Wired vs. Wireless

Traditionally, the technology required to permit mobility of the learning environment was not available in the Ethernet LAN days, and reconfiguring aging schools with Ethernet cable can be a costly and sometimes complex task. The cost of renovating and updating electrical, HVAC and sometimes removal or asbestos has often been cost prohibitive. With the advances that have been made in wireless technology over the past decade, wireless has become an easier and less cumbersome set-up in the classroom and provides outstanding mobility that enhances an interactive learning model.

The two main advantages of using wired connections over wirelessare speed and capacity. The speeds of wired connections range from 100 to1000Mbps (100 times faster than wireless). Since each machine hasits own connection, bandwidth is not shared, so that the connectionremains fast regardless of the number of users. Wired connections arealso extremely reliable, and provide the capacity needed when users are using multimedia tools with files that are more than 15 MB (too large for basic wireless networks to handle).

The biggest disadvantage to using wired networks is that it is not a mobile system because users are confined to areas where there is access to wired jacks. Ethernet cables will run up to 100 meters before they need to be boosted; however, the longer the cable, the more signal loss occurs. There are some newer cables that will prevent this from happening, but they are fairly expensive. Cables can also be affected by moisture or magnets, but again, there are new cables that are better shielded from interference and physical deterioration. However, these cables must run either between computers or from each computer to a central device. As a result, the installation is often costly, time consuming, and difficult if the cables must be run under the floors orthrough the walls. Some new office buildings have pre-wired CAT5 cables,but schools, unless they are extremely new, generally do not.

Wireless LAN networks give the classroom a feature common to many businesses in which the students’ wireless devices communicate with a central wired node on the LAN. This practical approach is in contrast to the peer-to-peer mode. The client-server structure, rather than equal peer-to-peer nodes that simultaneously function as both clients and servers to other nodes in the wireless network, is better suited to classroom applications. Centralized access to the Internet, local printers or other wired services through infrastructure mode wireless LAN connections to an access point is the most appropriate classroom set-up for signal strength, security, and network management. When the wireless client/student initiates the download/upload and the wired LAN server reacts to and satisfies these requests, and file transfers can be managed by the teacher and school administration.

Wireless routers for this set-up have dropped in price considerably over recent years and their reliability has improved greatly. Also, peer to peer systems do not permit quick and easy reconfigurations of multiple independent users, and security would be a nightmare if each device needed to be configured separately with any reconfiguration made to the classroom (e.g. if a new mode were added). Broadband routes for wireless service offer firewall capability built into the device and are configurable through its own software. Maintenance and upgrades are less expensive in the long run, and connection sharing software packages (ICS) are available with a nominal fee or free.

Wireless LANs protect their data through the Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP) encryption standards that now make wireless communication at least as safe as any wired ones. This encryption is generally effective at preventing security breaches (eg. radio wave snoopers and data miners) that are always of concern in a school environment. Firmware updates to WEP are constantly under review, and concerned school administrators can implement additional security measures by connecting user students through the Virtual Private Network (VPN).



Interference

The wireless LAN access point must be centrally located where radio signals can reach it with minimal interference. Too many classroom walls can greatly reduce the wireless range. Also, careful non-overlapping channel selection is essential to avoid interference between nearby wireless access points in a large school.

Interference can be an issue with devices sharing the same radio waves or other nearby wireless networks. Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS) senses existing broadcasting on the spectrum and automatically avoids it, while Transmit Power Control (TPC) adjusts the signal power depending on proximity of devices and essentially prevents them from shouting at each other. DPS and TPC are now mandatory for equipment in North America.

Performance

As more school wireless devices utilize the WLAN, performance degrades even further. Typically, the wireless network will support a limited number of hosts due to bandwidth limitations, but greater classroom mobility of wireless LANs can help offset these performance disadvantages and technology aimed at increasing bandwidth is being improved rapidly.

Video streaming can pose a problem when bit streams peak at 8Mbps, and can be too much for the wireless broadband. Furthermore, additional student users accessing the network will share the available bandwidth and reduce their personal allotment, which can potentially affect such actions as streaming media.

