THIS ISSUE OF EDU FEATURES ELEMENTARY EDUCATION CREATIVE APPLICATIONS, THINGS TO DO, OPINION

0 a LLL

THIS ISSUE OF EDU FEATURES ELEMENTARY EDUCATION

SPEAK OUT (Contributions, Opinion and Letters to the Editor) 4 @ OPINION: THE CHILD AND THE COMPUTER 6 THE EDU VIEW

... AND MORE...

PRODUCTS AND NEWS

8 INTRODUCING DECAL

e CABRILLO TEST GRADER

9 @ MORE DIGITAL IN THE NEWS 10 © DEPRESS

...AND MORE...

POTPOURRI (Articles, Reports and Activities)

11 ¢© TV TEACHERS

13 @ WHAT IS TIMESHARING?

14 @ WHAT’S A NICE MINI LIKE YOU DOING IN A PLACE LIKE THIS?

USERS IN CONFERENCE

CHILDREN LEARN COMPUTER SKILLS

20 ® MEETINGS OF INTEREST

... AND MORE...

= ae 4 © O1 e @

APPLICATION STORIES

21 © COMPUTERS ARE FOR KIDS

COMPUTER ON THE GO

THE CHILDREN’S MUSEUM

HOW TO RUN AN IN-HOUSE COMPUTER WITH AMATEURS

...AND MORE...

NO & e 8@ @

SOURCE MATERIAL FOR EDUCATORS

99 @ FREE AND LOW-COST ITEMS 30 © 101 BASIC COMPUTER GAMES 31 © MULTI-MEDIA FOR GRADE SCHOOLS 32 @ BOOK REVIEWS 33 © FOR THE VERY YOUNG ... AND MORE...

IDEAS AT WORK 34 @ WHAT’S IN A NAME?

35 © CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING

36 @ ACTIVITIES FOR CHILDREN

38 © THE IDEA BOX

39 e GAMES COMPUTER BUMS PLAY

40 © PROGRAM OF THE MONTH: REVERSE

... AND MORE...

PUBLISHER’S STATEMENT

EDU—lIssue #10: Winter 1973

Editors of this Issue: Sally R. Bower, DIGITAL Robert H. Meese, DIGITAL Dr. Sam Spero, Cuyahoga Community College, Cleveland, Ohio

EDU is published four times per school year by the Education Products Group, Digital Equipment Corporation, Maynard, Mass. 01754.

Circulation: 15,000

Subscription Rates: $2.00 per year (Individual) $15.00 per year (Group)

EDU welcomes contributions from its readers. Send to:

Editor, EDU, at the above address.

CREDITS—ART AND PHOTO

COVER: The young artists who contributed to the cover design for this issue of EDU are:

Suzanne Carol Peters—Age 4 (daughter of Alice D. Peters, Administrative Software Applications Manager, Education Products Group, DIGITAL)

Detta June Ahl—Age 5 (daughter of David H. Anhl, Secondary School Marketing Manager, Education Products Group, DIGITAL)

SUZANNE

Pera

ART: Bob Barner, 57 Temple Place, Boston, MA. Sally R. Bower, DIGITAL

PHOTO: The Children’s Museum DIGITAL Equipment Corp. Whitworth College, Spokane, Washington

OANA Waa Se 2 MEO 7. TA AN

DPD TAM, THAI Tr Cc XN

Fn en ee ee ee ee ee oe

7 (Contributions, Opini SPEAK OUT (ariznento ne taton

=

CONTRIBUTIONS

We know how hard it is to take the time to send your contributions to EDU. Especially now, when you’re busy preparing courses for this term or school year! But EDU needs input from its readership ...Do EDU and your fellow educators a favor. Make a resolution to write at least one letter to EDU this year... Okay?

Talk about anything ... your installation, your computer instructional programs or your ideas ... for all levels of instruction from grade school to college and university. Typed or hand-written materials will be accepted—send us edited or unedited material. And

if you need some ideas, look at our back issues of

EDU, or write something for the following categories:

SPEAK OUT (Contributions, Opinion and Letters to the Editor).

PRODUCTS AND NEWS (Book reviews, classroom aids, other people’s products, anything new for classroom computing). | APPLICATION BRIEFS (Stories about your installation, applications at any level).

SOURCE MATERIAL FOR EDUCATORS (Books, papers, articles, ideas and materials).

