Distance Learning in Courses with a Laboratory
Kevin D. Taylor, Jeffrey W.Honchell, and William E.DeWitt
Purdue University
Kokomo and West Lafayette, Indiana
Abstract
Distance learning over the past several years
has gained in popularity not only as a way to offer
instruction in locations without local expertise, but also
as a cost effective method where limited enrollment at
one location would not normally warrant offering the
course. In engineering technology programs, where
most courses have a laboratory component, distance
learning offers many new challenges in course delivery.
This paper will discuss the authors’ experiences with
distance learning in two electrical engineering
technology courses, each with a laboratory component.
One course offered via the Indiana Higher
Education Telecommunication System (IHETS) used oneway video and two-way audio for the lecture. The
professor lectured to sixteen students locally, and to two
remote sites with three and five students, respectively.
Each remote site had a laboratory instructor who was a
member of the faculty at that campus, but neither were
familiar with the subject matter prior to the course
offering. Due to scheduling conflicts, the involvement of
the coordinators was quite different. One instructor had
another class to teach during the lecture broadcast,
while the other attended the lectures and completed
many of the assignments.
A second scenario involving distance learning is
using video taped lectures with remote laboratory
instructors. We present two models here. In one case,
the lab was taught by an instructor who had taught the
lab at the originating site. In the other case, the
instructor had some knowledge of the material, but no
experience with the laboratory exercises.
We will make several suggestions on ways to
improve the delivery of both the lecture and local
offering of the laboratory of a distance course.
Introduction
The School of Technology at Purdue University
administers various programs throughout the state of
Indiana via a system entitled Purdue Statewide
Technology (PST). There are currently ten PST sites, the
majority of which offer associate degrees in various
technology disciplines. If a student from one of these
PST campuses wants to pursue a baccalaureate degree
with Purdue, he or she would need to transfer to one of
the campuses offering the upper division classes.
Distance learning provides an opportunity for students at
PST sites to continue their education while maintaining
their residence and jobs. Since many of the PST students
are non-traditional students, this is the only avenue for
these students to continue beyond the associate degree.
Since the PST sites would have limited enrollments in
elective courses, this also provides an efficient method of
delivery.
In Engineering Technology programs most
courses have laboratories. This creates a problem not
only in having facilities available for these exercises, but
in having an instructor to monitor the laboratory. We
have investigated several methods of addressing these
problems, and offer some suggestions for improving the
experience.
One Way Video, Two Way Audio Lectures
Two PST sites participated in this experience
with distance learning. This was offered via the Indiana
Higher Education Telecommunication System (IHETS)
and originated from the West Lafayette campus. Neither
PST lab instructor had taken the course which was an
elective course for Electrical Engineering Technology
students. The course, Electrical Distribution Systems
(EET381), used computer exercises for most of the
laboratories. Three of the labs consisted of tours. Two
of the tours were taped for the PST sites and all students
attended the third. The earlier labs, completed at the
PST sites, used simple computer programs or
spreadsheets. Three of the later exercises involved more
complicated software requiring the assistance of the
originating instructor. The PST students traveled to
West Lafayette on one Saturday to perform these
exercises.
The two PST sites had different levels of
involvement by the lab instructors. Due to a scheduling
conflict, one PST instructor could not attend the
broadcast of the lectures. The other PST instructor
attended the broadcasts and performed most of the
homework and lab exercises.
The entire class, including those at the
originating site, was surveyed midway through the
semester. About one-half voiced no preference between
the television lecture and a standard lecture. One quarter
preferred the IHETS lecture and the remaining quarter
preferred a standard classroom lecture. Comments from
the survey exposed problems in return of homework
before exams and differences in the lab schedule.
The PST students were surveyed the semester
following the course. Although there was no difference
in the results concerning lab instructor knowledge, the
students at the PST site with limited instructor
involvement unanimously listed a preference for a
standard classroom. The students at the other site said
they had no preference in delivery method. Comments
from both groups voiced a concern over having three lab
exercises on a Saturday. One stated that, “Only having
one shot at the labs does not lend itself to strong memory
retention." During the class most of the PST students
liked the idea of completing three exercises in one day
since it eliminated three scheduled labs.
Video Taped Lectures
Two PST sites used this method of delivery for
EET368 (Linear Integrated Circuits) taped at West
Lafayette. Again, the experiences differed. One site had
an instructor who had been a lab instructor for this
course at the originating site. In addition, the lectures
were replayed in the same semester they were recorded
(one week delay). The other remote site used the same
tapes, but presented them the semester following the
videotaping. The second instructor had no experience
with the course, and again due to scheduling could not
attend the lectures.
As expected, the experience where the tapes
were played the same semester had few difficulties. The
“semester delay” delivery was plagued with problems.
Due to the lack of an interactive relationship with the
lecturing instructor, the students turned to the lab
instructor for questions. Even when the students did
contact the lecturer for questions, it was difficult for him
to remember where the students were in the lecture
material. Another problem was the coordination of
handouts for the class. Often the tapes were calling for
supplemental material that the students did not have.
Only one survey was returned from this group
and this student was from the “semester delay” class.
Although this student showed no preference in delivery
system, he suggested that the lab instructor view the
lectures with the students.
Other Possible Methods
One method being implemented at Old
Dominion University [1] uses a mobile laboratory housed
in a 40 foot trailer that travels from site to site. The
students have three, 8-hour laboratory sessions
throughout the semester. Instructors are provided by the
originating site or adjunct professors are hired from the
host community.
