Advanced and Emerging Technologies
at a Research University
Copyright William Frawley, 2001. This work is the intellectual property of
the author. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for
non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that this copyright
statement appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that
the copying is by permission of the author. To disseminate otherwise or
to republish requires written permission from the author
Advanced and Emerging Technologies
at a Research University
EDUCAUSE Mid-Atlantic Regional Conference
Baltimore
December 3-4, 2001
William Frawley
Faculty Director, Academic Programs & Planning
Director, Office of Undergraduate Studies
212 Gore Hall
University of Delaware
Newark, DE 19716
billf@udel.edu
Problem:
How to use advanced
research-technology for
teaching?

How to bring faculty development in line with
University mission?




High technology
Research-teaching integration
Broad commitment to undergraduate instruction in
a research environment
Get maximal benefit from faculty development
expenditures?
Instructional Improvement
Grants: Historical Context

Less is, well…, less


Small grants: 5K
Limited expenditures






Usual suspects

Laptop
Summer salary
Baseline activities


Redo course
Put things on web
Invite speakers
Develop module

Increasingly small
group of awardees
(both people and
units)
Increasingly small
group of reviewers
Previous CTE Grant Program

RFP for Past CTE grants

CTE announces 15 instructional
improvement grants
Reprise --How to use advanced researchtechnology for teaching?

How to bring faculty development in line with
University mission?




High technology
Research-teaching integration
Broad commitment to undergraduate instruction in
a research environment
Get maximal benefit from faculty development
expenditures?
Some Un-Leaderly Advice
 Don’t
act and then apologize
 Sit and think
 Who’s
doing what around here?
 Is this what the institution thinks or says it
is actually doing?
Five Activities
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Restructure grant program
Brainstorm from the research
environment
Proactively challenge the
administration
Fan out: “special operations”
Recruit grant submissions
1. Restructure grant program

Less is more



Content vs. technique



Fewer awards at higher levels (5@20K)
More competitive
Idea-driven instructional improvement
Wide open within thematic parameters: allow proof
of concept
Benefits




more “bang for buck”
appeals to intellectual side
real competition
recognizable to research faculty (NSF) and to
senior management (mission and incentivization)
2. Brainstorm from the
research environment

Form idea groups of respected faculty

About all sorts of instructional matters


Technology, outcomes
Draw from across institution


Sciences to arts to non-academic units
Senior to junior

Ask for small number of specific projects
 Benefits


Many concrete proposals for now and future
New contacts
2. Brainstorm from the
research environment
(cont.)

Benefits





Many concrete proposals for individuals and
projects now and future
New contacts in the groups
Made teaching an intellectual activity
Produced review panel automatically
Hints


Feed them
Don’t let up
3. Proactively challenge the
administration

Ask for more in a cooperative way: internal
“challenge grant”



Know the outcome beforehand


Double our allotment
We promise broad and new participation
Idea groups have identified likely grantees
Use faculty, mission, and senior management
perspective



Incentivization
Faculty-driven
Institution as a whole
4. Fan out: “special
operations”
 Visit
the research environment
 Campaign
with targeted people
 Approach on research grounds
 Have
 I’m
them articulate their grants on site
doing this. Is that what you’re talking
about?
 Expect anything and everything
4. Fan out: “special
operations” (cont.)

Benefits


Promotes idea-driven teaching
Recognizes epistemological diversity





Teachable moments
Labs, studios, etc.
Learning crosses class
Reverses the role: administration wants to see
what you’re doing
Outcome


Wide interest: biology, engineering, physiology,
art, business, education, languages
Large but focused pool of potentials
5. Recruit grant submissions

Reconvene and target: Uncle Sam Tactic


Be an amiable, smart noodge


RFP = RFYP (Request for YOUR Proposal)
Work to help their ideas come to light
Outcome



