Deployment
Benefits must exceed costs
Benefits must accrue to those who pay
the costs
Most promising deployment model
Student owned devices
Achieving Sustainability
Lowering cost
Support a wide range of form factors, devices
and platforms
Target devices students would otherwise
have with them
Increasing benefit to students
Other classroom applications
Value of having class resources digital
Classroom Applications
Note taking
Digital Capture and Replay
Domain specific applications
Simulations
External resources
Web
Documents
Communication
Keys For The Device Enabled
Classroom
Tablets will have a major role
Form factor and device cost is critical
Must include wide range of devices and
platforms, including non-traditional computing
devices
Must provide reliable,
consistent connectivity
Low cost of entry
Integration across classroom applications
CLASSROOM PRESENTER
www.cs.washington.edu/education/dl/presenter
For more information, contact
Richard Anderson
anderson@cs.washington.edu
Acknowledgements;
Support from MSR ERP, Collaboration with
ConferenceXP group, UW Team, HP, Beth Simon
and Ubiquitous Presenter, feedback and ideas
from many users
© 2006 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Microsoft, Windows, Windows Vista and other product names are or may be registered trademarks and/or trademarks in the U.S. and/or other countries.
The information herein is for informational purposes only and represents the current view of Microsoft Corporation as of the date of this presentation.
Because Microsoft must respond to changing market conditions, it should not be interpreted to be a commitment on the part of Microsoft,
and Microsoft cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information provided after the date of this presentation.
MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, AS TO THE INFORMATION IN THIS PRESENTATION.