Return to the U S WEST VRRV Home Page
The Virtual Reality Roving Vehicle project has the potential to be one of the most visible, extensive projects undertaken by the Human Interface Technology Laboratory to date. It is also a project that has the potential to make a significant impact on the lives of thousands of children in the United States.
Given the potential for this project, it is sound business to make certain that we plan, implement, and assess our progress against our goals on an ongoing basis. This Management Plan describes in detail how to create this reality.
The Education Plan written in June 1993 describes a program of theoretical and applied technology, pedagogy, and assessment research. The U S WEST VRRV project fits into the Education Plan on all three fronts.
With regard to technology, the U S WEST VRRV project provides us a means to access to a great number of children with whom we can conduct usability testing of human-computer interface issues, in both a formal and informal fashion. Since VR is such a new technology, we have much to learn as educators about what the best applications of the technology might be. Pedagologically speaking, the U S WEST VRRV project provides us an opportunity to better understand how the technology might affect many aspects of the educational process, such as curriculum development, information access, retrieval, manipulation, and presentation, and cognition. We hope that it may also assist us in better understanding the relationship between the individual and their environment, and how the individual learns in that environment. And since this technology provides us with an alternative way of thinking, new assessment procedures need to be developed, so that we may track our progress in charting and sailing a new course in the established sea of 'learning'.
It is not enough to consider the U S WEST VRRV project in isolation; we are a research laboratory with an agenda that extends well beyond the bounds of the educational realm. Therefore, it is important to consider how the project relates to the larger goals of the lab.
We are in the business of developing a better overall understanding of how humans interface with technology. Furthermore, it is our charter to use this information to develop useful, applicable, and ethical products and processes that can be applied outside the domain of our research facility. As a technology incubator, it is our job to move information from inside the Lab to the outside world by 'spinning' technological developments off into new business ventures and other organizations.
In a business sense, we need to be cognizant of concepts such as market opportunity, competition, internal strengths and weaknesses, and our ability to generate something useful for our constituents. An analysis of this type also needs to take into account the current (and projected) political agenda of the nation. Given the strong political support for 'broad-band communication' and the current state of the technology, now is an excellent time to begin development of a 'pull' strategy by granting children the opportunity to work with a technology that will likely be very much a part of their daily life in ten years time.
GreenSpace represents the earliest representation of the quintessential distance learning environment. In this virtual 'common', individuals from around the world will be able to work with each other in real-time by sharing information, collaborating on projects, and interacting mentally, physically, and, theoretically, emotionally as well.
SuperMedia is billed as a 'transportation system for the mind'; in essence a computer-generated alternative reality that is sufficiently perceptually satisfying that it negates the need for individuals to 'travel' physically from place to place. There are long-term ramifications for many industries and institutions embodied in such a notion; including education.
As illustrated by the figure above, the conceptual framework of both GreenSpace and SuperMedia illustrates that the concept of 'school' as a physical space to which students go for their education is becomes a societal rather than a technological construct. The central point, however, is that the U S WEST VRRV project, and the Education agenda are a good fit with the long term goals of the Lab.
Taking the U S WEST VRRV project from a paper proposal to a physical reality will be a challenge. It will require the utmost in communication and support, both within the HIT Lab, and from our constituents as well. In the next section, we will discuss what it takes to get a project of this magnitude and importance off the ground. Specifically, we will discuss critical success factors, project process, organizational structure, project timeline, fiscal management, and future issues that need to be taken into account right now, at the onset of the project.
Critical success factors are those issues that can in effect 'make or break' a project. We are asking a lot from both our internal staff, our external funding sources, and our 'customer' base in the schools and the larger community. The U S WEST VRRV project is very ambitious. Even with the financial support of US West, this project will stretch the seams of the entire Lab, especially during the beginning stages. The graphic below illustrates the critical success factors inherent to this project. Following the graphic is a description of each factor.
