- Email: [email protected]
The growth of computer-assisted instruction in Taiwan schools
Computers Educ. Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 337-341, Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
THE GROWTH
0360-1315/89S3.00+0.00 Copyright 0 1989MaxwellPergamon Macmillanplc
1989
OF COMPUTER-ASSISTED IN TAIWAN SCHOOLS
INSTRUCTION
STEPHEN M. ALESSI* and Yu-FEN SHIH The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, U.S.A. (Received 31 October 1988; revision received 22 December
1988)
Abstract-The
growth of CA1 in Taiwan schools is progressing at a rapid rate. This paper discusses current government projects and expenditures and contrasts CA1 efforts in Taiwan with those in the United States.
BACKGROUND
In the Spring of 1988 the authors attended the Republic of China (R.O.C.) Second Annual CAZ Conference in Taichung and were able to collect firsthand information concerning the growth of CA1 in Taiwan. That growth has been quite remarkable, due in large part to government efforts to promote and support CA1 in the schools. In 1987, Wu[ l] described the use of CA1 in Taiwan schools and reported that it was in its infancy. Early CA1 experiments were undertaken on mainframe computers but had not been considered successful. The government was embarking on efforts to develop authoring systems to facilitate CA1 in the Chinese language, to train teachers in the design and use of CAI, to develop CA1 and to evaluate it. Wu reported twenty-one such projects in 1984 and 1985. Most CA1 was being done on Apple II or compatible microcomputers, with few schools and teachers involved. The National CA1 Project was just beginning, with emphasis being placed on a computer designed specifically for CA1 in the Chinese language. CURRENT
PLANS
AND ACTIVITIES
In 1986 a 4-year plan for CA1 in the schools was instituted as a joint project of the Ministry of Education, the National Science Council and the Provincial Government. That plan has since been extended 2 years, until June 1992. The goals of the 6-year plan emphasize implementation of CA1 rather than research-training teachers, developing CA1 and encouraging its use in schools. The reason for this is clear from the minutes of a published conference session which included members of the Ministry of Education[2]. CA1 has been accepted in advanced countries. It is therefore unnecessary to do further research to prove its effectiveness. But, many current CA1 lessons are unsatisfactory because they are just page-turners. Hence, the training of professionals to develop better CA1 is more important [than research on relative CA1 effectiveness]. It is fairly certain that good CA1 will someday provide efficient as well as effective instruction. [Translated from Chinese.] Thus, the goals of the 6-year program are to shorten the technology gap between Taiwan and advanced countries, to popularize computer concepts and elevate the level of their use in education, and to provide effective and efficient teaching in education and training via the new information technologies[3]. The specific objectives are to increase teachers’ and students’ knowledge of CAI, to train teachers in the development of CA1 courseware, to develop and distribute a CA1 authoring tool, and to institute and maintain a national database of courseware accessible to all teachers[4]. As a first part of the 6-year plan, each of the 369 public and private senior high schools has been given 35 IBM-compatible microcomputers, with a total budget of approx. $10,500,000 for fiscal *Send all correspondence
to: Dr S. M. Alessi, 370 Lindquist Center, Iowa City, IA 52242, U.S.A. 337
338
STEPHENM. ALEW and
Yu-FEN SHIH
year 1987-1988.* Each of the 676 junior high schools are being given at least 10 microcomputers under a budget of about $2,300,000 for fiscal year 1988-1989[3]. In 1988 the Ministry of Education began purchasing microcomputers for elementary schools with the intention of placing 10 microcomputers in each of the 2486 elementary schools within 4 years. The computers being placed in the schools are 16-bit IBM-compatible microcomputers and cost about $1250 each. They run at relatively high speed (12-16 MHz) under MS-DOS. They all have the very high resolution monitors necessary for the display of Chinese language characters. Most display only monochrome graphics. The Chinese character capability is provided via additional software and works on any IBM-compatible microcomputer with graphics capability of sufficient resolution. The computers are almost always placed in a single computer lab. A few schools, which have participated in more than one government project, have more than one computer lab. However, good CA1 does not come simply from placing computer hardware in schools. The presence of computer hardware provides only the basis for successful CAI. Support for teacher training and courseware development is also necessary, and this is recognized in Taiwan. Funds have also been allocated for teacher training and development of CA1 materials. The original CA1 4-Year Plan (July 1986June 1990) included the development of CA1 units on mechanics, mechanical