NERALLD December 1998 Newsletter

NERALLD queries: contact Bruce Parkhurst, Director, Geddes Language Center, Boston University, 725 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston MA 02215 tel 617/353-2640 FAX 617/353-2519 email brucep@bu.edu

SUMMARY OF THE 10/30/98 MEETING STARTS ON PAGE 3

ELECTION RESULTS Congratulations to

Bruce Parkhurst, Boston University, re-elected to a 2 year term as President;

Tamra Hjermstad, Williams College, our new Newsletter Editor;

Mary Fetherston, University of Rhode Island, our new Recording Secretary;

Michael Nieckoski, School for Int'l Training, re-appointed as Web Meister.

The publishers in attendance suggested the following contacts for labs to use when seeking licensing information, technical support or to raise issues relating to laboratory use of multimedia. At press time we had still not heard from three publishers; please check the website for the most up-to-date infornation.

David Herren, Read Gilgen, Otmar Foelsche, Ivan Audouin, Dick House, Jin-Heng Ma and Jim Bruno.

Jon Aske, Salem State College, Salem MA

Edmund Brelsford, Marlboro College, Marlboro VT

Marianne Francis, Boston University

Gordon Hartig, Middlesex Comm. College, Lowell MA

Dale E. Hinchey, Saint Johnsbury Academy, Saint Johnsbury VT

Emmanuel Paris-Bouvret, Trinity College, Hartford CT

Marc Rando, Thayer Academy, Braintree MA

Prof. Lyra Riabov, New Hampshire College, Manchester NH

John Seufert, Governor Dummer Academy, Byfield MA

Prof. Karen Storz, Wellesley College, Wellesley MA

Lorraine Williams, St. Michael's College, Colchester VT

Session 1: DIGITAL LINGO 101

This session was presented by David Herren of the Center for Educational Technology in Middlebury, VT. David's useful handout and a complete transcript of the session are available at the NERALLD website. HERE

Question: What is streaming media?

DH: Streaming is usually associated with digital video. Streaming video is a feed being sent from one computer through a hub to another computer. The video is being fed live and is being viewed as it is being received. Non-streaming is often associated with a web-browsers, where the content of a file gets transferred in its entirety and then gets played on another machine. There are also hybrids where the file starts playing before it has been completely transferred.

Question: Can we stream video on our own server to our own clients?

DH: Yes. However, just as you have problems with bandwidth on the internet, the same situation will occur on your campus network. You need to know about your network infrastructure to determine what kind of performance you'll get with streaming video. There are two types of networks--switched and shared (not the technical terms). Shared network connections are on a hub, which is in a sense a fancy garden hose. Another common shared network infrastructure involves computers connected to others through a hub. Why? It's dirt cheap! Because running video on a shared network yields poor results when many machines are involved, we should use a switched network instead. A switched network looks exactly the same as the hub with one exception, instead of a hub, it's got a switch. The switch is more like a computer itself--it's intelligent. It only sends the packets to the machine that is calling for them. Think of it this way: HUB--CHEAP--DUMB, SWITCH--LESS CHEAP--SMART. On the issue of standardizing digital video, you should be aware that the Int'l. Standards Organization (ISO) and the Motion Picture Experts Group (MPEG) recently selected QuickTime as the file format for MPEG4. I would not look at standardizing on ANY other format.

Question: How can I discourage a faculty member who wants to illegally broadcast a DVD movie in the lab?

DH: Tell him it's a felony violation of the copyright law. However, if that doesn't sway him, give a demo. Put it on the network but start some major downloads before the demo. Lots of them. Make ten copies of a 100 Mb file on five machines in the lab. Keep the monitors off and then bring the class in to watch the stuttering video. The performance issue will usually dissuade them if the copyright issue didn't.

Question: Can CD-ROM based multimedia be networked?

DH: Assuming that the publisher has granted permission for a site license, you can put the CD on the server and have the clients simultaneously use the program. What are the issues? (1) CD-ROM x24 is brutally slow, (2) Up to 512Mb ram on the server is needed to get the information from the slow disc (CD) to the faster memory of the computer, and, (3) the software design may or may not lend itself to being used in a server/client environment.

Question: Is there a short way to distinguish among Appletalk, IPX, TCP/IP?