Internal cohesion is required at both the strategic and the tactical levels. We have ascertained in the previous section that the project is a good fit for the Lab. But this is just a starting point. The project requires support from the Director on down to be successful, especially since it will be a dynamic exercise in a non-controlled environment, i.e. working with the public outside the relatively controllable confines of the physical Lab.
As is often the case in the Lab, we are spending someone else's money to accomplish mutually held goals. There needs to be a certain mindfulness about spending the money appropriately, accounting for it completely, and a proactive management strategy that will maximize the investment that has been made in us. If we are mindful of this investment, it is much more likely that our funding sources will be willing to reinvest in projects of this nature in the future. In other words, strong fiscal management makes good sense all the way around.
In selecting our hardware and software platforms, we need to be cognizant that we are dealing with children, who 'act out' everything. Static virtual worlds are not going to cut it for them. The importance of good design, strong engagement and active participation opportunities cannot be overemphasized. Furthermore, we are building the beginnings of the Virtual Learning Center educational showcase, so it makes sense to concentrate on building engaging environments.
Management of this project will involve constant communication between our constituents. This includes the laundry list presented above: school administrators, teachers, students, parents, industry representatives, and each other. The level of commitment needed from each of those parties is substantial; if any one link in the chain becomes weakened, the entire process will suffer. Therefore, it is important to convey and to agree upon the parameters of the project with each of these groups before, during and after our involvement with them.
Building commitment is based on good communication. It is our job to facilitate that communication, and to make sure that everyone is 'on the same page', so to speak. We have an opportunity to create an entirely new way of doing business with these constituents, based on creating mutual success through continued dialogue. This can be a model for the manner in which other large-scale projects can be run, assuming it is successful.
Part of our charter in Education is to develop effective mechanisms to make sure that we as educators are on the right track with what it is that we are teaching our children, and how we are going about the business of education. Learning through VR is very new, and will undoubtedly require the development of new assessment procedures. This is especially true when one considers the research that has been done on fitting examinations to the type and manner of material learned. This factor in and of itself could spawn an entire industry, and should not be discounted.
Reporting our research will be critical to the development of wide-spread acceptance and utilization of virtual learning environments, if this is what we find should be our 'message'.. It is not enough to know that it works or does not work inside the confines of the Lab; we must share what we discover with the world through network postings, traditional papers, and conference presentations. This is the more academic component of the information dispersal mechanism; the public relations component is discussed below under 'Positive Press'.
The net result of a well-run project is a positive outcome for all parties involved. It is particularly important that we stay on top of the PR opportunities associated with the U S WEST VRRV; the national agenda surrounding educational improvement is a good basis for documenting and sharing information that we gather during the duration. Our industry representatives will also be quite interested in 'tooting their horn' as well, and understandably so. If this is successful, it will truly be a 'win-win' for all parties.
In combination with the critical success factors above, we need to stay focused on the process of creating, implementing, and assessing individual projects within the U S WEST VRRV domain. The figure below illustrates the process as I perceive it:
Of these 6 steps, the one that will be most problematic is Step 5-- providing an effective means through which our sites can procure and utilize VR technology after we go away. One potential means to this end is to employ the services of Sharon Lemke and the office of OSPI. Not only do they have a handle on state-level technology funds, they are also the best source on how to access those funds. Getting the Lab out of that loop would be beneficial, since we don't have the resources to provide much in the way of support during that process. We should also look into other options regarding this very important step.
Below is an illustration of the organizational structure for this project. Following the graphic is a description of each project-specific position, i.e. those designated by hard, rather than dotted line relationships. Included in the description is a brief statement about the individual designated to fill that position.
HITL Management in this case means Dr. Tom Furness. who provides overall strategic guidance and support for the Lab. It is important that we acknowledge Dr. Furness's role in maintaining the momentum behind creating and supporting not only the vision of the Lab as a whole, but for this particular project as well.
The Internal Lab Liaison position is an important one, in that this individual works directly with the Learning Center Director to effectively allocate important Lab resources (such as software engineers) to the project on an as-needed basis. The individual in this role is Dr. Max Wells, Assistant Director of the HIT Lab. He will act as an internal consultant to the U S WEST VRRV project, as well as maintaining his primary responsibilities to the Lab at large.