drawing, electrical engineering, electromagnetic theory, math, economics, commerce and accounting for vocational high schools. To that, the 2 year extension has added mathematics, English, and physics for junior high schools; and natural science and math for elementary schools. About 2000 instructional units are planned with approx. $3500 budgeted for the design and development of each. When trained teachers design a unit (which does not include programming), they are paid approx. $570. About 200 units have been completed [5], representing considerable government expenditure in support of courseware development. Additionally, the Ministry of Education provides teacher inservice workshops on CA1 through four universities in three cities: Taipei, Taichung and Kaohsiung. The workshops, given two or three times yearly, are generally 7 hours per week for 18 weeks. The Ministry has provided each participating university with 40 microcomputers for these workshops, costing about $200,000. fundamentals of CAI, courseware design, These workshops teach basic computer concepts, evaluation, computer-managed instruction and the BASIC programming language. Participants produce an instructional unit during the workshop. In the current 6-year plan about 800 teachers a year are being trained in these workshops with over 2200 trained by the end of Summer 1988. Approximately $170,000 per year is budgeted to this training, which is provided free to teachers and for which they earn university credit[4]. Courseware development is supported by the Ministry of Education in cooperation with teachers who have attended a workshop. Teachers design lessons by creating storyboards and flowcharts which are then reviewed by university professors and programmed by the Ministry of Education. These lessons become part of the official school curriculum, which is determined by the Ministry. At the Second Annual CAI Conference, courseware was demonstrated which was produced by teachers during workshops or afterwards with programming support from the Ministry of Education. There are plans[4] to provide access to Ministry-developed CA1 materials in a national courseware database accessed inexpensively via Videotex. Conferences such as the First and Second Annual CAI Conferences are another way in which the Ministry of Education supports and encourages CA1 in the schools. The first CA1 conference was held in June 1987 in Taipei, and the second in May 1988 in Taichung. The Ministry has budgeted, in cooperation with the National Science Council, the Provincial Government and various city governments, approx. $68,000 for each of these conferences[6]. There are award ceremonies honoring teachers and administrators who have contributed significantly to CA1 in their schools, a showcase of CAT software, keynote speeches on various CA1 design and evaluation issues, and panel discussions on goals, problems, and solutions for the future. Another form of support for CA1 has been the development of a Chinese authoring system. The Ministry of Education has recognized the difficulty of producing Chinese language CA1 in BASIC,
*Note, all amounts originally reported the exchange rate: US.%1 = NT$28.
in New Taiwan
dollars
have been converted
to approximate
U.S. dollars
based on
CA1 in Taiwan
339
so supported development of an authoring system by the Department of Industrial Education at National Taiwan Normal University[7,8]. That authoring system, to be available to teachers by the end of 1988, is quite powerful. It runs on IBM-compatible microcomputers and is capable of high resolution graphics, either color or monochrome. Text, pictures and data can be imported from other programming environments. Currently 10,000 (of about 70,000) Chinese characters are included. Developers can create more characters of their own, in any language, with powerful font editors. There is considerable flexibility in character size, shape and orientation, as well as sophisticated graphics, animation and special effects editors. Lesson sequencing appears patterned after Hypercard [9]. Instructional events are referred to as cards, where a card may be either a static or dynamic display, or an interactive group of displays. Plans are underway to add a flowchart-oriented front-end similar to recent American authoring systems like Course of Action [lo], CourseBuilder [ 111, PCD3 [ 121 and IconAuthor [ 131. Work is in progress to add digitized or synthetic speech and more Chinese characters. The authoring system, for which the Ministry of Education budgeted approx. $80,000, may soon be provided to teachers at cost. We were told it will be sold to teachers for about $lO-$20, the cost of diskettes and manuals. Given the low cost and lack of competitive authoring systems in Taiwan, it may become the standard for authoring there. If that happens, not only will the authoring system make courseware production easier, but many teachers will be able to share expertise and common CA1 functions developed with it, much like sharing subroutines in a standard language. It should empower many capable teachers to do things they previously could not.
