AUC Academic Conference 'From Virtual to Reality' The University of
Queensland 1996AUC Academic Conference 'From Virtual to Reality' The University of
Queensland 1996
Back to Home Page ...... by Presenter ...... by Paper Title ...... by Keyword
Paper Title:
Using bulletin boards and self tests
to enhance staff-student communication
in a large student bodyPresenter:
Eileen Beswick, The University of Queensland
Authors:
Ms Eileen Beswick, Dr Alison Bailey, Mr Bruce Davey,
Dr Graham Huxham, Mrs Bev Oelrichs
The University of Queensland
Keywords: Bulletinboards, teaching
Faculty area: Physiology and Pharmacology,
Our department has one of the largest student bodies in the university. We have twelve classes of 100 - 300 students and one class of 1300 students. The problems of communicating effectively with students are magnified when dealing with classes of this size. In the 1980s we made a commitment to computer based education and now have 46 SE30s, Classics and LCIIs dedicated to data acquisition, and 32 LCIIIs and 15 Power Macs dedicated to computer assisted learning
This presentation charts our experiences in developing bulletin boards and self testing. Our large class sizes, while presenting problems, gave us a large data base from which to develop our understanding.
In 1994 we networked the student computers and some of the staff computers. In second semester we introduced a simple Hypercard bulletin board to several of our larger classes, some first year level and some second year. The bulletin board was quick and easy to open and use. The student inserted the question in the top box. The answer box was password protected. Staff would answer the questions, usually within two or three working days. The system was connected to a counter so statistics on the use could be obtained.
To prevent problems arising from student probings or interference, we installed MacPrefect software which saved technical staff a lot of time trouble shooting. In an attempt to divert students from making frivolous entries, we installed a student news board with no password protection, thus enabling students to communicate with each other. This pilot project gave us enough confidence to introduce the Hypercard bulletin boards to all classes in 1995.
Drawing on our experiences in 1994, we advertised more extensively and we employed a group of student helpers to work in the CAL lab for two or three hours a day to help the students who were not confident enough to open a bulletin board. They were outfitted in bright yellow t- shirts with our bulletin board logo to identify them. We considered this to be a success. Responses to a survey showed considerable improvement since 1994. (Table 2). Advertising had increased knowledge of bulletin boards and where to find them. Importantly, the number of students lacking the confidence to use the computers had dropped from 23% to 9%.
We had recognized quite early that Hypercard, being a single user application, would always create problems. The system crashed disturbingly frequently, usually during periods when several students were known to be using the bulletin boards.
We had several personal approaches from students wishing to access our server by modem. The questions was, how widespread was the demand? Just how many students have access to a personal computer and a modem? Associated with the survey on bulletin boards, we asked the students whether they had access to a computer, to a modem, how comfortable they were with computers and what they used them for.
Clearly students are aware of the importance of computers in education but at present use them mostly for wordprocessing in assignment preparation. About 10% of all respondents, 17% of students who also owned a computer, owned a modem. The number is greater when considering college students. As the majority of our programs are Macintosh based and the majority of students had a PC, students consequently cannot run most of the programs used in the department. We anticipated growth in the internet and recognized the time had come when we had to switch to a WWW based bulletin board. We tapped into a third year computer science subject where students were required to complete a major real life project for assessment, and we found two students to prepare a bulletin board system for us.
- Based on our experience, we specifiied that
- simplicity was more important than power
- the facility to edit bulletin boards and to answer questions was to be secure
- statistics were to be accumulated
The new bulletin boards were introduced in 1st semester 1996. By then, all computers in the department were networked enabling all lecturers to access the WWW from their desk, regardless of platform. Instructions were inserted in students' practical note books. To prevent every student and his/her dog from surfing the net, outside access was disabled by installing a bridge using Karlbridge software which limits access to within the University of Queensland domain.
The design of the bulletin board was extremely satisfying from our point of view. An icon on the desktop opened directly into the student welcome page, from there to the "Select a Bulletin Board" page, and then into the browser page (Fig. 1). In order to gather more information on their use, we imposed a login facility on first year students
Figure 1 Web based bulletin board
Academic staff have a separate entry point where they are required to login with a password. This gives access to the answer and delete a page facility. A third level of entry is provided for administrators giving the facility to create, delete and edit bulletin boards and to access the statistics.
Figure 2. Statistics collected on usage of bulletin boards.
The total number of openings and questions by students and answers by staff are recorded in Fig 2. This enabled the administrator to identify when questions were not being answered. Not shown here is a table for each bulletin board identifying if the openings were by staff or students, enabling us to identify the true number of openings by students.
Where students were asked to login, we were able to identify which of these students opened the bulletin boards, how many time they opened them, how many questions were asked by individual students. This information enabled us to cross correlate with other statistics about the first year students and forms the data base for the graphs.
Survey of records of the number of students opening a bulletin board for 1996 is more complete than that for 1994/5 (Table 1). 1st year 95 and 2nd year 95 were compiled from student responses to a survey. 1st year 96 were compiled from automatic counting of bulletin board openings. 1st year 96 "never opened a BB" was estimated from total enrollments minus number of openings. As the drop out rate for first year students is fairly high, this figure would be overestimated.