CONFERENCES AND REPORTS (Meetings of interest, articles, reports and stories [original or borrowed!]). IDEAS AT WORK (Classroom ideas, hints for teaching).

Send your letter, article and/or materials to EDU, Editor, Education Products Group, 5-5.

CLASSI FI EDS And thanks.

READERS: This is your section. We’ll run your ad here FREE if you’re a school or non-profit organization. Got some older equipment you'd like to sell, a useful software package, or some other service? We'll also run want ads—looking for hardware, software, part-time labor, etc.?

Do you want the convenience of additional software without the extra cost of a programmer? | am considering a computing service for schools and individuals who need additional software or who need access to a computer. | propose a mail-in or terminal service for program develop- ment and usage. CPU’s will be a PDP-8/E

initially and if demand is great enough a PDP-11/45 will be added to handle telecom- a, munications and PDP-11 assembler programs. For more information write:

Clifford Bailey

Box 311

Bixby, Okla. 74008

OPINION: THE CHILD AND THE COMPUTER

“The Child and The Computer’ was taken from a series of talks by Dean Brown, Stanford Research Institute, and Mohammed A. El-Ghannam of Ain Shams Univer- sity, Cairo. These lectures were presented in October, 1971, at the Second Specialized Course on New Tech- nologies in Education, Beirut, Lebanon.

Learning begins with experience, with seeing, touching, Q hearing, smelling, and manipulating. Sensual percep- tions, repeated in a somewhat orderly fashion, create

organized structures of association within the memory.

VJ

y

Kh

With sufficient repetition, recognition of patterns emerges. When the patterns are established, they can be verbalized, communicated, abstracted, and ex- tended to predict new experiences or to give broader interpretation to old experiences.

Thus the child must experience to learn. The computer serves as a laboratory in which such experiences can occur. The computer presents a picture. The child touches the screen. The picture responds according to preprogrammed instructions. The child touches it again. Again the picture changes. Material from virtu- ally every subject can be presented in this mode. At some later time, when the interaction between the child and the machine has run its course, the teacher (or other children) will verbalize the experience. At this point the correct terminology can be applied. However, itis the experience in a free, undirected context in which the perceptual structures are first established. The com- puter is particularly valuable for this purpose because the child feels free to explore—free from penalty in case of error. In fact, it is precisely through experi- encing different alternatives that the child gains a broad understanding of the subject.

This leads to the fundamental axiom of computer teaching. The machine should never be used for testing or scoring, or for keeping records of the child’s activ- ities. If the machine once assumes a judgmental pos- ture, the child’s faith will be destroyed. After several betrayals of intimacy, the machine will never again be completely the child’s friend. The child’s modes will change irreversibly from curiosity to timidity. His ob- jective will change from actively exploring to merely making a good mark. He will fall back into that worst of pedagogical syndromes: ‘“‘guess what the teacher wants.” As a matter of fact, some children succeed rather well in guessing what the teacher wants and become A students. This has little to do with education.

It is better to administer tests by conventional proce- | dures than by using the machine and thereby risking the fragile psychological ambience so carefully estab- lished for the child. In fact, testing seems to be one area in which the machine has little of substance to contribute.

At its best, the computer is at the disposal of the teacher, turned on and used throughout the day. Topics may tange from drill to simulation, through game play- ing and on to composition and art. Other activities should be going on in parallel. Children group and re- group themselves around several foci of attention— reading books, painting, working with television and other media, listening to stories from the teacher, building things, and watching films. The teacher manip- ulates the ambience continually, making certain that every child receives the attention and the experiences he needs.

Experiments with various classroom arrangements have shown that the addition of teaching devices al- lows much larger groups to be taught more efficiently with fewer teachers. Classes of 100 or more children are managed easily by one master teacher and several young student teachers or teacher’s aides. The children group themselves naturally around different foci of attention—the books, painting tables, music area, com- puter terminals, and video displays. The groups range in size from three to eight, and are continually forming and reforming according to the interests of each child. The paraprofessionals are compensated for their lack of formal command of various subjects by the material covered by the video and computer programs. They exercise the human functions of teaching while the machines take responsibility for the content.