PROBLEMS
AND
FUTURE
DIRECTIONS
In some sessions at the Second Annual CAZ Conference, teachers and administrators discussed their experiences. While all of those present were obviously involved with and relatively enthusiastic about CAL many spoke up about what is still needed. Foremost in their minds was better training and support. The workshops currently offered were not considered enough. Some said two workshop levels are needed to better meet the needs of beginners and advanced designers. Others indicated that the monetary support must be accompanied with release time from teaching. Several encouraged formation of teams working on lessons rather than individual teachers working alone. Another concern was that workshops should be followed up to encourage more teachers to use the skills learned. Only a few teachers completing workshops presently receive the opportunity to develop lessons in cooperation with the Ministry of Education. Although teachers may develop courseware on their own, their work will not be included in the national database or considered part of the official curriculum unless produced in conjunction with the Ministry of Education. In our discussions with individuals and our reading of official reports we noted several other needs. Already mentioned is that elementary schools have received little of the attention and money. Although this has begun, the number of microcomputers for elementary and junior high schools (10 per school) seems insufficient. Even if total school enrollment is smaller than in senior high schools, a lab must be able to accommodate a typical class of students. However, class size is larger in elementary and junior high schools, not smaller. Evaluation and research has been minimal. At the Second Annual CAZ Conference there was discussion of software evaluation in classrooms, but it was not yet underway. The National Project (mentioned by Wu[l]) included some assessment of achievement and attitudes in schools. The results[l4] indicated improved attitudes with CA1 but little improvement in student achievement. As discussed earlier, a prevalent attitude in Taiwan is that CA1 will eventually be successful and that current efforts should be on implementation and improvement. Instructional methodologies are not very varied, consisting mostly of tutorial, drill and instructional game programs. Few development efforts are based on a rigorous instructional design model. There is need for a cycle of formative evaluation and revision of materials before distribution, both to instill creativity and to ensure quality. CM1 is almost non-existent. There are plans to network school microcomputers but as of this time not much has been done to manage microcomputers or instructional systems.
340
STEPHEN
M. ALESSIand Yu-FEN
SHIH
Despite all the equipment and development occurring, actual use of CA1 by students is still small, usually in pilot situations. In many schools the computer labs are still used primarily for instruction on computing: programming, word processing and business applications.
DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN
TAIWANESE
AND
AMERICAN
CA1
There are several differences between the CA1 movement in Taiwan and the U.S.A. These differences are attributable to four factors. First is that CA1 has come recently to Taiwan, at a time when microcomputer technology is more mature, while CA1 in the U.S.A. began before microcomputers and grew with their early development. Computer facilities in Taiwanese schools are newer and more powerful than that in American schools, most of which still use Apple II microcomputers and often have a mix of incompatible microcomputers. We believe the older and varied equipment in American schools limits the quality and impact of CAI. While newer and more powerful equipment will not guarantee better CAI, it provides the potential for it. The quality of courseware we observed was a little better than the average courseware seen in the U.S.A., but was below the best American products. This is perhaps as one should expect given most of the courseware is designed by teachers with limited time and resources, and programming was all done in BASIC because the new authoring system has not been released yet. The second difference is the nature of educational decision making and support in Taiwan vs the U.S.A. American education is based on a decentralized system of local control while Taiwan education is more centralized and state funded. This has enabled Taiwan to make nation-wide decisions and implement programs for all schools, resulting in similar facilities and greater equity across schools. On the other hand, there is a lack of diversity, so if the government fails to make good decisions, the future of CA1 there may be in jeopardy. While to date most CA1 development has been state planned and funded, there is growing desire among teachers and administrators that private industry produce courseware as in the U.S.A. and that schools should be able to purchase from companies or commission them to develop courseware[2]. Third, CA1 is not as heavily used in business and industry as in the U.S.A. Thus, there is a lack of university programs training professionals in Instructional Design and CAI, and there is a lack of jobs for professionals specializing in this area. CA1 is guided by people whose expertise is in computer education, industrial education or specific subject specialties. This may impede progress and limit the quality of Taiwanese courseware in the future. In a centralized educational system like Taiwan’s, poor courseware would be a greater problem than in the U.S.A. because there is little alternative courseware. The fourth difference is the Chinese language itself. Because the written language is based upon thousands of complex characters, computer hardware suitable for Chinese must possess great power and flexibility for graphics creation and manipulation. That makes the computer better equipped for CA1 than common microcomputers in the U.S.A. In the past, inability to produce Chinese characters may have slowed Chinese CAL but now that hardware is surmounting the challenge, the potential for quality courseware is greater. As important as this hardware is, the development of an authoring system which supports flexible and high quality graphics may be even more significant. The Chinese authoring system compares very favorably to American authoring systems in its text, graphics and animation capabilities. Based on the sample software we inspected, it also appears that Chinese authors are more enamored with graphics and animation than are American authors, necessitating good editors in the authoring system for these purposes. The main thing this system currently lacks is a simple lesson sequence editor. We believe that the availability of a powerful and easy-to-use authoring system will contribute to the growth of CAI. It will not guarantee excellent courseware, but will increase the speed at which courseware is produced and improved, will raise the lower bound of courseware quality, and will allow more people with instructional design skills and content knowledge to produce good courseware.