DH: Using the garden hose analogy, think of the data as different colored drops of water. There is nothing in the network to prevent you from serving yellow drops, green drops, blue drops, any color you want. Routers are like switches. A router looks at a drop and asks "Am I going to pass it on or not?" A router can be configured to allow any colors, but some routers are pre-configured to allow only certain colors through. If you're running IPX it's like the device has a tremendous prejudice against red drops. There's no reason it can't be reconfigured, but making that happen is another matter. Appleshare/IP can send all colors, Windows NT requires one click of mouse to do so, and Novell requires a few letters of typing.

Question (from a publisher): Are college labs are going from Windows '95 on client machines to NT?

DH: If you are working in a Windows environment I would absolutely install NT on client machines. It is much easier to manage. If you come in contact with software that doesn't run on NT, I would contact the publisher immediately and say this is not acceptable.

Question: Could you talk about DVD?

DH: DVD is Digital Video Disc which has 8 global standards. The whole thing was driven by copyright law. Look at the last reference on the handout section on DVD, codefreedvd.com, this is a commercial outfit. You send them your DVD player and they will turn it in to one that doesn't pay attention to the global bit. Is it legal or not? Are your lawyers richer or better paid than Disney's? I think not!

Session 2: DISCUSSION Moderated by Otmar Foelsche , Read Gilgen and Ivan Audouin. The first step was to have the group shout out problems which were then written out on the board and roughly categorized. Here we list the probems, many of which were discussed (full text available at website).

-- User interface problems such as non-intuitive instructions

-- Used textbook market (CD's packaged with original text, not available

for purchase when the text is sold used with the CD)

-- Shared digitizing -- could labs work together to share to burden of digitizing audio sets which aren't available as such from publishers?

-- Publisher digitizing -- why don't they make the full, original audio/video available separately?

-- Licensing problem -- multi-user licensing for a product which is designed for single users ...

-- Quality control --technology control and pedagogical control

-- Support --where is tech support?

-- LCTL (less commonly taught languages) - too few materials!

-- Format changes (technology)

-- Choosing the appropriate technology

-- Copyright -- Fair Use -- changing media format

-- "Legacy" technology (e.g. audiocassettes and other effective low tech solutions)

Session 3: "IN AN IDEAL WORLD.."

The afternoon session of the NERALLD conference was a panel presentation moderated by Dick House of Wabash College. The panel: Read Gilgen, Director, Learning Support Services, Univ of Wisconsin-Madison; Jin-Heng Ma, Mayling Soong Prof of Chinese at Wellesley; and Jim Bruno from Holt, Rinehart & Winston. The speakers' comments are paraphrased and slightly abridged. Only a summary of the subsequent discussion is included. The text of the afternoon sessions have been submitted to the IALL Journal Board for consideration.

First Speaker: Read Gilgen, representing the lab perspective.

Although each lab is different, there are some commonalties, such as media, then and now. In the 1960s, we had audiotape. Now, we have cassettes, video, satellite, computers, and multimedia. The complexities have increased. Our concerns? The rapid rate of change, the cost of replacement equipment, and new technologies. We're not in control of our destiny! How do we stay on top of things? Three approaches: 1) We don't; 2) We become fanatics and live eat breath language lab stuff; or 3) If we're really lucky, we get good staff.

Who are our constituents? Faculty, students, administrators, publishers, and hardware/software vendors. The Ideal Faculty Member makes his/her pedagogical needs known, examines materials carefully before adoption, and then uses those materials. The Ideal Student knows where the lab is and becomes famous and remembers the lab! (Aside: I was told that we should write off the A students because they are smart and end up teaching and don't make any money. Concentrate on the C students who are more likely to be enterprising, do well, and give generously as alumni!) The Ideal Administrator values language learning and mentions both the football stadium and the language lab in the same sentence. The Ideal Publisher knows what the faculty really need, resists technology for the sake of technology, recognizes that universities are not afloat in money, can give reasonably priced licenses, gives manageable licensing procedures, and gets materials delivered to students. The Ideal Vendor gives us the technology (integrated and consistent hardware and software). We need and tools for easy distribution and storage. One clear message suggested by staff at the University of Wisconsin lab is that we need to improve communication among our constituents; we need to talk to each other.