The Learning Center Director is in charge of all of the Lab's education projects. Dr. Bill Winn holds this position, and is actively engaged in a number of related projects aside from the U S WEST VRRV. In his role as Director, Dr. Winn has overall responsibility for the U S WEST VRRV project, and is the only individual who has budgetary allocation signing authority. All project expenditures must be okayed through him.
Dr. Winn will share the responsibility of developing and maintaining contact with schools/teachers, strategic alliance partners, and potential project personnel with the Operations Manager, described below. In addition, he will also provide curriculum development, learning environment development, assessment tool design, data analysis, and research design assistance as needed. Developing publishable reports regarding Learning Center activities is also under his jurisdiction, as is assisting other project personnel to do the same. This may include public appearances at conferences and other public events.
The Operations Manager is in charge of the day-to-day functioning of the project. This individual is in charge of the project database of potential sites, the project calendar, personnel development and review, maintaining contact with schools, teachers, students, strategic alliance partners, and vendors. In addition, the Operations Manager is in charge of making sure that what we promise to our constituents is indeed what we deliver. Project follow-up and exit interviews are under her domain, as are the shared responsibilities of curriculum development, project assessment, publications, presentations, and world building. Ms. Kimberley M. Osberg has been named as the Operations Manager. One of her first responsibilities will be to work with the Technical Manager and the Assessment Coordinator to develop a Teacher Training and Development program for the hardware and software platforms employed by the U S WEST VRRV project.
Also under her jurisdiction is management of the van drivers, who will be providing transportation and technical assistance on-site, and student interns associated with the project. Student interns may be teachers, or others who are interested in working on the project.
The Technical Manager is the individual in charge of research and analysis regarding hardware, software and van purchases. He is also responsible for technical support issues, including support provided both in-house, and support from our vendors. His job is to make sure that all mechanical aspects of the U S WEST VRRV project are functional at all times. In addition, The Technical Manager may be called upon to do Teacher and/or Student training, provide world-building assistance, and work closely with individuals engaged in field research. He may also need to provide software programming assistance on an as-needed basis. Mr. Ari Hollander has been named the Technical Manager for the U S WEST VRRV project.
The Distance Learning Coordinator and Project Historian in this case are the same individual, due to the talents of the individual holding the position. Mr. Howard Rose has background in video production, as well as distance learning systems development. In the short run, Mr. Rose will be engaged in documenting the process of getting this project off the ground this summer and fall. He will also document individual site visits, and the research process at those sites. In the long run, he will be in charge of facilitating development of the distance learning component of the U S WEST VRRV, linking vans and other learning environments, to create a web of educational access. In addition to his U S WEST VRRV responsibilities, it is possible that Mr. Rose will also be called upon to provide world-building assistance or video documentation of other Lab projects.
The Assessment Coordinator will work directly with the Learning Center Director and the Research Specialist to develop new ways of understanding the effect of VR in education. As such, she will work with researchers to develop research designs employing these new tactics. In addition, she will also work directly with the Operations Manager to provide assistance as School Liaison, and in the area of Teacher and Student training. She will also be responsible for world design, particularly in the area of science. If we choose to undertake a Usability Testing effort for one of our vendors, that process would also be the responsibility of this individual. Ms. Sharon Kirkbride has been assigned the role of Assessment Coordinator, starting in the Fall of 1994.
The Project Programmer will be an individual dedicated at least in part to the U S WEST VRRV project. This individual will provide the Technical Manager with assistance in maintenance and support of the software used to build and render worlds, and will also be in charge of developing new interfaces and data collection systems as needed to support our research efforts. He or she will also work closely with our vendors, installing patches and upgrades, and potentially working collaboratively with the vendor(s) to provide value-added interface design, programming, and implementation assistance. Individual TBD.