One tremendous advantage of this
scheme is that it eliminates the need for laboratory
equipment duplication at each campus.
Two-way audio and video systems are becoming
more readily available and laboratories could be remotely
supervised. Most of these systems have multiple
cameras and computer connections. It would be feasible
to have a portable camera so the remote instructor could
“roam” the laboratory. The two-way video capability
would be more valuable in this setting than in the
lecture. A second use of the two-way video might
include holding video office hours. The cost of tying up
the system for this use would probably be prohibitive.
Another option would be having the instructor
rotate originating locations. For example, the lecturer
could broadcast from location “A” on Mondays, location
“B” on Wednesdays, and location “C” on Fridays.
Laboratory sections would correspond to the day that the
lecturer was at a particular site.
This fall, we will be offering a course in Digital
Signal Processing (EET357) using one-way video and
two-way audio (IHETS). A one week workshop was held
at West Lafayette on the course preparing the PST lab
instructors for the course. The workshop included most
of the lab exercises planned for used in the fall.
Considerations and Planning
From an administrative point of view, distance
education may seem to be the great panacea. One can
reach more students while maintaining faculty contact
hours. However, if this were true, then one section of
introductory algebra could be taught in a huge lecture
hall without adverse effects on retention. Clearly this is
not the case. In elective courses where enrollments are
small, distance learning can increase the numbers
enough to justify keeping a course section open.
In courses with a laboratory, the administrators
need to consider the desired level of involvement of the
remote site instructor. This may range from a technician
supervising the transmission of the course and
monitoring the lab to an instructor auditing the course
and performing the exercises prior to the scheduled lab
time. In order for the latter to be effective, the time spent
by the remote instructor must be included as part of his
or her regular teaching load. The weighting of the load
needs to be based on the level of participation and not
just added to a standard teaching load.
Other considerations for remote laboratories
should consider equipment and software needed to
present the course effectively. Tools available at the
originating site need to be available at all locations.
Provisions must be made for fast transmission of
handouts and homework. If possible, e-mail or fax
should be used to expedite this task.
The instructors of these courses need to decide
how the grading will be performed prior to the start of
the course so it can be published in the syllabus. One
method would be to have the originating instructor
responsible for all grading. Another possibility is having
one instructor grade all of the first exercises, etc. The
key here is knowing ahead of time the roles of all
participants. This can be difficult considering the
physical distance between the locations as well as the
differences in personalities involved.
One final difficulty is scheduling, especially
with live broadcasts. Many campuses schedule classes a
year in advance. Locations may work different dates.
Coordinating a class that meets the needs of several
locations can be difficult. In some case locations can be
in different time zones that change mid-semester. If it is
an elective course, potential non-degree students from
local industry should be contacted long before the start of
the semester.
Conclusions
The ideal scenario for distance learning would
include a two-way video/two-way audio connection for
the lectures and office hours. The lab instructor would be
cognizant of the material being presented in the course
and lab exercises. Homework would be turned in by fax
or e-mail and returned via the same methods. The
grading would be shared to keep the standards equal at
all locations. The laboratory and computer equipment at
each location would be identical.
Most universities do not have the resources to
achieve all of these ideals, but awareness of the potential
problems could lessen the impact on the effectiveness of
the presentation.
There are many advantages and disadvantages
of utilizing distance education. The disadvantages are
compounded when the course has a required laboratory
component. With careful planning and administrative
support, most of the shortfalls can be overcome.
References
[1]
Alok K. Verma and Gary R. Crossman, “A Mobile
Instructional Laboratory to Supplement the
Televised Program in Engineering Technology”.
1995 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings.
[2] Jeffrey W. Honchell, “An Approach to Long
Distance Learning within the Purdue University
Statewide System”. 1995 ASEE Annual Conference
Proceedings.
Biography
Kevin D. Taylor is an Assistant Professor of Electrical
Engineering Technology at Purdue University - Kokomo.
He has a B.S.E.E. from Iowa State University and a
M.S.E.E from Southern Methodist University. Prior to
starting his teaching career in 1987, Mr. Taylor was an
Integrated Circuits Design Engineer for Texas
Instrument, Inc. He is a registered Professional Engineer
(PA), a member of SAE, Treasurer for the Central
Indiana Section of IEEE, and is the Secretary and
Newsletter Editor for the NEE division of ASEE. He
spent the past three summers working at Delco
Electronics, Inc. in the areas of IC modeling and electric
vehicles.
Jeffrey W. Honchell is an Assistant Professor of
Electrical Engineering Technology atPurdue University West Lafayette. He received hisB.S. degree in Electrical
Engineering Technology fromPurdue University, and his
M.S. degree in Computer Science from the State
University of New York atBinghampton. He has held
various positions at IBM and was a member of the
professional staff with The JohnHopkins University
Applied Physics Laboratory. He is currently an executive
board member for the Illinois/Indiana Section of ASEE
and a member of IEEE
William E. DeWitt is an Assistant Professor of
Electrical Engineering Technology at Purdue University West Lafayette where he teaches undergraduate courses
in electrical machines and power systems. He has over
twenty-four years experience in a variety of engineering
positions in government and industry. During the sixyear period before joining the Purdue faculty in 1993,
Professor DeWitt was a consulting electrical engineer in
private practice. He is a senior member of IEEE and a
member of ASEE.