CA1 in Taiwan
341
CONCLUSION There are both positive and negative aspects to the growth of CA1 in Taiwan. Because it is new, the hardware and software becoming common in schools is powerful and compatible. Software developers in Taiwan can depend upon a sizable number of schools with the same computers capable of supporting high-quality CAI. There is considerable government support for CA1 via teacher inservice workshops, conferences and monetary support for courseware development. On the other hand, the centralized decision making and funding which has made some of the above possible may also stifle variety, creativity, and the quantity of courseware production. Quality may also suffer due to lack of research, evaluation, and a rigorous instructional design model. In the balance, while CA1 is new in Taiwan schools, it appears to be progressing faster than in American schools. The state-of-the-art of authoring systems and courseware at that level may soon be more advanced. Although the number of students actually exposed to CA1 is still small, it is likely to grow quickly due to these differences. REFERENCES 1. Wu T.-H., CA1 in Taiwan: state and problems. J. Compur.-Based Instr. 14, 106 (1987). 2. Lee C-P., Yu C-K., Cheng C.-S. and Chan C.-K., Can CA1 really solve teaching problems? [Minutes of panel discussion. Document in Chinese, title translated.] Inform. Educ. 2, 36 (1987). 3. Institute for Information Industry, Information Industries Yearbook. Institute for Information Industries, Ministry of Economic Affairs, Taipei, Taiwan (1988). 4. Yu C.-K., The Origin, Development and Fufure of CAI in Taiwan [Document in Chinese, title translated]. Ministry of Education, Taipei, Taiwan (1988). 5. Ministry of Education, Education in the Republic of China. Ministry of Education, Taipei, Taiwan (1987). 6. Ministry of Education, Minutes of a Discussion Meeting about CAI Training Workshops and the Second Annual CAI Conference [Document in Chinese, title translated]. Ministry of Education, Taipei, Taiwan (1987). 7. Dai J.-Y., Chinese CAI Aurhoring systems [Document in Chinese, title translated]. Ministry of Education, Taipei, Taiwan (1988). 8. Dai J.-Y. and Chu Y.-P., A study of a system software tool for the implementation of Chinese Computer Assisted Instruction (CCAI) courseware. J. Taipei Munic. Jun. Teach. Coil. 16, 289 (1985). 9. Apple Computer, Inc., HyperCard [Computer program]. Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, Calif. (1987). 10. Authorware, Inc., Course of Action [Computer program]. Authorware, Inc., Minneapolis, Minn. (1987). 11. TeleRobotics International, Inc., CourseBuilder [Computer program]. TeleRobotics International, Inc., Knoxville, Tenn. (1987). 12. Control Data Corporation, PCD3 [Computer program]. Control Data Corporation, Minneapolis, Minn. (1987). 13. AIMtech Corp., IconAuthor [Computer program]. AIMtech Corp., Nashua, N.H. (1988). 14. Ministry of Education. Euuluufion Report of the CAI Experimental Projecr [Document in Chinese, title translated]. Ministry of Education, Taipei, Taiwan (1987).