Cross compatibility of wireless nodes can also be an issue. Therefore, when considering school expansion, the interoperability between access points from different manufacturers must be considered.

http://compnetworking.about.com/sc/homenetworking.com
http://www.vnunet.com/
http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/
http://ibiblio.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/peer-to-peer

Classroom Diagram

Equipment and Other Considerations

Equipment Required (based on 40 students per class)


40 Lap top computers (1:1 ratio)
Wireless Network
PDAs (1:4 ratio)
1 Portable Data/Video Projector
4 Mounted Data/ Video Projectors
2 Wall Mounted Data/Video Displays
4 Electronic Whiteboards
1 VCR/DVD Combo
1 Document Camera
1 Microphone - Wireless
40 headsets w/mics
Hearing Impaired System
Podium/Teaching Station with automated control panel for all audio/video/environmental control systems
1 Video Camera
4 Digital Cameras (1:10 ratio)
1Audio Cassette Recorder
Video Conferencing capability
Portable TV Monitor
Ceiling Mounted Speakers
2 Laser Printers
1 Scanner


Other considerations

Network

· Wireless
· Desktop videoconferencing capabilities

Room size and configuration:

· Recommendation minimum of 21 sq. feet per user at a personal mobile work station
· Minimum 850 - 1000 square foot classroom for 40 students
· Raised deck or loft area built around the perimeter of the room for conferencing and group work


Acoustics design

· Room should be designed and equipped with acoustic tiles or architectural modifications to ensure room is not “lively.”
· Echo and noise transference should be minimized.
· HVAC noise must be minimized.


AC Power and data connections

· Extra power outlets and capacity - raceways
· Electrical power outlets and data ports should be plentiful and located throughout the room
· audio/visual input and output ports located throughout the room for ease of connection of any portable device within the classroom


Lighting
· Zones/dimmable lighting to allow parts of the room to be dimmed while others remain lit.
· Black out shades on any windows to enhance projection quality


Furnishings

· Computer tables 48" wide for one person preferred (42" min.) with built in power supply
· Furniture in the classroom should be light weight and on wheels so that it can be reconfigured to accommodate a variety of delivery methods (teacher centered, individual, small group or stations).
· Conference tables large enough to accommodate up to six students at a time (also with build in power supply).
· Swivel chairs on wheels to accommodate different vantage points for students
· Adequate shelving and cupboard space for workspace and storage
· A mobile cart equipped with projector and speakers can be used to load up laptops and transport the lab to any location in the school environment.

Choosing A Design for the Technology Rich Classroom

The technological advancements that have been made over the past 25 years have changed the way the human race works, plays, and thinks. The future of mankind has been inexorably changed by our ability to communicate globally 24 hours a day. Never before has the human race had the capability of sharing ideas, opinions and knowledge with the ease that has come to pass in our lifetimes. The students sitting in our classrooms today have grown up with this technology; it is not new or magical to them, but rather, it is and always has been the way the world works. On average, 13- to 18-years-olds spend more than six hours a day using digital media, and contribute more than $175 billion annually to the retail economy in the US (http://images.apple.com/education/k12/onetoone/pdf/1_to_1_white_paper.pdf).

Obviously, students whose daily lives are consumed significantly by technology based activities (texting, downloading music and videos, emailing, surfing the internet, collecting images on cell phones, gaming, etc. are not likely to be engaged by old school delivery methods in the classroom, so a transformation of the classroom is critical, and progressive schools and educators are keen to move quickly toward paralleling the classroom experience with that of everyday life. If more than six hours of our students’ waking hours are spent using digital media outside of the classroom and that has become a primary communication tool for them in their daily lives, it makes sense that the classroom should mirror real life.

Even a cursory read of the most recent literature on technology in education or a peruse through the many technology initiatives currently underway in many school districts around the world, indicates, without question, that the direction of technology rich classroom design is moving quickly toward the 1:1 computing model. The flexibility and mobility of the “laptop school” changes everything about how, when and where students learn and teachers teach, but providing each student with his or her own computer is not all there is to it. In addition to the technology, teachers must be trained to make best use of this technology and be prepared to explore new teaching theories and methods that compliment the use of the latest gear.

In institutions where this transformation has already taken place and with success, the improvements reported in teaching and learning are impressive. In addition to advancing equitable access to technology for all students and thereby narrowing the digital divide, 1: 1 schools are reporting improvement in attendance, behaviour, and the development of observable, measurable, higher order thinking skills in their students. For academic outcome, they are reporting higher overall GPAs and significantly higher grades for English language arts and mathematics.


1: 1 learning environments reporting these kinds of successes are focused on problem-based learning and/or authentic learning.....


