The resulting changes have far exceeded our expectations, as exemplified in the "Professionalism in Computing" course described here.

Incorporating resources into meaningful learning experiences and developing active learning scenarios by which students can be involved in their learning opportunities is a process that has not been a part of the training of most computer science professors. The newcomer’s major expectation is that given knowledge of the topic, their transformation to teacher from learner is straightforward. Consequently in providing a topical resource today there is a distinct need to go beyond the provision of a knowledge base for information identification and coalescence, so as to provide an appropriate means for the disseminating that information. The system must be able to support the "traditional" lecture class, though distance learning presentations, to self-learning situations.

Starting in Fall 1994, a digital library in support of a junior-level major's course entitled "Professionalism in Computing" was developed and used as the vehicle for a number of experiments in the use of the Web for course support. This development continued throughout the term of the NSF project, eventually resulting in a collection of over 3000 Web pages. The collection is organized into a number of directories and into two major sections corresponding to topics of general interest and those specific to Virginia Tech. From the beginning, the applicability of the resource to a variety of environments was of paramount importance. The NSF project involved three institutions who expected to benefit from the results, and it was realized that it would not always be the same faculty member at each institution who would have the responsibility of managing the course. Moreover it was recognized that the number of topics to be covered in class could only be a subset of the topics available. A more complete coverage of the topic then required that not only could the course manager select those subjects that are to be used in face-to-face encounters, but those same resources could be used as the crux of (say) take-home assignments or on-line discussions.

From the beginning it was expected that these materials would be used by different faculty at Virginia Tech who would put their own "twist" on the course. No matter how good the textbook, how extensive the resources, how detailed the notes, every faculty member has their own way of presenting materials, adding their own imprimatur and incorporating their own experiences. It was important therefore to modularize the digital library so as to allow each teacher to organize the materials according to their own desires. However, it was realized as the library developed that in moving from a lecture presentation mode of learning to a self-paced, Web-based learning environment, the peculiar influence of the librarian/Webmaster diminishes and the needs of the learner could be fulfilled better with a less structured strategy. This approach also has the advantage that, by eliminating a fixed structure, the contents can be readily updated as new problems arise, new laws are promulgated, precedents are established in court cases, or international diversity is recognized. On the other hand within each module there is structure in the form of a sample class outline, a set of class notes, a bibliography, and a collection of in-class projects.

Each module is currently organized to include seven major files composing the nub of a learning experience:

In support of this distribution, the University of New Hampshire Center for Academic Resources advises students: "Active learning means taking responsibility for your learning and developing habits of mind and study strategies that will be

the means for accomplishing your academic goals. Responsibility is the toughest part: know that college expects that you will take charge of your learning -- that you will go to class, do assignments, and embrace confusion and "wrong answers" as opportunities to try again...If it hasn't occurred to you yet, know that from here on in you are THE responsible agent for your learning and life."

To the faculty member the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation suggests that active learning is a methodology that:

The challenge then is to overcome the propensity to easily adapt the web to be a simpler purveyor of reading materials and to develop an interactive learning environment.

These steps can readily be divided into pre-, in-, and post-class activities, or assigned to individual explorations, group collaborative efforts, or whole-class undertakings. There is no restriction on whether the work is done synchronously (in-class for example) or asynchronously (pre- and post-class, or as a take-home assignment). It has been our common approach to assign steps 1 and 2 (discovery and identification) as a pre-class, individual activity. The identification of tools and resources is perhaps best done outside the classroom, though in a laboratory setting it is possible to undertake "scavenger-hunts" on the Web to locate resources and solutions. Step 3, looking at the alternatives, lends itself easily to a (possibly in-class or pre-class) group activity. Implementation and reflection are excellent topics for an in-class discussion, though the reflection element can be extended into a post-class assignment for individual thought and cogitation.

One of the simplest tools that we have found to be extremely useful is a on-line count-down clock! Within a class when students are working on individual or group projects it is essential that they have some guide to the time that is left for their work. To manage the in-class activities to conform to the allotted requires careful timing and adherence to a schedule. Keeping activities on time and restricting activities to a set time span can be used as a management tool to get to the point and to ensure that decisions are made. Later reflection will confirm (in our experience) that given the resources available an appropriate decision was made even under time pressures. Obviously it is the responsibility of the manager to ensure that there is sufficient time. The movement of portions of a project to pre- and post-class activities effectively extends the in-class project time allowance. Written in Javascript it can be easily ported to any course Web-site:

There are two major elements of the course where it is essential that participants develop "community standards". The first of these is associated with peer-evaluations that take place as part of the oral-communications segment of the course. Through a time-restricted decision-making exercise, the class decides on the criteria for evaluation of their fellow students in individual presentations. Breaking down the categories for evaluation into content, oral-presentation, and supporting-graphics, the class (often in excess of 60) creates a set of mutually agreed metrics for evaluation. The technique of decision-making is simply that used in many large group decision-making projects, starting with having individuals choose three criteria for each category, then working in groups to choose four, through sub-committees of group leaders who select five, and finally representatives of the subcommittees who select the final six criteria. For most students this is the first time that they have ever been placed in the position of having to make large group decisions and are surprised that it can be accomplished in a short time. The same technique is used a second time in the development of community standards for the conduct of the on-line debates. As a part of the class period on Netiquette (with a pre-class activity planned to recognize the problem and the resources for solution) the class decides on the rules of conduct in the forthcoming on-line debates. A similar preparatory exercise is the Behavioral Analysis activity that is used to organize students into groups. In this case students have a pre-class activity to determine their behavioral characteristics through the use of a forty element questionnaire. Classified into one of four categories (controller, analyzer, promoter, or supporter), clusters of like temperament explore their likes and dislikes in preparation for a presentation that will eventually lead into a broader discussion of interpersonal relationships in group settings. From the results of the pre-class analysis the instructor attempts to establish groups that will work together effectively for the remainder of the course.