THE GROWTH
0360-1315/89S3.00+0.00 Copyright 0 1989MaxwellPergamon Macmillanplc
1989
OF COMPUTER-ASSISTED IN TAIWAN SCHOOLS
INSTRUCTION
STEPHEN M. ALESSI* and Yu-FEN SHIH The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, U.S.A. (Received 31 October 1988; revision received 22 December
1988)
Abstract-The
growth of CA1 in Taiwan schools is progressing at a rapid rate. This paper discusses current government projects and expenditures and contrasts CA1 efforts in Taiwan with those in the United States.
BACKGROUND
In the Spring of 1988 the authors attended the Republic of China (R.O.C.) Second Annual CAZ Conference in Taichung and were able to collect firsthand information concerning the growth of CA1 in Taiwan. That growth has been quite remarkable, due in large part to government efforts to promote and support CA1 in the schools. In 1987, Wu[ l] described the use of CA1 in Taiwan schools and reported that it was in its infancy. Early CA1 experiments were undertaken on mainframe computers but had not been considered successful. The government was embarking on efforts to develop authoring systems to facilitate CA1 in the Chinese language, to train teachers in the design and use of CAI, to develop CA1 and to evaluate it. Wu reported twenty-one such projects in 1984 and 1985. Most CA1 was being done on Apple II or compatible microcomputers, with few schools and teachers involved. The National CA1 Project was just beginning, with emphasis being placed on a computer designed specifically for CA1 in the Chinese language. CURRENT
PLANS
AND ACTIVITIES
In 1986 a 4-year plan for CA1 in the schools was instituted as a joint project of the Ministry of Education, the National Science Council and the Provincial Government. That plan has since been extended 2 years, until June 1992. The goals of the 6-year plan emphasize implementation of CA1 rather than research-training teachers, developing CA1 and encouraging its use in schools. The reason for this is clear from the minutes of a published conference session which included members of the Ministry of Education[2]. CA1 has been accepted in advanced countries. It is therefore unnecessary to do further research to prove its effectiveness. But, many current CA1 lessons are unsatisfactory because they are just page-turners. Hence, the training of professionals to develop better CA1 is more important [than research on relative CA1 effectiveness]. It is fairly certain that good CA1 will someday provide efficient as well as effective instruction. [Translated from Chinese.] Thus, the goals of the 6-year program are to shorten the technology gap between Taiwan and advanced countries, to popularize computer concepts and elevate the level of their use in education, and to provide effective and efficient teaching in education and training via the new information technologies[3]. The specific objectives are to increase teachers’ and students’ knowledge of CAI, to train teachers in the development of CA1 courseware, to develop and distribute a CA1 authoring tool, and to institute and maintain a national database of courseware accessible to all teachers[4]. As a first part of the 6-year plan, each of the 369 public and private senior high schools has been given 35 IBM-compatible microcomputers, with a total budget of approx. $10,500,000 for fiscal *Send all correspondence
to: Dr S. M. Alessi, 370 Lindquist Center, Iowa City, IA 52242, U.S.A. 337
338
STEPHENM. ALEW and
Yu-FEN SHIH
year 1987-1988.* Each of the 676 junior high schools are being given at least 10 microcomputers under a budget of about $2,300,000 for fiscal year 1988-1989[3]. In 1988 the Ministry of Education began purchasing microcomputers for elementary schools with the intention of placing 10 microcomputers in each of the 2486 elementary schools within 4 years. The computers being placed in the schools are 16-bit IBM-compatible microcomputers and cost about $1250 each. They run at relatively high speed (12-16 MHz) under MS-DOS. They all have the very high resolution monitors necessary for the display of Chinese language characters. Most display only monochrome graphics. The Chinese character capability is provided via additional software and works on any IBM-compatible microcomputer with graphics capability of sufficient resolution. The computers are almost always placed in a single computer lab. A few schools, which have participated in more than one government project, have more than one computer lab. However, good CA1 does not come simply from placing computer hardware in schools. The presence of computer hardware provides only the basis for successful CAI. Support for teacher training and courseware development is also necessary, and this is recognized in Taiwan. Funds have also been allocated for teacher training and development of CA1 materials. The original CA1 4-Year Plan (July 1986June 1990) included the development of CA1 units on mechanics, mechanical drawing, electrical engineering, electromagnetic theory, math, economics, commerce and accounting for