Double proposals
Across university
Provost added even more
What did we get?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Remote control delivery of electron
microsopy
Alternative sequencing of historical images
Wireless in PBL across disciplines
Virtual meetings and business decisions
Internet 2 and the arts
3D models for anatomy
Plus: half a dozen other proposals for the
following year: e.g., virtual reality and protein
imaging
Douglas Buttrey & Ian Hall Chemical
Engineering/Mechanical Engineering
Telepresence Transmission Electron
Microscopy for the Classroom
Traditional TEM
Viewport with
Phosphor Screen
JEOL 2000FX
200 keV
Why not Teach TEM the Traditional
Way?
•Training is very costly!!!!
•Enormous input of Faculty / Technical Assistance
•Instrument cost is very high (time=$$)
•Maintenance cost is also very high (time=more$$)
•Digital technology reduces ONE-on-ONE needs.
The JEOL 2010F FasTEM
Remote Operation of the
FasTEM
HR-TEM Images
T
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
F
o
c
u
s
Computer Simulation
df = 42.5 nm
df = 85 nm
df = 205 nm
Si3N4
HR-TEM
Imaging
of
Silicon
Nitride
Crystal Characterization using
HR-TEM and Diffraction
Mitsubishi Catalyst
Diffraction Pattern
Conclusions
• Using digital technology in the classroom can mean
much more than accessing the web
• Digital instruments make telepresence possible
• Group access to major instruments saves $$$$
• Live demonstrations stimulate interest
Seeing is Believing!
Christine Kydd & Diane Ferry
Business Administration
Exploring Business Issues and
Decision-Making in High Tech
Fields Using Videoconferencing
and Electronic Meeting Tools
Purpose of Course
To learn about and through current
technologies used in Business for
Decision Making
Specifically using Videoconferencing
and GroupSystems
High Tech Topics to be
Discussed
Complexity science
Quantum physics/computers
Biotechnology
Communication technologies
Looking for a great course to take in
January, 2002??
Biotechnology
Communication
Technology
Future of Business
Quantum
Physics
Complexity
Science
Come and find out how these topics
fit together and will have an impact
on your business career!!!
BUAD467 High Tech Issues in
Business Decision Making
A new experimental course,
BUAD467, is being offered
during January, 2002 to
students at the University of
Delaware in the College of
Business and Economics,
Newark, DE 19716.
Taught by:
Dr. Diane Ferry, Associate
Professor of Management
ferryd@be.udel.edu
(302)831-1769
Dr. Christine Kydd,
Associate Professor of
Operations Management
kyddc@be.udel.edu
(302)831-1783
Dimensions of Collaboration Technologies
PLACE
DIFFERENT
SAME
SAME (Synchronous)
TIME
DIFFERENT (Asynchronous)
Low-tech:
Traditional face-to-face
meetings (chart pads)
High-tech:
Electronic meeting tools
Low-tech:
Telephone
High-tech:
Videoconferencing
Videoconferencing
Simulates face-to-face meeting
Can link people globally
Helps relieve travel
GroupSystems
Meeting Facilitation Tool
Allows group decision making
Focus on collaboration
Simultaneous and Anonymous
Input
Raymond Nichols
Art
Timelines: historical images
sequenced by varied databases
for instruction in history and art
Timelines on-line
 Opening
timeline
George Watson, Physics &
Astronomy
Araya Debessay, Accounting
Carol Denson, Consumer Studies
Beth Haslett, Communication
 Wireless
Learning
Technology for Collaborative
Wireless PBL
 UD
PBL: Wireless Technology for
Collaborative Learning
Robert Neeves and Michele ProvostCraig
Health and Exercise Sciences
 An
Innovative Approach to Anatomy and
Physiology Instruction and Learning
Through the Use of Plastinated Models
and Computerized, Interactive,ProblemBased Learning Modules
Introduction: Plastination
Process



Invented by Dr. Gunter von
Hagens, Heidelberg, Germany
in 1978
Process by which water and
lipids in biological tissues are
replaced by curable polymers
such as silicone, epoxy and
polyester resins that harden
over a period of 4 - 6 weeks
This results in a dry,odorless,
hazard- free specimen that can
be handled safely without gloves
Introduction: Training in Plastination

Trained in Heidelberg
with Dr. von Hagens
while on sabbatical leave
from University of
Delaware
 Currently prepares
plastinated specimens at
the University of
Maryland’s Anatomical
Services Center
Plastinated Models
Background and Significance

Models have been prepared for
instructional use for the following
institutions:
 Johns Hopkins
 New York University School
of Medicine
 Mount Sinai School of
Medicine
 University of Maryland’s
School of Family Medicine
 University of Delaware’s
Health and Exercise Science
and Nursing Departments
Plastinated Models
Background and Significance
Research
and
development of
cardiac ablation
catheters for Arrow
International
Incorporated,
Reading, PA and C. R.
Bard Pharmaceutical,
Boston, MA

Secondary Schools

Wilmington, DE

Kirk Middle School,
Newark, DE


Scientific
displays at
numerous museums
including: Museum of
Science, Boston,
Tower Hill High School,

Valley Park Elementary
School, Pennsville,NJ
Pilesgrove Elementary
School, Woodstown, NJ
Havre de Grace
Elementary and Middle
School, Havre de Grace,MD
Project Goals
Plastinated Model
Development

Develop an on going human
and animal organ
preservation program to
provide didactic models to
support classroom instruction
for A & P courses

Develop computerized,
interactive, problem-based
learning modules to
accompany the models

Assess the efficacy of the
use of the models and PBL
learning strategies
Project Goals

Digital photography of
plastinated specimens and
power-point driven problembased units on each of the
plastinated models will be
developed to direct student
learning of anatomy and
physiology.

Students will also be able to
handle the specimens while
answering a series of
problem-based questions.
Assessing the Efficacy
of Plastinated Models & PBL

Assessment scales will
be developed in
conjunction with the
University of Delaware’s
CTE.
 Both classes will be preand post-tested on course
content knowledge
 Statistical analyses will be
performed to evaluate
differences in learning
Lessons Learned
 Less
is much much more
 Target,
target, target! Know thyself (and
thine enemy)
 Megalooligomicrotropism
 “You
get what you negotiate”
 Always
 Take
ask for a little back
the bull by the horns
 Know
thine bull
Lessons learned (cont.)

Research can drive teaching
 Teams work even in humanities
 Technology does not equal computing
 No one really knows how to assess (or wants
to)
 Unexpected effects




Workload and technology expectations
Intellectual property
Models: intra-institution technology transfer
Support


IT fellows
Restructured CTE