—_ OPINION: ESTABLISH AN “EVALUATION CENTER”

by Dr. Olcott Gardner

The article in the January 1973 issue of EduHelp entitled ‘“The Basic Problems?” cited lethargy on

the part of teachers and administrators to use com- puters as the main stumbling block in the path of computer entrance into education. The statement, “It seems generally true that the computer is either “in” the math... or the science department. . . and very seldom used considerably by both” is a key to the problem. When equipment becomes resident in a single department, the envelope of proprietorship seems to engulf it to the extent that not only is use restricted to that department but often to only a few within the department. Since this characteristic is hereditary in education, the only solution is surgery— move the computer to an extradeparimental residence!

The second obstacle lies in the computer’s use being restricted to a calculating tool for science and math or teaching computer technology and programming. If full utilization of the computer in education is achieved, these applications become secondary to its educational support technology role. Since the computer will be used more for pupil and program evaluation services in all disciplines and across all grade levels, it rightfully belongs in a district-wide Evaluation Center that is readily accessible to every- one without first receiving permission for its use from a science or math teacher.

The Evaluation Center established in 1972 in the Jamesville-DeWitt Schoo! District, DeWitt, N. Y. provides services to all teachers for pretest, curriculum embedded and post test monitoring of pupil achievement in all subject areas from kinder- garten through the 12th grade. Project SPPED (System for Pupil and Program Evaluation and

4

Development), supported by the Bureau of School and Cultural Research of the New York State Education Department, provides schools wishing to establish an Evaluation Center with banks of objectives and items in math, science, reading, language arts and social studies. Mark-sense card input allows immediate batch entry of data. In less than 6/10 second per pupil, individual pupil per- formance is monitored on as many as 40 objectives providing individual and group profile matrices in addition to item analysis with percent mastery and raw data output. Monitoring needs in the “affective domain” are met primarily by semantic differential analysis. |

Teachers also utilize the output data to partition

pupils into specific instructional activities. Educational strategy decisions for team teaching are made from the monitoring data. Flexible modular scheduling to implement the teaching strategies is then provided

by the computer. All pupils in a school district could be rescheduled to meet their instructional needs as often as necessary.

Once an Evaluation Center such as this is in operation, teachers and administrators soon perceive the powerful role of the computer in education and the applications proliferate rather than decline. In addition, the pupils who are operating the hardware are gaining exciting real-life experiences rather than expending all their efforts in computer-bum “games” and sliderule-type programming for math and science homework. About the author: Dr. Gardner is the Director of Research for The Jamesville-DeWitt Central School System in DeWitt, New York. He is active in the

development of computer instructional monitoring systems for the PDP-12 and PDP-8/E computers.

—> The teacher, in using the machine, should be guided

by the following general principles:

(1) Never use the computer when some other means is better. The computer should not compete with books, films, experiments, discussions, or games —it should augment them, in its own unique way.

(2) Use arich variety of children’s phrases, idioms, and allusions to make the programs more rel- evant to the child’s existing universe.

(3) Do not waste time trying to make the machine interaction human-like. ‘Natural’ dialog can be- come extremely expensive, yet it serves little or no pedagogical purpose. It is dishonest to try to fool the child into thinking the machine is some- thing that it is not—and besides, it can’t be done.

(4) Master the art of “non-sequitur’’ where the ma- chine maintains a meaningful dialog even though it does not recognize the child’s response.

(5) Never cast the machine into a judgmental role. (6) Use humor.

(7) Change the rhythm of the flow between the child and the machine frequently, sometimes abruptly.

(8) Never interrupt a flow when it is going well.

(9) Allow the machine to be wrong occasionally. Cul- tivate the critical facility in the child to use his own judgment regarding his acceptance of what he is told.

(10) Encourage the child to question the machine and otherwise take initiative when he can.

When the children are interacting with the machine, they are in a completely different psychological mode than when they are with the teacher or doing other things. This is a very rich mode for learning: We should make use of it.

CORRESPONDENCE CORNER >

THE EDU VIEW

The readers of EDU have interesting, enlightening and very varying views about all aspects of the newsletter. Compiled from thousands of responses to the © questionnaire in EDU #8, these comments are repre- sentative of the opinions we received. To sample some of the responses, many readers wanted more issues of EDU on a yearly basis; other wish lists included a request for less cartoons, for more cartoons, more feature articles ... more about DIGITAL products,

less about them... two colors, four colors, and three hole punches. Some readers declined comment, because they thought EDU was just right... or

terrific in its existing format.

Here are some of the real words from fellow readers!

“The mag is great. Leave it alone and simply continue as is. The students read this one ahead of all others.” C. L. Sackett Pasadena High School Pasadena, Cal.