vocational high schools. To that, the 2 year extension has added mathematics, English, and physics for junior high schools; and natural science and math for elementary schools. About 2000 instructional units are planned with approx. $3500 budgeted for the design and development of each. When trained teachers design a unit (which does not include programming), they are paid approx. $570. About 200 units have been completed [5], representing considerable government expenditure in support of courseware development. Additionally, the Ministry of Education provides teacher inservice workshops on CA1 through four universities in three cities: Taipei, Taichung and Kaohsiung. The workshops, given two or three times yearly, are generally 7 hours per week for 18 weeks. The Ministry has provided each participating university with 40 microcomputers for these workshops, costing about $200,000. fundamentals of CAI, courseware design, These workshops teach basic computer concepts, evaluation, computer-managed instruction and the BASIC programming language. Participants produce an instructional unit during the workshop. In the current 6-year plan about 800 teachers a year are being trained in these workshops with over 2200 trained by the end of Summer 1988. Approximately $170,000 per year is budgeted to this training, which is provided free to teachers and for which they earn university credit[4]. Courseware development is supported by the Ministry of Education in cooperation with teachers who have attended a workshop. Teachers design lessons by creating storyboards and flowcharts which are then reviewed by university professors and programmed by the Ministry of Education. These lessons become part of the official school curriculum, which is determined by the Ministry. At the Second Annual CAI Conference, courseware was demonstrated which was produced by teachers during workshops or afterwards with programming support from the Ministry of Education. There are plans[4] to provide access to Ministry-developed CA1 materials in a national courseware database accessed inexpensively via Videotex. Conferences such as the First and Second Annual CAI Conferences are another way in which the Ministry of Education supports and encourages CA1 in the schools. The first CA1 conference was held in June 1987 in Taipei, and the second in May 1988 in Taichung. The Ministry has budgeted, in cooperation with the National Science Council, the Provincial Government and various city governments, approx. $68,000 for each of these conferences[6]. There are award ceremonies honoring teachers and administrators who have contributed significantly to CA1 in their schools, a showcase of CAT software, keynote speeches on various CA1 design and evaluation issues, and panel discussions on goals, problems, and solutions for the future. Another form of support for CA1 has been the development of a Chinese authoring system. The Ministry of Education has recognized the difficulty of producing Chinese language CA1 in BASIC,
*Note, all amounts originally reported the exchange rate: US.%1 = NT$28.
in New Taiwan
dollars
have been converted
to approximate
U.S. dollars
based on
CA1 in Taiwan
339
so supported development of an authoring system by the Department of Industrial Education at National Taiwan Normal University[7,8]. That authoring system, to be available to teachers by the end of 1988, is quite powerful. It runs on IBM-compatible microcomputers and is capable of high resolution graphics, either color or monochrome. Text, pictures and data can be imported from other programming environments. Currently 10,000 (of about 70,000) Chinese characters are included. Developers can create more characters of their own, in any language, with powerful font editors. There is considerable flexibility in character size, shape and orientation, as well as sophisticated graphics, animation and special effects editors. Lesson sequencing appears patterned after Hypercard [9]. Instructional events are referred to as cards, where a card may be either a static or dynamic display, or an interactive group of displays. Plans are underway to add a flowchart-oriented front-end similar to recent American authoring systems like Course of Action [lo], CourseBuilder [ 111, PCD3 [ 121 and IconAuthor [ 131. Work is in progress to add digitized or synthetic speech and more Chinese characters. The authoring system, for which the Ministry of Education budgeted approx. $80,000, may soon be provided to teachers at cost. We were told it will be sold to teachers for about $lO-$20, the cost of diskettes and manuals. Given the low cost and lack of competitive authoring systems in Taiwan, it may become the standard for authoring there. If that happens, not only will the authoring system make courseware production easier, but many teachers will be able to share expertise and common CA1 functions developed with it, much like sharing subroutines in a standard language. It should empower many capable teachers to do things they previously could not.