What are we trying to accomplish? What are we trying to get students to accomplish? Are we dealing with reading, writing, speaking? Are the students commuters? scholars? We need to assess whether what we're doing is effective, to compare non-traditional methods with traditional ones to see what is best for students. We need to evaluate whether the cost of some of the new approaches is worth it. Are we reaching students we didn't reach before? What we do has an impact. My final point is that as a Lab Director you CAN make a difference!

Second Speaker: Jin-Heng Ma, representing the faculty position.

I've been teaching since the late 1950s and don't want to retire. This high technology is interesting! I started with audio, then video, then CD, then laserdisc. Throughout, I always try to improve the teaching.

What is ideal for teaching foreign language? Textbooks alone won't do it. No matter what. You can't get away from language labs because you need to practice speaking. You can't always get to a computer, so a Walkman is good. With video you get visuals, body movement, images of culture. CD is interactive--you need this to provide interaction for the students. CD-ROM is best because students can get answers when they get things wrong. But these are things for outside the class. In the classroom you spend your time interacting with the students. Audio gives practice. You repeat, repeat, repeat, but you don't know if you got things wrong. You need to use them all! Language teaching is not training for high technology, so teachers need help with the technology. We need the lab staff to help us with this, with training on how to use these things and make teaching better.

What about developing your own materials? All takes time. Writing a textbook is easier than doing audio. Video takes longer than either of these. CD-ROM development goes way beyond that, and you don't get credit from the administration for your efforts. You need to convince the administration that this is not just all for fun. If you can put your theory into practice, and let students learn from these materials, it is good. But you will still do a lot of work with written homework and corrections.

Now everything gets more expensive, with all the different media required. This is something we need to address. For publishers I have this comment: When I go to conferences I get jealous because of all the materials in the romance languages. There is so little for Chinese! I wrote a little program and it took two or three years. And getting it to work for students--this took many years more. Kudos to Jill Cheng (Cheng & Tsui) for starting to publish in Chinese and Japanese, even before the institutions could provide the necessary equipment in labs.

I would like to suggest to publishers that if they have a CD that it can get reviewed just like books get reviewed. Allow teachers to get examination copies. Teachers need CDs to review just like they need to review textbooks. If more publishers had workshops -- so we could see and compare various programs -- that would be really useful.

Third Speaker: Jim Bruno, representing the publishers' perspective.

"In an Ideal World" I look to Moore's Law: every 12 - 18 months the storage capacity of microprocessors doubles. Smaller, quicker, cheaper technologies seem to be always popping up. I can't wait to wear a computer! Moore's Law also tells us that the machine which we buy today for $1400 will cost $10 in the year 2010 (and will have many more times the capability). But it doesn't matter that the computer of the future will cost $10; the one you want now still costs thousands.

The prospects for the future which I find exciting:

1) Computers will get more portable.

2) Learning can happen anywhere.

3) Learning is based on authentic materials. We had realia but it was static. Today we see right outside our door or across the world. It's accessible and authentic and right on our desktops.

4) Whereas today learning is focused on disciplines, learning will become more interdisciplinary.

5) Learning is more activity-based; materials can model skills rather than serve as recipes for learning.

6) Learning is peer-driven. Many people work best when working in groups. This promotes mentoring, nurturing, problem solving. We won't always have same-age students. Mentoring becomes more common.

7) Learning leads to publishing. Learning doesn't stop with the assimilation of information but continues into producing for others who will learn.

8) Publishers learn to publish and market smaller parts of larger wholes. We want to roll out the whole bag of solutions, but solutions often come in parts. We have responded to developments in the world of technology by trying to provide everything in larger packages, comprehensively. We may be trying to accomplish too much. We need to develop partnerships with highly creative developers and then publish things in smaller parts.

9) Literacy is better understood. Skills that are needed do not draw on the linear, but rather in recognizing patterns, collecting data, making interpretations, navigating through learning environments.

10) Technology stretches our senses. It empowers our eyes to see what is across the world and to hear voices from other places, to touch others.

Session 4: DISCUSSION - "Tackling Tough Issues" (Topics discussed are marked with --. Full text under consideration for publoication in a future IALL Journal.)

Dick House (moderator): What can publishers, lab directors and faculty do to coordinate our efforts?