“| like it—one of the few communications | take the trouble to read. Thanks for sending it my way.”’ L. Faurot Northwestern College Saint Paul, Minn.

“I like EDU as it is. It is readable, with a sense of humor. | like what you are doing.” H. G. Liebherr Nicolet High School Milwaukee, Wis.

“| need a home copy of EDU!” Mrs. J. Wyatt Chapel Hill, N.C.

“Just keep up the good work! EDU inspires me to keep at ‘em about computer uses in the classroom.”’ | J. Harpel Burt Junior High School Clarksville, Tenn.

“Put in a centerfold!” T. L. Nitka Broward County Vocational Center Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

“EDU is moving in the right direction. Keep it up!” C. Hamberg Adlai Stevenson High School Prairie View, III.

“lam distressed at the sometimes obvious use of women as ornaments in the pictures of new computers and related equipment. It’s probably safe to say that most of the clerical work related to computers is done by women (e.g., Keypunching). But the illustrations with a woman at every keyboard tend to reinforce the current (although changing) image of women as menials or secretarial workers. This is the only complaint | have about EDU.... EDU represents

one of my links to the “outside world” andisa

source of mental stimulation for me. I’m willing to pay up to $8 ayear....”

K. L. Kunkler

Ortonville, Mich. ks “I’ve been with you since EDU #2. You’ve come a long way, baby!”

J. Wenzel

Albion College

Albion, Mich. “Boost FOCAL a little—it’s a terrific language.”

B. Wagner

Glenbrook South High

School

Glenview, Ill. “Cut out all that fun and games which promotes the idea that a computer is a toy. A computer is a costly tool and should be devoted to doing serious work; any teaching set-up that does not impress that on the student is misdirected.”’

T. K. Tate

Lehigh Community College

schnecksville, Pa. “Looks good; usually a littke something for everybody, according to their interests. ...”

M. E. Likes

Central State University

Edmond, Okla.

oo

“| think that one of the best things about EDU is that

it can be read (and enjoyed!) by students and faculty.” Mr. Vitale Skidmore College Saratoga Springs, N.Y.

> PRODUCTS AND NEWS

NEWEST IN PRINT

Both of these new items-in-print should provide ex- cellent up-to-date information for current (and wishful) users of PDP-11 RSTS sysiems.

Project DELTA Computer Education for Delaware Schools: An application note that describes the use of a PDP-11 RSTS system in a network of Delaware’s secondary schools. Project DELTA’s exciting student- oriented and student-controlled approach to state- wide computer utilization is described; the DELTA educational program library package is fully outlined.

RSTS/E Educational Library: This software bulletin outlines the educational program packages available from DIGITAL. Full descriptions of all items, as well as ordering information, are contained in this handy guide to educational resources.

Both brochures may be obtained directly from Com- munication Services, PK1, DIGITAL.

GUIDANCE AND THE PDP-14

A new series of interactive guidance programs based on “humanistic psychology” has been written for use on PDP-11 RSTS Systems. Written in BASIC-PLUS, these eight programs have been designed for use in guidance and counseling applications for secondary schools, community and junior colleges.

Developed by Dr. Russel N. Cassel of the Department of Education, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, the programs have been made available by a Wisconsin-based system and software firm. The eight programs include:

1) PERSDEV: Personal Development Program. A one-semester course designed as an introduction to vocational and educational planning.

2) HUMRELAT: Human Relations Program. A sequel to PERSDEV, this one-semester course deals with human relations and the ability to get along with people.

3) DEDEV: Decision Development System. A one- semester course designed to develop decision-making competency in conjunction with the study of counsel- ing, school or clinical psychology, and social work.

4) PLUDRUG: Drug Abuse Education. Based on simulations and games, this course is designed to provide information regarding drugs and drug users.

5) REHAB: Rehabilitation Counseling System. De- signed for use by a professional guidance counselor or psychologist, REHAB may be used in individual or group work, It examines a wide variety of personal adjustment problems and counseling solutions.

6) VOCGUYD: Vocational Guidance System. Aids in the exploration and planning of vocational or career choice.

7) EDGUYD: Educational Guidance System. Aids in decision-making for choice of educational direction.

8) DRIVING: Automobile Driving System. DRIVING is intended to supplement the standard automobile training course offered in most high schools. This program uses simulation and gaming to develop com- petencies.