For first year students 28% opened a bulletin board in 1995 and 30% in 1996. Most students opened them between one and five times. Students who asked questions did not open the bulletin boards more or less frequently than those who did not ask a question.
Table 1. Number of students opening a bulletin board
Table 2 compares reasons students give for not opening a bulletin board. Comparison of 1st and second year students is interesting. Lack of confidence in using a computer was similar at about
10%. The big difference was related to not knowing where to find them and/or not often near the CAL Lab. However, this is unlikely to be a valid excuse for a student who actively sought out the CAL Lab as we know from other hard data that 750 of the same group of students (57%) did find the room (Table 2)and directions were published in their subject handbook. The increased number who had not thought of a question possibly relates to the more general state of disorganization of first year students.
Table 2. Reasons for not opening a bulletin board
The number of queries to the Students' Help Desk in first semester 1996 was similar or slightly greater than in 1995. Our 1995 results showed the demand in second semester was much less and we do not intend to staff a Help Desk in 2nd semester, 1996. We will continue the Help Desk in 1st semester, 1997.
Figure 3 The number of enquires to the help desk over 3 semesters
Figures 3 and 4 illustrate the openings and questions for 1995 and 1996. Surprisingly, the openings and questions per enrolled student were less in 1996 than in 1995. This would suggest that the Web based bulletin board was less well received than the Hypercard bulletin board.
Figure 4. Number of openings of bulletin boards in 1995 and 1996
Figure 5. Number of questions asked by students in 1995 and 1996
We repeated the survey on computer ownership. Of those students who completed this section of the survey, 81% had access to a computer at home and 34% owned a modem. This compares with 17% owning a modem in 1995. Clearly our decision to place the bulletin boards on the internet was justified.
How many of the 1995 problems were eliminated by changing to the Web based bulletin board? Not many. The Web has its own set of problems. Students and staff had problems accessing the bulletin boards from home. This does not appear to be a fault with our system but a variety of difficulties found by users related to network administration. Within our system, the original langauge was too slow leading to a large number of complaints from both staff and students. This could explain the reduced number of openings and questions by students in 1996 compared with 1995.
The bulletin board was being rewritten for 2nd semester 1996 and the slowness should be eliminated. Did we manage to stop the bulletin boards from crashing? No. While the bulletin board itself was intact, Netscape itself would freeze necessitating a restart. We think this is related to the speed and we are hoping this will disappear with the new version.
The other resource we have introduced this year is self tests for first year students. Many find the transition from high school to university difficult and it is a matter of concern that first year students in large classes (>1000) receive no feedback on their performance until the end of semester exam. By then it is often too late. Furthermore, the tests are entirely multiple choice questions and many students are uncomfortable with this format. We have devised two self tests on two sections from the first year lecture series using an Authorware shell. The format is the same as the end of semester exam. We have not put these tests on the Web for our first trial but we do intend to do so in 1997.
Each test has a bank of sixty question arranged in ten bins of six questions with each bin covering similar material. The test chooses one question randomly from each bin, ten questions in all. For our statistics, the student is required to login with his/her student number. The student reads the question and enters the answer (Fig.6). When all ten questions have been answered, the student receives feedback on the number answered correctly and the time taken compared with the time allowed in the end of semester exam.
The student then receives further feedback on the correct answer. The original question is presented again together with a comment on why that answer was correct, and a rating on the level of difficulty of that question.
Figure 6 Question page of self tests
Did the students perceive these self tests as useful? About 57% of enrolled students opened a test. This compares with 30% who opened a bulletin board (Table 3). On average, a student would open each test 6 to 8 times though we found that 120 students opened them only once while one student opened a test 42 times. There were about 600 openings per week for each of the tests.
Table 3. Student usage of self tests
The students were surveyed on their use and perceptions of the tests. 85% ranked them as extremely helpful or very helpful.
We must conclude that the tests are popular with students, and that, at least with first years, tests are more popular than bulletin boards. This surprised us. We had predicted that students would come to our CAL laboratories and open both the bulletin board and the tests during the visit. Perhaps first year students are more insecure and this pattern will not be repeated with later year students. Perhaps we have underestimated just how much students' approach is assessment driven. Our evaluation will continue.
Bulletin Boards have been an accepted part of our teaching structure for 3 years. We will continue to seek out better ways of presenting the bulletin boards and making them more user friendly. A slow response time was a turn off for some students and most staff and this problem is being addressed. For large bulletin boards, an index to questions is necessary and this is being provided. In 1997, our department faces challeges due to the change to a Graduate Medical Course and problem based learning. We anticipate a bulletin board and news board will become an integral part of those students' study pattern.
With the self tests, we have congratulated ourselves on the success of our innovation but students are accepting it as normal. They have made comments on the Student Newsboard such as "why haven't we got more?" and "why are other departments so lazy that they haven't got tests?". The self tests will be extended to other topics and to other subjects, and will be rewritten for the Web.
Back to Home Page ...... by Presenter ...... by Paper Title ...... by Keyword
Ms Eileen Beswick,
Department of Physiology and Pharmacology,
The University of Queensland,
St. Lucia Qld 4072.Phone 07 3365 1348,
Fax 365 1766,email: beswick@plpk.uq.oz.au
Back to Home Page ...... by Presenter ...... by Paper Title ...... by Keyword