--Develop smart classrooms for easy use of technology but don't abandon "old" lower tech which works.

-- Publishers might want to subscribe to LLTI

[Editor's note: For information about LLTI, see polyglot.lss.wisc.edu/IALL/LLTI.html]

-- Faculty training is a big issue. It helps when publishers do training especially on non-product focus.

-- Lab Director input on text selection

-- Publishers could list their software with the Foreign Language Database.

[Editor's note: See eleazar.dartmouth.edu/fldb for information about the FLDB]

-- Distribute information on appropriate contacts within publishing houses so we can be heard.

-- Work at a higher organizational level - get IALL and publishing organizations working on resolutions.

Dick House: Let's looks at a more technical aspect of the situation: How has high tech changed foreign language education? How have things been improved, how have things gotten worse?

-- Concerns about the efficacy of the materials.

-- Students' predilection for quick and random access.

-- Repetitiveness of some software accompanying texts.

-- Lack of research in the use of software for language learning.

-- Concerns about materials addressing different learning styles.

-- Giving students the option to download stuff on their computers in the dorms.

--Student interest in multimedia positively effecting their learning curve.

-- Student comfort level with technology.

-- Technology can detract from classroom instruction by increasing faculty workload and decreasing content (e.g., emphasis on other areas such as reading).

-- Tenure credit for faculty who use multimedia effectively.

-- Problems of multi-tasking for lab directors.

Dick House : How many lab directors here wear two or more hats? (A clear majority raise their hands.)

-- Issue of lab directors having to train themselves.

-- Using NERALLD and IALL, and other contacts as sources of information/training.

Dick House: Getting to the matter of intellectual property, whatever our group affiliation, we are aware of copyright and the legitimacy of copyright protection. Any thoughts on this topic?

-- Development of workbooks which can be accessed on-line by a password.

-- Faculty making the most of contact hours with students through use of technology.

-- The effect of very high textbook and workbook costs.

-- Fair Use Guidelines.

-- What institutions can do with commercially produced materials (10% use isn't always a good rule).

-- Why publishers can't always grant permission for further use.

Dick House: This morning we talked about different formats - taking the audio track off a video, for example, or transferring from one medium to a digital medium. How do people in the group consider the copyright issues around format changes?

-- Using materials with permission on an intranet.

-- Issues such as licensing and distribution of digital materials.

-- The feasibility of including a letter that outlines permissible actions with the tapes.

-- Problems with each lab negotiating separate deals with separate pricing and licensing agreements.

-- Putting permissions information at the publishers' websites.

-- The need for points of contact with the publishers, to negotiate various levels of rights.

-- Charges to make extra video copies.

-- Publishers' permission for faculty developing courseware to accompany existing texts.

-- Keyserver software and limited-use software.

Dick House: The final question: "Was all of this worth it?" Try to be concrete. What should we do next?

-- Ask IALL to run a session like this in June at the IALL '99 Conference (U Md, College Park, 6/22-26).

-- Similar sessions but with additional groups to expand the communication, not just between lab directors and publishers, but also between computer support staff and lab directors, and between faculty and lab directors... and bring in the students, too.

-- Whether sales reps are the best way for publishers to reach out to lab directors.

-- Getting faculty demonstrations and mini-sessions in the lab.

-- The importance of demonstration CDs.

-- More aggressive communication of language lab requirements with faculty.

-- Labs as hubs, as centers for language faculty, particularly in literature-oriented departments.

This group volunteered to further discussion of the issues raised in the meeting. If you have thoughts, concerns, questions or issues to bring up, please contact one of the NERALLD members listed below.

Elaine Leary, Houghton Mifflin	Lyn McLean, John Wiley & Sons
Chris Alberg, Walpole High School alberg@bc.edu	Cindy Bravo, Boston College cynthia.bravo@bc.edu
Connie Christo, Harvard University Christo@fas.harvard.edu	Otmar Foelsche, Dartmouth College otmar.foelsche@dartmouth.edu
Tamra Hjermstad, Williams College thjermst@williams.edu

94 active members (dues paying within the last 14 months)

59 have renewed to date

23 full year members from last year have yet to renew

12 half-year members from 97-98 have yet to renew

(NB: Treasurer Report available upon request)