Educators who would like to obtain further information regarding this guidance package may contact: Mr. Leon Todd, Jr., Marketing Manager, Computerized Planning Systems, Inc., 4060 North Oakland Ave., Shorewood, Wisconsin 53211. Mention EDU!

INTRODUCING DECAL 3 DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CAI AUTHOR LANGUAGE ~

The DIGITAL CAI Author Language package combines the latest teaching technology with the advanced hard- ware facilities of a RSTS-11 timesharing system. De- signed to provide an easy means for individualizing instruction, DECAL puts CAI lesson-authoring capability into the hands of educators. Within two or three hours, instructors with no previous computer experience can create lessons for drill and practice, tutorials, and mastery testing.

DECAL consists of eight programs which permit in- structors to create and edit CAI lessons, build student name files, and obtain statistics on student perfor- mance. Within the scope of an individual lesson, an instructor can present textual material, pose questions, anticipate student responses, branch to different areas of a lesson depending on responses, time responses, and provide other guides for the student as he works.

The eight programs which make up the DECAL package are:

CREATE enables an instructor to create a CAI lesson in a simple, interactive fashion.

LEDIT lesson editing program that allows the creation or modification of a lesson.

STUDNT student name file manager that permits creation of a student data base for later lesson and student performance reports.

LREP lesson report program that produces re- ports of student progress through a lesson.

SREP student report program that produces re-

ports on student usage of the CAI system.

COMMAN comment file manager that allows listing and deletion of student comments.

UANS unanticipated answer reporting program that allows listing and deletion of unan- ticipated student responses.

QUIZ lesson administering program; the only : program used by the student.

The DECAL package was developed by DIGITAL after considerable research and examination of existing CAI author languages, as well as consultation with educa- tors across the country. DECAL is currently installed in five test sites whose feedback is expected to influence future developments. Plans are underway to establish a special section of the DECUS Educational Library to facilitate DECAL lesson exchange.

The Author Language is written in BASIC-PLUS for the PDP-11 RSTS system; the package requires either RSTS V4A or RSTS/E software with the Record I/O and PRINT USING features, 8K user area, and ample disk storage. Further hardware requirement details are con- tained in the DECAL System Manager’s Guide.

For a limited time only, the DECAL Package is available to customers for $50. The package includes distribution of software ($35), Instructor’s Guide ($7.50), and a System Manager’s Guide ($7.50). This price is subject to change when development on the package is com- pleted; new pricing will reflect development, support, and maintenance costs. Any registered RSTS user is eligible to purchase DECAL upon completion of the associated software license agreement. To obtain copies of the order and licensing forms, write to: DECAL, Education Products Group, Building 5-5, DIGITAL.

Students in a wide range of educational programs are currently making effective use of DECAL. Among the many possible applications of a CAI Author Language are industrial training, career education, primary and secondary education, and medical education.

a,

MORE DIGITAL IN THE NEWS

SEPTEMBER, 1973 AEDS MONITOR

“An Instructional Mini-Computer Program” by Eddie James, Inter- mediate School District #110, Seattle, Washington. Describes a unique portable-computer pro- gram that is currently in progress in Seattle schools. (See article entitled “Computer On The Go” in this issue.)

SCHOOL MANAGEMENT

“A Lot of Computer for a Little Money” by Alice D. Peters. A unique arrangement with a local business firm aids Idaho Falls School District +91 in the acqui- sition of a PDP-11 RSTS system for instruction and administrative applications. The cover photo of this issue features Lexington High School’s EduSystem 50.

CURRICULUM PRODUCT REVIEW

“Huntington Simulation Mate- rials” by Sally R. Bower. De- scribes the Huntington simulation project, directed by Dr. Ludwig Braun at SUNY/Stonybrook, and outlines the materials that have been published by DIGITAL.

THE MATHEMATICS TEACHER “Supertoys and Computers’”’ deals with Seymour Papert’s project utilizing the Turtle, other “Supertoys” and a PDP-11 RSTS system at the Artificial Intelli- gence Lab at MIT.

OCTOBER, 1973

NOVEMBER, 1973

DECEMBER, 1973

CABRILLO TEST GRADER

The grading of mutiple choice tests has become an easier task for Hal Singer of Cabrillo High School, Lompoc, California. When existing packages failed to suit Hal’s needs, the team of Singer and Singer wrote a new test grader, in PAL Ill. (Hal credits his brother Don, teacher at Forest Grove Union High School, Forest Grove, Oregon, with authorship.)