The pre-class discovery is also a lead-in to the class on "Rules We Live By" where students explore the driving forces in their life and ballot on the "values" that influence their decision making. The top five choices for the past several semesters are shown in table 1.

Once developed prior to class, this survey makes an excellent tool for an in-class discussion of the differences between laws and ethics, and between codes of conduct and community values. This mechanism can also be used as a course or module pre-test for assessment purposes in other topics.

Ask almost any student on the first day of a term what he/she considers to be the primary concern of a course in computer ethics and the most likely response will be "hacking". This topic is a prime candidate for an active-learning exercise. Using two readily accessible articles on hacking to be read in advance of the class, the class activity centers around exploring the answers to twelve questions that the students have explored by their groups for ten minutes: See Table 2.

A succeeding class can then concentrate on security as a tool for systems administrators and complete the strategies, implementation, and reflection elements of the activity.

Table 1: Driving Values

Table 2.

Freedom of Speech is a topic that has many scenarios that can lead to active-learning projects. The sample project is based on the George Orwell book "1984" and the US Constitution, supplemented by visits by the participants to "cyberhate" sites intending to explore the gray area between offensive and tolerated speech. Using pairs of key words groups are led through comparisons between narrowing extremes of concepts - love and hate, attitude versus action, and finally the differences between acceptance and tolerance. Typical of the activities is the suggestions in Table 3, followed by the following questions that will provoke further discussion shown in Table 4.

Using examples from the Hate Directory it is possible to study the differences between these terms and how they are applicable to the question of freedom of speech on the Web. Discussion can evolve around the statement:

ideas have consequences

and the question "at what point is it necessary or appropriate in a democratic society (the antithesis of Oceana in '1984') to take action to limit free speech?" The recent Oregon court case that awarded damages to a group of abortion doctors against a Web-site that named them and appeared to promote hostile actions against them is a noteworthy case for discussion in this context.

As noted above, the primary impetus for the inclusion of active learning activities within the site came from the NSF sponsored workshop at the University of South Florida. A major portion of that workshop was spent in the development of projects that could be used in Computer Science courses. The work on developing activities has continued and in particular has been incorporated into the lesson plans for most topics. The projects.html page of most directories now contains back links to the USF compendium as well as additional local developments.

In general, experience shows that it is essential that students have a pre-class activity prior to a class that will involve active learning so that they are prepared to participate. The task of attempting to not only provide the fundamentals of the subject and motivate participants to be involved in an active-learning experience, followed by a summary and assessment, simply does not fit into a single class period. On the other hand, the pre-class activity imbues a commitment on the part of the students to learn more about the topic and to be more involved in the activity.

Among the goals for the inclusion of two other institutions in the use of the materials was twofold: (1) to evaluate the ability of other faculty and students to assimilate the course library, and (2) to expand the discussion population. On the latter point, it was recognized that the student population at Virginia Tech is primarily white and conservative; Norfolk State University is a traditional black institution in Tidewater Virginia serving an urban community of students with a very different social background from those at Virginia Tech; Heritage College is a unique liberal arts college located where no other four-year college exists. Fifty percent of the college's undergraduate students are either Native American or Hispanic Americans. Eighty-five percent are the first persons in their families to attend college and sixty percent live below the poverty level. Many Heritage students are farm workers and/or single mothers; women make up 70 percent of the undergraduate student body.

Each institution used the course library in a different manner. While Virginia Tech had moved to a Web-based course style using classrooms with Computer Assisted Teaching Systems (CATs), Norfolk State and Heritage used a seminar format in which students studied topics using the Web-based materials (in an order of their own choosing) and then met once a week with a faculty member to discuss their findings. An attempt was made to involve the three groups of (roughly 100) students in joint debates, with the hope that these three disparate populations would come down on different sides of certain issues. Three debate topics were chosen for these joint debates dealing with current issues in computing – a case of the appropriateness of minority representation on the Board of Directors of a major computer corporation (based on actual correspondence between the company’s President and a stockholder, with permission of both parties), cryptography and the clipper chip, and a charge of plagiarism against an unnamed student who copied the format and background of another student in preparing a home page. While the debates were well subscribed, the differences in student backgrounds did not emerge as vividly as expected. This may be partially the result of a more restricted access to terminals at Norfolk State and Heritage than is common at Virginia Tech. It is hoped that through this project, this experiment can be repeated with improved access facilities.

In evaluating their involvement Richard Barnhart of Heritage College reported:

Unsolicited responses were received from other institutions who had used the materials but had not "registered" with us as participants in the experiment. Typical of these (and most interesting) is the comment from the United Arab Emirates:

The retention of student contributions in the library is an integral part of this project. This will help in not only expanding the content but also creates a model for others to emulate in their own research, study and writing.

This paper is a progress report on the road from an almost obsolete technology of 1993 to the learning environment of the 21st century. What we accomplish here will be a model for other university courses, and eventually for classes at other levels. The study of the social impact of the computer and computer ethics should not be limited to post-secondary computer education, but should be available to all users of computers. Through this system perhaps we can find ways to incorporate elements of computer ethics into many courses.

In conclusion, besides the course discussed herein, we have worked on a wide range of objectives around the theme of improving learning by increasing interactivity and by applying digital library concepts, content and systems. As a result, a new infrastructure has emerged, our pedagogy has been transformed, utilization of the courseware we developed has grown rapidly both locally and remotely, and many tools have been constructed. Students learn new topics, often in new ways, and we have continued to progress in developing digital library content, systems, and interfaces.