Reporter Volume 25, No.23 April 7, 1994 By ANN WHITCHER Reporter Editor As classes resume this week following spring break, a group of UB faculty and staff is overseeing the phased introduction of the latest teaching technology into UB classrooms. They are also mulling results of a recent faculty survey on classroom conditions, as they continue to evaluate and upgrade classroom equipment, lighting, cleanliness and other factors. The university's Classroom Quality Assessment Group, chaired by Frank Bartscheck of Computing and Information Technology (CIT), and Richard Noll, director of planning and programming, aims for effective oversight of UB's 166 centrally scheduled classrooms on both campuses. The 12-member group meets monthly and represents both faculty and areas of administration most concerned with classroom upkeep. "These are individuals who care," says Bartscheck. "It's a really good group in terms of getting things done." According to its mission statement, the assessment group "directs the provision, maintenance and betterment of centrally-scheduled instructional classrooms and support spaces which are considered university-wide resources and therefore not the responsibility of any one department." It also functions as an ombudsman for users of instructional space vis-vis a wide range of classroom issues. According to Richard Lesniak, director of academic services for CIT, the design for the university's Educational Technology Equipped Classroom (ETEC) "was done here at UB over the last five years. These are currently called technology classrooms in the national press. They can have distance learning rooms, or be a lab full of microcomputers. "In this case, we're talking about empowering the faculty in a lecture hall or classroom situation, where there's a one-on-many lecture hall model. I The ETEC classroom is centered on an instructor's workstationQwhat we call a podiumQwhich has integrated into it a whole variety of educational technology devices. "Two that are primary are: a high-power microcomputer workstation that's connected to the Internet through the campus' communications network. The other important component is a Visualizer*, a video-based overhead-opaque-copy stand projection device that will display whatever is put on its stage up on a video projector mounted from the ceiling." Transparencies are unnecessary using this device, which allows display of maps, illustrations, materials in color, etc. The most recently completed of four ETEC classrooms is 111 Kimball Tower. Ten more such classrooms are included in the Natural Sciences Complex, which opens this summer. "The idea behind the podium," says Lesniak, "is that faculty require no technical support. As soon as the door is open, all devices are powered up. A VCR is included in the podium; there's a campus telephone so the instructor can get campus support directly in for problems. Some have slide-to-video projection devices. All have keyboard and mice for computers. The instructor can see whatever the students are seeing on the screen, i.e., the monitor in the podium shows whatever is being projected on screen. The one thing that makes this unique is that it's integrated with a single, one-button approach." Also present in each of these classrooms, says Lesniak, is a distributed sound system that's connected to a computer system, too, so the instructor can use CD-ROM or video disc to enhance classroom presentation. The actual ETEC program was developed by Educational Technology Services, which Lesniak headed, now part of Academic Services within CIT. "We currently tour people from other campuses: both SUNY and non-SUNY schools," he said. "These are usually groups of faculty and administrators trying to make decisions about classroom innovation and cost-effective approaches like ours." With the introduction of the 10 new ETEC classrooms this summer, 20 percent of UB's centrally scheduled class space will be so equipped. The goal, say Frank Bartscheck and Richard Noll, is 40 percent as soon as possible, the availability of funding being the determinant. Meanwhile, the group is using the results of a recent faculty survey to improve the less glamorousQbut still vitalQclass settings. According to Peter Gold, associate dean of the Undergraduate College, UB faculty were asked to assess the suitability of their assigned classrooms in a survey distributed last October and recently tabulated and released. "From the list of 166 centrally-scheduled classrooms," says Gold, "we selected 58 classrooms on the basis of location, type, special features, and similarity to other rooms in the building." Faculty were asked to comment on sound, lighting, heating, seating, A/V maintenance, etc. Many faculty provided additional comments and these, too, were tabulated. Each teacher assigned to a selected classroom received a questionnaire. Gold says he's pleased with the response rate: 50 percent or 350 out of 750 forms distributed, were returned and counted. "While we find no 'perfect' classroom in our sample," said Gold, "there are a substantial number that present a good environment for teaching. There are, on the other hand, classrooms that elicit too many complaints. Most features of most classrooms are satisfactory to most professors. Some classrooms elicit particular and frequent complaints. "That UB's faculty consider classroom quality important is shown by the high rate of return for the questionnaire, their familiarity with classroom conditions, and the large number of written comments that were filled with detail rather than vague complaints." Among the best: Acheson 17; 97 Alumni; 126 Baldy; 10 and 252 Capen; 6, 119 and 202 Clemens; 127 Cooke; 354 Fillmore; 108 and 111 Kimball; 14, 109, and 100 Knox; 210 Norton, and 440 Park. In the "bottom ten" column were 101 Baldy (the Kiva), 246 Cary, 322 Clemens, 170 Fillmore, 455 Fronczak, 125 Kimball, 104 and 209 O'Brian, and 10 Talbert. The most frequent complaints involved sound, lighting, heating, and entrances, while the level of cleanliness and A/V support were viewed more favorably, said Gold. The survey has resulted in 35 work orders for repairs and upkeep. Other assessment group activities include: continued review of classroom painting needs, and a study of long-range classroom needs as more academic activities move from the South to North Campus. In addition to Lesniak and Gold, other assessment group members are Sallyanne Catalano (Conferences and Special Events), Ron Cichocki (Communications Engineering Services), Scott Danford (Faculty Senate Facilities Committee), Rich Donderewicz (Custodial Services), Prof. Todd Evans (Oral Biology), Susan McNeill (Millard Fillmore College), Joanne Plunkett (Records and Registration) and Associate Provost Sean Sullivan.