The Cabrillo test grader is designed to run on any PDP-8 with 4K words of core memory and an optical mark sense card reader. The use of this minimum hardware configuration means that users of EduSystems 15, 25, 30, 45 and 50 qualify to run the package.

FUN FOR PHOTO LOVERS

Here’s the chance that all you camera buffs have been waiting for! An invitation to capture your school, your classmates and your EduSystem on film.

We’re looking for candid black and white action- packed photos for publication in EDU, in brochures and magazine advertisements. Imagine your computer center featured in bill board size at the spring educa- tional conferences! The five most creative entries will receive credit and acclaim in a future issue of EDU

... 80 Start snapping ... photo fun is for everyone.

Forward 8 x 10 glossy photos (if possible) and nega- tives; submission permits DIGITAL to use photos in any way (with credit, of course). Don’t forget to attach information regarding school, people pictured and other facts and figures.

Flash!

The program uses standard EDUTEST test grading cards. It can handle 999 students and a

maximum of a 100-question test for each student. The reporting system produces:

an individual student response analysis for right or wrong answers. This report is optional.

an item analysis of the number of times each ques- tion was missed.

a class list of the number of questions each student answered correctly and his percentage score.

The Cabrillo Test Grader will be available from the DECUS Educational Library in December.

DEPRESS

DEPRESS is a version of Dartmouth’s IMPRESS, /nter- disciplinary Machine Processing for Research and Education in the Social Sciences. DEPRESS was de- veloped for RSTS-11 by Clark Baker, Edward Baker and Deborah Persoleo of Project DELTA at the Univer- sity of Delaware with the cooperation of Dr. Edmund Meyers and Dartmouth College.

DEPRESS is a selective retrieval and analysis system for large data files in the social sciences. It represents a radical change in social science instruction, making it more inductive. The aim is to allow students to solve empirical research questions on their own rather than memorizing what a book or teacher says. It eliminates the drudgery and trivial housekeeping details of statis- tical work so the user can concentrate on posing and answering questions. The system is designed so the novice can obtain meaningful results on his first trial.

Intended primarily for high school students, DEPRESS is a simplification of IMPRESS. In most respects it resembles IMPRESS very closely. However, DEPRESS permits only simple statistical analyses of a data base (i.e., frequencies, chi-square test and percentages down, across, and on the total), which is adequate for the needs of most students.

DEPRESS contains the data for four studies:

COURT Supreme Court justices study in 1956 including background, politics, social class, and other demographic data.

PRES52 A random sample of the U. S. population

in October-November 1952. Data on the

presidential and congressional elections.

PRES56 A national probability sample of U. S. adults interviewed before and after the 1956 (Eisenhower-Stevenson) presiden- tial election. Detailed data on issues, parties, candidates, as well as standard background items.

PRES68 Random sample of U. S. adult popula- tion in October-November 1968. Data contain a special over-sample of blacks, giving a total of 284 cases in the cate- gory of “non-white.” Many items on the Nixon-Humphrey election and consider- able information on racial attitudes, the Vietnam War, and measures of social

stratification.

Provision is made in the system to create additional data files of local interest.

A description of DEPRESS may be ordered directly from DECUS. The software may be obtained directly from Project DELTA, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware.

PL/1 AND THE PDP-8

CompuMax, Inc. recently announced the availability of mPL/1 (Mini Programming Language One) for the PDP-8 family of computers.

Description:

Mini Programming Language One is a high level, gen- eral purpose programming language developed espe- cially for small computers. The language has been styled after IBM’s PL/1 Language and represents a significant advance in language development for small computers. The language has been designed to permit any programmer, no matter how little or extensive his experience, to use it easily at his own level. Typical mPL/1 application areas include business program- ming, industrial control programming, and student training. mPL/1 runs under the OS/8 Operating System.

The programming system includes the mPL/1 monitor, compiler, assembler, run time library, manual and a sample source program: $595. Optional maintenance subscription is available at $125 per year.

Configuration Requirements:

PDP-8 with 8K of core memory

Terminal (TTY or DECwriter)

DECtape (single drive)

OS/8 System Software

Options: Line printer, card reader, high speed paper tape reader/punch, 24K additional words of memory, 7 additional DECtape drives.