The U S WEST VRRV project provides the Lab with an opportunity to conduct novel research of great importance in developing an understanding of the effects of VR in education. The Research Specialist will provide assistance in research design, instrumentation development data gathering, data analysis and interpretation, and overall assistance in the area of cognitive science. Dr. Hunter Hoffman has taken on the role of Research Specialist for the U S WEST VRRV project, concurrent to his role on other Lab projects. He will work with the Assessment Coordinator to develop effective assessment measures, and with the Project Programmer regarding data capture issues.
Ms. Alden Jones is the Public Relations Coordinator for the Lab at large and for the Washington Technology Center. She is currently in contact with the PR department at US West, and will remain out primary PR liaison for the duration of the U S WEST VRRV project. Press conferences, video, TV and radio coverage for the project are her responsibility In addition to PR, Ms. Jones is also in charge of developing marketing (collateral) materials for distribution to potential sites. Database information re: contacts will be shared between the Operations Manager and Ms. Jones, to make sure that all of our bases have been, and continue to be covered.
We are currently working backwards from a deadline of mid-November for a press conference for US West, which may be held at Garfield High School in the Seattle School District.. Also during that same time frame are our first two confirmed site visits to Kellogg Middle School in the Shoreline District, and Liberty(?) High School in the Everett School District.
Obviously, there are many critical aspects that need to be effectively handled before the van(s) actually arrive at the schools. They are described below:
* Van design and procurement
- Graphic design for van exterior
- Fabrication of any type of interior 'seating' mechanisms for hardware and software
- Selection of moving systems for transporting equipment from the van to the classroom
* Equipment (Hardware/Software) procurement, training, testing and implementation
- Cost benefit analysis on the short list of potential vendors
- Vendor selection
- Contractual agreement process re: purchase price, training, support, etc.
- Training and development of pertinent staff
-Practice time
* Assessment tool development
* Data capture interface design, testing and implementation
* Design and test teacher/student training materials
* Marketing materials development
* "Dry run" with a less visible but willing group (with strategic partner?)
* PRESS CONFERENCE
The Learning Center Director, Dr. Bill Winn is the only individual on the project with signing ability. This has been done to maintain a tight reign on the budget as it stands, and to protect if from being dribbled away on un-tracked expenses. Dr. Winn will be working closely with Joe Bell, the Lab's Fiscal Manager, to make certain that this is the case.
Every quarter the U S WEST VRRV project group will meet to go over the expenditures made over the last quarter, just to keep us all aware of how we are doing, and where the money is going. This report will be made available to US West as well.
Additional (ongoing) funding will be (and already is to some degree, since some of our budget has already been spent before we have even started) a critical issue. Eventually we will need to decide how to fund the project for the long term, whether to spin it off into a business of its own, or to look for harder money than is currently available.
Another issue of great importance is hardware and software-- this market is expanding at a quantum rate, and undoubtedly there will be new 'toys' that should be tested. We have a project that is a natural for setting up a testbed scenario. This is also a potential source of funding, in that hardware vendors need to collect usability data anyway; why not through us? All opportunities of this nature, however, will need to be considered on an individual basis. We must not lose sight of our original research-related goals.
Geographic distribution is another concern. Though we are starting the U S WEST VRRV project close to home, we need to consider what is will take to keep our commitments re: geographic dispersion. Dr. Bill Winn and Mr. Don Theophilus have been making contacts in other states, but we need to develop a fairly strong infrastructure elsewhere before we can actually take the show on the road so to speak. Hopefully, what we create in Washington will provide a good model for how to build that infrastructure.
Politically speaking, what we are undertaking with this project really does have the potential to radically shift notions about how educational material should be delivered, curriculum development and implementation, and potentially even provide substantive information about the learning process itself. To date, we have been able to maintain a neutral stance regarding the use of VR in education. As we learn more from our research, we will need to develop a platform that is consistent with out findings. This is a transition we should think about ahead of time, since a 'position' will undoubtedly please some, and disappoint others. Just something to sleep on.