PROBLEMS
AND
FUTURE
DIRECTIONS
In some sessions at the Second Annual CAZ Conference, teachers and administrators discussed their experiences. While all of those present were obviously involved with and relatively enthusiastic about CAL many spoke up about what is still needed. Foremost in their minds was better training and support. The workshops currently offered were not considered enough. Some said two workshop levels are needed to better meet the needs of beginners and advanced designers. Others indicated that the monetary support must be accompanied with release time from teaching. Several encouraged formation of teams working on lessons rather than individual teachers working alone. Another concern was that workshops should be followed up to encourage more teachers to use the skills learned. Only a few teachers completing workshops presently receive the opportunity to develop lessons in cooperation with the Ministry of Education. Although teachers may develop courseware on their own, their work will not be included in the national database or considered part of the official curriculum unless produced in conjunction with the Ministry of Education. In our discussions with individuals and our reading of official reports we noted several other needs. Already mentioned is that elementary schools have received little of the attention and money. Although this has begun, the number of microcomputers for elementary and junior high schools (10 per school) seems insufficient. Even if total school enrollment is smaller than in senior high schools, a lab must be able to accommodate a typical class of students. However, class size is larger in elementary and junior high schools, not smaller. Evaluation and research has been minimal. At the Second Annual CAZ Conference there was discussion of software evaluation in classrooms, but it was not yet underway. The National Project (mentioned by Wu[l]) included some assessment of achievement and attitudes in schools. The results[l4] indicated improved attitudes with CA1 but little improvement in student achievement. As discussed earlier, a prevalent attitude in Taiwan is that CA1 will eventually be successful and that current efforts should be on implementation and improvement. Instructional methodologies are not very varied, consisting mostly of tutorial, drill and instructional game programs. Few development efforts are based on a rigorous instructional design model. There is need for a cycle of formative evaluation and revision of materials before distribution, both to instill creativity and to ensure quality. CM1 is almost non-existent. There are plans to network school microcomputers but as of this time not much has been done to manage microcomputers or instructional systems.
340
STEPHEN
M. ALESSIand Yu-FEN
SHIH
Despite all the equipment and development occurring, actual use of CA1 by students is still small, usually in pilot situations. In many schools the computer labs are still used primarily for instruction on computing: programming, word processing and business applications.
DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN
TAIWANESE
AND
AMERICAN
CA1
There are several differences between the CA1 movement in Taiwan and the U.S.A. These differences are attributable to four factors. First is that CA1 has come recently to Taiwan, at a time when microcomputer technology is more mature, while CA1 in the U.S.A. began before microcomputers and grew with their early development. Computer facilities in Taiwanese schools are newer and more powerful than that in American schools, most of which still use Apple II microcomputers and often have a mix of incompatible microcomputers. We believe the older and varied equipment in American schools limits the quality and impact of CAI. While newer and more powerful equipment will not guarantee better CAI, it provides the potential for it. The quality of courseware we observed was a little better than the average courseware seen in the U.S.A., but was below the best American products. This is perhaps as one should expect given most of the courseware is designed by teachers with limited time and resources, and programming was all done in BASIC because the new authoring system has not been released yet. The second difference is the nature of educational decision making and support in Taiwan vs the U.S.A. American education is based on a decentralized system of local control while Taiwan education is more centralized and state funded. This has enabled Taiwan to make nation-wide decisions and implement programs for all schools, resulting in similar facilities and greater equity across schools. On the other hand, there is a lack of diversity, so if the government fails to make good decisions, the future of CA1 there may be in jeopardy. While to date most CA1 development has been state planned and funded, there is growing desire among teachers and administrators that private industry produce courseware as in the U.S.A. and that schools should be able to purchase from companies or commission them to develop courseware[2]. Third, CA1 is not as heavily used in business and industry as in the U.S.A. Thus, there is a lack of university programs training professionals in Instructional Design and CAI, and there is a lack of jobs for professionals specializing in this area. CA1 is guided by people whose expertise is in computer education, industrial education or specific subject specialties. This may impede progress and limit the quality of Taiwanese courseware in the future. In a centralized educational system like Taiwan’s, poor courseware would be a greater problem than in the U.S.A. because there is little alternative courseware. The fourth difference is the Chinese language itself. Because the written language is based upon thousands of complex characters, computer hardware suitable for Chinese must possess great power and flexibility for graphics creation and manipulation. That makes the computer better equipped for CA1 than common microcomputers in the U.S.A. In the past, inability to produce Chinese characters may have slowed Chinese CAL but now that hardware is surmounting the challenge, the potential for quality courseware is greater. As important as this hardware is, the development of an authoring system which supports flexible and high quality graphics may be even more significant. The Chinese authoring system compares very favorably to American authoring systems in its text, graphics and animation capabilities. Based on the sample software we inspected, it also appears that Chinese authors are more enamored with graphics and animation than are American authors, necessitating good editors in the authoring system for these purposes. The main thing this system currently lacks is a simple lesson sequence editor. We believe that the availability of a powerful and easy-to-use authoring system will contribute to the growth of CAI. It will not guarantee excellent courseware, but will increase the speed at which courseware is produced and improved, will raise the lower bound of courseware quality, and will allow more people with instructional design skills and content knowledge to produce good courseware.