A state leader in technology integration, Cascade High School in rural Idaho, uses its 1 to 1 learning environment to engage high school students in authentic projects, connect with field experts, and even influence public policy. Students in advanced biology have designed wetlands, engineered solutions to save struggling trout populations, and even convinced local ranchers to change how they use land. Their technology breaks the barrier of place and time, enabling them to do authentic, stimulating work in their academic studies, while living in a remote rural area (http://www.nwrel.org/nwedu/winter_00/5c.html).



Similar initiatives in Canada have produced similar gains for students and school districts.....


The School District #60 in Peace River North in Alberta focused its 1to 1 learning in the area of writing, citing significant gains in the number of students that reached the top two levels of writing achievement. Overall, student writing assessments showed the greatest improvement in form (i.e., organization). Prior to the laptop program, girls significantly outperformed boys on the district writing assessment. Two years into the project, that gap had disappeared, with the percentage of boys and girls meeting standards at 89 percent and 88 percent, respectively. The district also attributes the 1 to 1 learning program for narrowing the gap between Aboriginal students and the general student population (Jeroski, S. (2005). Research Report: The Wireless Writing Program 2004–2005).

David Vandergugen, principal of technology services for Peace River North, commented, “In our first year of district-wide implementation, we saw student scores improve dramatically with 92 percent of our students meeting provincial education standards for writing, compared with a pretest score of 70 percent.”


After reviewing the research and based on our own classroom experiences, our group decided to adopt the 1 to 1 model for our target institute. The many possible applications of the technology available and the multitude of positive outcomes reported in cognitive, behavioural and social domains, make the choice very easy indeed. However, within the 1 to 1 model, there are different options to choose from.


The 1 to 1 model may mean that laptops are available to all students 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. This is the most desirable option, but some schools have opted to limit laptop availability to classrooms during school hours. In these institutions, laptops can be signed out by students during the school day or are available in the classroom from mobile carts only during the school day. The 24 hour a day model is preferred because, with this model, teachers can enrich classroom learning by assigning engaging homework assignments, students can continue work on their projects outside of class time, teachers and students can take advantage of on-going communication after school hours, and parents and extended family can more actively participate in the education of their children/grandchildren through access at home to email, teacher web pages, blogs, etc.

With the adoption of the 1 to 1 -24 hours per day design, the expectations are that student achievement will improve, the digital divide will disappear, teaching methods will advance and more effectively meet the needs of today’s learners, students’ learning experiences will become more relevant and personal, communication between students, parents, teachers and administrators will improve and an ongoing discourse will be established between these parties that will contribute to both the academic and personal success of each individual learner.

Evaluating the success of such programs will necessitate a revision of common assessment and evaluation protocols. Obviously, certain aspects of student learning (e.g. reading comprehension, numeracy and writing skills) can be assessed using more traditional methods. Test scores, GPAs, and results from standardized tests can measure outcomes on the objectives associated with academic achievement. The difficulties arise when faced with task of measuring the myriad of cognitive, behavioural, and social outcomes observed as a result of the integration of technology across the curriculum, and now, into the after school life of the student. There are many intangibles that need to be considered but are much more difficult to measure and link directly to a causal element. For example, increased attendance, improved attitude toward school and learning, teacher confidence, student confidence, student and parental satisfaction are all important outcomes, but new and effective ways of measuring these more mercurial benefits will have to be developed and linked directly to the use of technology and appropriate teaching methodologies that compliment the technology.


Physical Layout and Design Principals for the Technology Rich Classroom


In our classroom design, the traditional blackboard would be replaced by four interactive white boards and two wall mounted date/video projection screens. In this technology-rich classroom, students and teachers can send information to any one of the four whiteboards located around the room directly from their laptops. The opportunities for expanding and enriching the classroom learning experience are best described in the following example:


The teacher can simultaneously conduct a science experiment with his/her students using a digital document camera that projects to a large screen while displaying a Web-based animation depicting a related scientific process on another screen. In addition, using another screen, an Internet2 connection and some wireless microphones, students can videoconference with an expert on the scientific topic they are studying. Finally, the teacher works along with the students using a spreadsheet to crunch data from the experiment on an electronic whiteboard while the students are doing the same on their wireless Internet connected palm pilots or laptops. Of course all of this is being recorded to a DVD or to the Web so that students may take a second look later on that evening while doing their homework or studying for the next day’s test (http://www.techlearning.com/shared/printableArticle.php?articleID=196604071) .