Teal is Not the Color of MIT’s Introductory Physics Classroom…
        
        
        
        
Thanks to some very dedicated staff and faculty at the Massachusetts Institute 
  of Technology (MIT) last week, I and about 40 other attendees of the National 
  Learning Information Infrastructure (NLII) fall focus workshop on "Learning 
  Space Design for the 21st Century" enjoyed an intimate tour of more than 
  a half a dozen of the newer formal learning spaces at MIT.
As my colleague Steve Ehrmann of the TLT Group, who presented to the group 
  said, first of one space and then of others: "I attended lectures in this 
  room 30 years ago and it was nothing like this." Steve, an alumnus of MIT, 
  kept up the refrain throughout the evening. According to Steve, everything looks 
  the same on the outside (except the Stata Center, see below), but the insides 
  of the classrooms have been transformed. I was impressed. Can I please go back 
  to school?
At MIT, like on many modern campuses, the architectural and landscape heritage 
  is mostly preserved--which sustains the campus brand, image, and feel. Yet the 
  core mission of the campus--the learning and research that g'es on--is supported 
  to the utmost by appropriately-designed interior learning spaces enhanced with 
  current technologies.
There is a little bit of exterior change, though. The juxtaposition of old 
  and new was nowhere more striking than during our stroll down the street past 
  the industrial-age architecture of the Wright Brothers' Wind Tunnel
  and then into the courtyard in front of what is currently the boldest of new 
  campus buildings, the playful Stata Center [image above]. I could imagine that some 
  wild nanotechnology bugs had gotten loose from a lab and was causing campus 
  buildings to mutate into a strange titanium, brick, and red and yellow enamel 
  landscape of non-intuitive shapes. Here's 
  a link to a multimedia tour of the Stata Center.
We visited a set of language learning labs and classrooms, the redesigned "aero-astro" 
  department (planned from vision to implementation by the nation's "chief 
  rocket scientist"), a completely adaptable large classroom inside the Stata 
  Center, and several other formal learning spaces. The dedication of the MIT 
  staff and faculty showed by taking us on this tour, which took place after regular 
  working hours, was even more impressive than you might think because this was 
  at the end of the first day of classes of the academic year.
Of all the interior spaces we saw, I found the classroom for the introductory 
  physics class, the 
  TEAL classroom, of the TEAL 
  (Technology Enabled Active Learning) Project to be the most interesting. 
  During the semester, the room services 500 students in introductory physics, 
  never in a group larger than about 100 students at a time. Remember your introductory 
  physics lectures? You probably sat in rigid rows, too close to other students 
  for comfort, all facing forward to the sage on the stage who was writing on 
  endless blackboards with chalk. There'll be no more of that in physics at MIT 
  for freshmen. Instead, there is the most humane classroom I've ever seen.
This modern MIT studio-style classroom, which is the physical manifestation 
  of a larger project that completely redesigned the curriculum, is definitely 
  not a lecture hall. Within its 3,000 square feet nine students sit at each 7-foot 
  round table. Each group of three students share a networked laptop computer 
  and below the table, each student can reach into an alcove and grab a handheld 
  remote device to answer questions from the instructor. 
A state-of-the-art instructor's workstation is in the center of the room, but 
  the physics faculty spend most of their time walking throughout the space utilizing 
  wireless microphones. It seems like every square inch of wall space is covered 
  with video screens and whiteboard--one whiteboard specifically dedicated to 
  each of the students' tables. Ceiling-mounted video cameras are pointed at the 
  whiteboards, and the images from any one of the cameras can be projected onto 
  each of the whiteboards at the instructor's command--so student work can be 
  shared throughout the large space.
A class session g'es like this: The instructor might speak to the entire class 
  for maybe 10 minutes or so, using the workstation to project video or images 
  from a digital slideshow or even that old workhorse, the overhead projector. 
  Then he poses a question to the class and gives an option of, say, five possible 
  multiple-choice answers. The students reach under the table and each pulls out 
  a mobile response device and "votes" for the answer of their choice. 
  The instructor then displays a bar chart of the responses, which usually shows, 
  the first time around, a wide range of choices made by the students.
Then, rather than indicating which answer is right, the instructor encourages 
  group discussion during which students explain--perhaps sharing equations or 
  comments on their table's whiteboard, which is displayed as needed onto all 
  the whiteboard using the overhead videocams, why they think one or the other 
  of the answers is correct. After the discussion, the students "vote" 
  again. The process is repeated as necessary and students end up learning from 
  the "lecture," the discussions, and from their own thinking as they 
  watch the bar graph results change until eventually most or all of the class 
  is voting for the correct answer.
This classroom didn't come cheap, though. The design and renovation of the 
  3,000 square feet plus the purchase and installation of the technology in it 
  cost about one million dollars. The coolest thing about it for MIT is, though, 
  that overall the curriculum design is saving the department money over time. 
  They've never used teaching assistants, always staffing the introductory course 
  with faculty members instead, so by eliminating large lectures mixed with smaller 
  discussion and working sessions, they've significantly reduced the number of 
  faculty bodies it takes to teach the class.
This new classroom/curriculum gets results. The faculty can statistically demonstrate 
  that a much higher percentage of students reach benchmarked understanding levels 
  much more quickly than they had previously done with the old curriculum, using 
  older technology and a classic lecture hall. The beauty of the TEAL Project 
  is that the space and the technology in it are well-designed, through good planning, 
  to serve the collaborative, interactive learning process that the physics curriculum 
  was rearranged to create. Shouldn't it always be so?