CA1 in Taiwan
341
CONCLUSION There are both positive and negative aspects to the growth of CA1 in Taiwan. Because it is new, the hardware and software becoming common in schools is powerful and compatible. Software developers in Taiwan can depend upon a sizable number of schools with the same computers capable of supporting high-quality CAI. There is considerable government support for CA1 via teacher inservice workshops, conferences and monetary support for courseware development. On the other hand, the centralized decision making and funding which has made some of the above possible may also stifle variety, creativity, and the quantity of courseware production. Quality may also suffer due to lack of research, evaluation, and a rigorous instructional design model. In the balance, while CA1 is new in Taiwan schools, it appears to be progressing faster than in American schools. The state-of-the-art of authoring systems and courseware at that level may soon be more advanced. Although the number of students actually exposed to CA1 is still small, it is likely to grow quickly due to these differences. REFERENCES 1. Wu T.-H., CA1 in Taiwan: state and problems. J. Compur.-Based Instr. 14, 106 (1987). 2. Lee C-P., Yu C-K., Cheng C.-S. and Chan C.-K., Can CA1 really solve teaching problems? [Minutes of panel discussion. Document in Chinese, title translated.] Inform. Educ. 2, 36 (1987). 3. Institute for Information Industry, Information Industries Yearbook. Institute for Information Industries, Ministry of Economic Affairs, Taipei, Taiwan (1988). 4. Yu C.-K., The Origin, Development and Fufure of CAI in Taiwan [Document in Chinese, title translated]. Ministry of Education, Taipei, Taiwan (1988). 5. Ministry of Education, Education in the Republic of China. Ministry of Education, Taipei, Taiwan (1987). 6. Ministry of Education, Minutes of a Discussion Meeting about CAI Training Workshops and the Second Annual CAI Conference [Document in Chinese, title translated]. Ministry of Education, Taipei, Taiwan (1987). 7. Dai J.-Y., Chinese CAI Aurhoring systems [Document in Chinese, title translated]. Ministry of Education, Taipei, Taiwan (1988). 8. Dai J.-Y. and Chu Y.-P., A study of a system software tool for the implementation of Chinese Computer Assisted Instruction (CCAI) courseware. J. Taipei Munic. Jun. Teach. Coil. 16, 289 (1985). 9. Apple Computer, Inc., HyperCard [Computer program]. Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, Calif. (1987). 10. Authorware, Inc., Course of Action [Computer program]. Authorware, Inc., Minneapolis, Minn. (1987). 11. TeleRobotics International, Inc., CourseBuilder [Computer program]. TeleRobotics International, Inc., Knoxville, Tenn. (1987). 12. Control Data Corporation, PCD3 [Computer program]. Control Data Corporation, Minneapolis, Minn. (1987). 13. AIMtech Corp., IconAuthor [Computer program]. AIMtech Corp., Nashua, N.H. (1988). 14. Ministry of Education. Euuluufion Report of the CAI Experimental Projecr [Document in Chinese, title translated]. Ministry of Education, Taipei, Taiwan (1987).