TAC Meeting Minutes

February 8, 2003

Attending

TAC Members: Will Neuhauser, John Pierce, John Powers, Aaron Reynolds, Howard Rheingold, David Van Horn

Faculty/Staff: Keith Karoly, Noelwah Netusil, Jeff Parker, Marc Schneiberg, Jim Stewart Ethan Benatan, Marianne Colgrove, Martin Ringle, Johanna Thoeresz

Students: Christina Decker, Sarah Klain, Chris Rempel, Malcolm Spittler

Technology in the Curriculum: A classroom simulation on the economics of technological innovation

Economics Professor Jeff Parker demonstrated an innovative teaching "experiment" used in Economics 354. The experiment, conducted over a period of several weeks, involves a simulation in which students make decisions about investing in research, development, patent protection, and other aspects of bringing new technologies to market. At the end of the simulation, students who have best discerned the interlocking principles of entrepreneurship in a competitive free-market environment wind up with the greatest amount of capital.

In order to conduct this multi-week simulation, Jeff developed a complex spreadsheet. At each cycle of the simulation, students provide Jeff with input on their decisions relating to investments, raw materials selections, and other variables. Jeff then calculates the results of all the decisions and generates a new state for then next cycle. When asked what they learned from the experiment, one student replied that she learned that sometimes one has to make decisions under imperfect circumstances and in general it broadened students’ understanding of economics.

While the simulation is very rich and pedagogically rewarding, the amount of faculty labor involved in moving from one cycle to the next is formidable. Typically, Jeff would spend several hours each day on calculations. For this reason, the simulation is unlikely to be a tool that most faculty would find practical for their teaching.

In order to address this problem, Jeff is planning to seek grant funding to automate a significant portion of the work that he currently does by hand. He is working with Marianne Colgrove to obtain this funding. If a grant is obtained, Jeff will work with CIS staff to develop an automated prototype of the simulation to use in his classes next year. He may subsequently seek significantly more grant funding to expand and polish the automated simulation so it can be used easily by other faculty, both at Reed and elsewhere.

The Status and Future of Information Technology at Reed College

Marty mentioned that the computing and information systems department of the college will soon embark on its five-year strategic planning process for technology. This process involves talking to every faculty and staff member and as many student groups as possible. Marty noted that TAC had been helpful in previous strategic planning cycles and that he hoped the fall meeting might include a discussion of potential directions that might be valuable for the college to pursue.

It was observed that five years ago, many colleges chose to invest in distance learning and have since regretted that decision (and the vast amounts of money wasted on it). As has often been the case, Reed balked at pursuing the distance learning "fad" and has since been praised for its wisdom in weighing carefully the pros and cons of new technologies.

When asked what the faculty at the TAC meeting would like to see, Marc Schneiberg, professor of sociology, noted that he would like to make more and better use of census data currently available on the Internet but sometimes difficult to access due to network speed limitations.

Another faculty member noted that some computing activities are hindered by staff size limitations. For example, it would be great to have someone on staff experienced with statistical resources in computer services. Large universities often have such specialized data librarians.

Evident to TAC members was the fact that while ample hardware and infrastructure exists, the staffing and other support needed to integrate technology into their teaching is the greatest need. TAC members could relate to the fact that this is a complex problem in education because so many different topics exist, whereas in a business environment the focus makes things simpler. Reed goes to great lengths to individualize, not to standardize computing requests from faculty and students—this too requires staff time.

It was noted that successful integration of technology in the curriculum will require more network bandwidth, more frequent computer replacement etc. Some assistance might be available through partnerships with other colleges (such as the one Reed is currently pursuing with Occidental, Swarthmore, and Vassar).

Marty requested that TAC members at the fall meeting share ideas from the most abstract to the most practical in answering the question: Where should Reed be on the leadership curve with respect to technology in liberal arts colleges? In the vanguard? At the median? Somewhere else? If the choice is for Reed to be a leader, what exactly does that mean?

Feedback from TAC in fall ’03 would be added to feedback from faculty, staff, and students. The fall meeting ’04 would be a place to share possible directions with TAC before finalizing the 5-year priorities.