For further information about mPL/1, contact CompuMax Inc., P.O. Box 804, Oswego, Ill. 60543. Mention EDU!

eh.

10

> POTPOURRI (Articles, Reports and Activities)

COMPUTER MATH

The Computer in Mathematics Instruction: The March, 1972 issue of the Journal for Research in Mathematics Education contains a very interesting article by L. L. Hatfield and T. E. Kieren entitled ‘“Computer-Assisted Problem Solving in School Mathematics.” The experimental study examined the following questions:

1. Does the activity of writing, executing, and study- ing the output of computer programs related to problems in the regular mathematics curriculum affect mean student achievement?

2. Is there a differential effect of computer use on students of varying levels of prior mathematics achievement?

3. Are there curricular areas where the use of the computer particularly contributes to or detracts from mathematics achievement?

The study was conducted with respect to students in the seventh and eleventh grades over a two year period. The authors conclude, ‘generally speaking, the results from these related studies lend support to computer programming as a facilitator in certain aspects of mathematics instruction.”

Submitted by Dr. Sam Spero, Editor of

Computer Mediamation; reprinted from

April 1972 issue.

11

TV TEACHERS

Children’s television programs, like The Electric Com- pany and Sesame Street, have brought unique educa- tional tools to the hands of parents and teachers for the past several years. We at EDU recognize the value of this programming effort and offer the following news items and statistics as evidence of technology’s mean- ingful role in education. |

—The U.S. Office of Education granted more than $4 million to the Educational Development Center, Inc. of Newton, Mass., to develop a TV-based mathematics program for minority children from ages 8 to 11. The program will be offered to schools on open broadcast for home viewing. Work will begin in January and continue for two years under the direction of Dr. Jerrold R. Zacharias, director of MIT’s Education Research Center. Sixty-five half-hour shows are planned.

—Teenage tutoring programs were initiated last sum- mer in twenty cities across the country; youths were employed as tutors for pre-schoolers using Sesame Street as a major tool.

—Last spring The Electric Company won its first and Sesame Street its sixth Emmy Award for ‘‘outstanding achievement in children’s programming.”

—Results of an analysis of The Electric Company done by The Educational Testing Service showed that the “orogram had a Clear and significant impact on its primary target audience” (second grade students in lower half of class in standardized reading test scores). The program also impacted first, third and fourth grade students in varying degrees and similarly affected all groups who viewed the show in school. (Two volume report available from ERIC, Document Reproduction Service: TM 002433 and 34)

The computer is rapidly taking the place of the ink blot. Both reveal more about the individual who reacts

to them than they do about themselves. —John R. Coleman

34 nce upon atime, long before they what | say. What is the difference between that and invented the ball point pen (even memorizing right now, without learning to write?” before they invented the pencil), teachers used to teach by lecturing to the students who memorized every word their teacher said. Memorizing “Reading ?”’ was the only way to learn.

“Well, for one thing, the slow students will be able to keep up by reading the notes.”’

‘Another skill they have to acquire.” One day a bright young man came up to his teacher

A a6 9 Mees and said: Notes “Sir, | have invented a pencil.” “That you will prepare.” ‘What is a pencil?’ asked the Teacher. “You mean | have to do more work with your new

method of learning? | like memorizing better. | still see

“It is a device to assist you in teaching and assist no advantage.”

us In learning,” replied the Student.

\,

“What do | do with it? If | eat it will it help me ‘But sir, the advantages will present themselves once memorize better? If my students eat it will it help the system is in operation, because there will be so them memorize better?” many things students and teachers will be able to do

“No,” said the student. “If you use it and we use it that They GGUMEnet GO DETOre:

we won't have to memorize at all.” “You have to prove it to me before | will make any “What kind of teaching would that be, without lecturing radical change like you suggest. Anyhow, haven't we and without memorizing? How will | know if my always Jeathed oy memorizing ¢

students are learning if they don’t memorize and

recite for me?” MORAL: Newton’s 2nd Law that a body at rest stays

: at rest unless acted upon by an outside “That's easy,” replied the student. “You will ask them force is not just a law of physics.

to write what they have learned.” “Write?” queried the Teacher. ‘Oh, that’s something they will have to learn to do

before they can use the pencil.” This article is reprinted from the May, 1972, issue of Computer ; ; Mediamation. /n the words of the newsletter’s editor, Dr. Sam “And how long does learning to write take?” Spero, “Computer Mediamation is an occasional publication of 7 ns the Educational Media Center of Cuyahoga Community College, Perhaps ay Oar. Cleveland, Ohio. Its purpose is to motivate faculty to examine the “Vou mean to say that | will have to wait a whole year potential of computers in instruction. The newsletter explores all the ways that a computer can be used as a medium (“... means, before students can use your new method for agency or instrumentality ...’’) for implementing any or all facets learning? Then they will come to class and write down of the instruction process.”

Computer Applications in Classics

A session on Computer Applications in Classics is scheduled for 1:30 P.M. on December 28, 1973, as part of the meetings of the American ~~ Philological Association from December 28-30, at: the Chase-Park Plaza Hotel in Saint Louis, Missouri. Information can be obtained from James J, Helm, Department of Classics, Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio 44074,

Reprinted from the ACM Sigcue Bulletin, V7, No. 4, October 1973.

12

To timeshare means, quite literally, to share the time of a device among two or more applications, one ata time. Stated another way, to devote the time of a computer system to the execution of. two or more programs on an interleaved basis.

In a timesharing system, each program is assigned a fixed time slice or time quantum with operation being switched from one program to another in round robin fashion until each program is completed. In other words, if each user receives 1/60 of a second and

12 users are ‘‘on” the system, each user will receive service every 1/5 of a second. Since the central pro- cessing unit is considerably faster than any user terminal or peripheral, the user is generally unaware of any sharing of time and has the impression that he is the only one using the computer system.

The timesharing system performs what is sometimes called ‘“‘multi-programming’”’; that is, it allows several programs to reside in core simultaneously and to operate sequentially. The switching between programs is initiated by a clock which interrupts the central processor to signal that a certain time period has elapsed.

RSTS/E, however, has a more sophisticated scheduling mechanism. It doesn’t use the round robin approach

as described above; instead, priority of which job is to run mext is determined by:

a) job size

b) computing requirements

c) input/output requirements

d) time since job ran last

e) the specified priority level of the job (set by System Manager)

User programs can be located in secondary memory (usually magnetic disk) and moved into main memory (core) for execution. Programs entering main memory

_— WHAT IS TIMESHARING?

13

exchange places with a program (or programs) that has just been serviced by the central processor. This operation is called swapping.

In operation, main memory is divided into separate memory blocks. Secondary (disk) memory is con- nected to these blocks through a high speed input/ output processor—a hardware device that allows the disk to swap a program into any one of the main mem- ory blocks without any aid from the central processor (Direct Memory Access or DMA). This structure allows the central processor to be operating on a user pro- gram in one block of memory while programs are being swapped to and from another block. This inde- pendent overlapped operation greatly improves efficiency and processing power.

Round robin scheduling, in which each program operates in sequence and receives a fixed amount of time, is effective only if all programs have similar requirements. Such is generally not the case, however. At any particular time, a timesharing system will be handling some programs which require extensive amounts of computing time (said to be compute bound), other programs that must stop frequently for input or output (said to be I/O bound), and still other programs that are idle (programmer is thinking about next line, for example).

To serve programs at and between these extremes, the scheduling algorithm provides frequent service

to |/O bound programs and gives compute bound jobs longer time quantums to prevent wasteful swapping. A dynamic scheme provides two queues—one for each type of job. When a user first logs on to the system, he is placed in an I/O bound queue (waiting line) where he receives frequent service and small time quantums. If the program isn’t completed or does not request input or output during the time allotted to him, the job needs more computing time and is placed in the com- pute bound queue. The point at which a job enters these queues is determined by the other scheduling priority elements. Thus, the scheduling algorithm optimizes system efficiency by automatically adjusting to program requirements.

In addition to sharing the time of the central processing unit, using RSTS/E, users can also share the use of

all of the peripherals on the system. This concept is known as “resource sharing.” The user may, from his terminal or program, assign a device for his use, and release the device upon completion of an operation. Certain devices are “‘public’’ such as the system disk, line printer and high-speed paper tape, and do not have to be assigned to a specific user.

Thus, using resource sharing, data may be read in from a card reader and printed out on a high-speed printer. The on-line user can assign devices and even other terminals for input and output functions. Individual users get exclusive use of devices for as long as re- quired and then release them for others to use with the RSTS/E monitor coordinating the I/O requests.

For further information, see RSTS/E Brochure; to ob- tain a copy write to Communication Services,