rackIT @ GWD

Witten in 2003, this paper contains some of the history of Open Source /GNU Linux and the many advantages of running Open Source at Universities or other large scale IT operations. — Jerry Gartner

Abstract

Since 1983, with the establishment of the Free Software Foundation by Richard Stallman, universities have used non-commercial software for research and classes. With the advent of Linux in 1992, and with the ongoing changes in proprietary software licensing schemes, more universities are using the Linux operating system and other Open Source resources. This paper explores the history and philosophy of Open Source software and provides examples of this software as used in the university.

Introduction

On April 1, 2003, the Faculty Senate of the University at Buffalo, State University of New York, approved the following resolution.

Continue Reading »

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Linux in the Classroom:
Theory and Test
Jeffrey B. Williams
Kansas State University
June 1, 2000

Abstract

School systems have been eager to adopt classroom computing to improve student learning. As computer systems age, and as new operating systems are introduced, the current computers may not seem adequate for the job of teaching. However, there are alternatives available to school districts which can use older computers, increase software reliability, and decrease both acquisition and administration costs. This paper serves as a brief introduction to the Linux operating system and how it may be integrated into the curriculum. It is based on two demonstration projects which were conducted during the Spring, 2000, semester by several Kansas State University doctoral students.

Background

The May 23, 2000, McPherson Sentinel in a first page story reported:

The Unified School District 418 Board of Education voted 4-3 against a a request by the district’s technology committee that the board accept a proposed four-year rotational lease plan to replace and upgrade district computers.

Assistant Superintendent Perry McCabe…said the district has invested considerable funds the past few years in upgrading its technology. Now, he said, the district needs to consider its responsibility to maintain and continue to upgrade that technology.

The district currently has 800 computers, printers, and scanners. The computers range from models that are six to seven years old to the most current line of I-Macs and G-4s.[1]

The McPherson school district is noted as being one of the top districts in the country. If such a district is having problems with upgrading and maintaining computers both in the classroom and in the offices, other districts must be facing the same problem. While we would like to see the latest hardware and software in each school district, we know that resources are limited. As computer budgets grow, other program budgets shrink. This is the reality of working with a limited resource such as money, space, and personnel.

Any use of computers in the classroom requires thought, planning, and leadership. We must first determine if the computer is the best tool for a given learning objective. As much as I hate to admit, sometimes computers simply are not the proper medium for teaching a given subject. You can’t use a computer to teach a student to play a violin or to improve the person to person, face to face skills of people. (Please see pages 115 to 120 of Evil Geniuses in a Nutshell[2] for a succinct example.)

If we decide to use a computer, we must properly plan for it’s integration into the classroom. Not only must we determine the hardware and software to purchase, but we must also evaluate the infrastructure which makes using the computer possible. Where do we put them? What kind of desks do we use? How do we share printers, scanners, and Internet connections? Does the building have enough power to run multiple computers? Can phone lines, network cable, and other communication links be easily installed?

Those are just the physical problems. What about technical support? How large a budget is allocated for teacher education? What is the plan for upgrade and replacement of obsolete and broken equipment? Who determines the software which will be used? Strong leadership is necessary for resolving the problems of computers in the classroom. Sometimes unpopular decisions must be made, especially ones concerning the level of technology which will be supported. The strong leader must also concern himself with the impact of his decisions outside the school. Can the lessons learned in the classroom be applied outside the school setting? Hardware and software decisions certainly can not be made in a vacuum.

For the rest of this paper I will contend for the following points.

• There is a place for technology in the classroom.
• Linux can be used as an alternative to combat hardware and software obsolescence, while maintaining a cutting edge technology program.
• Given the right programs and circumstances, Linux makes much more sense in an educational setting than other operating systems.
• No computer is user friendly, easy to use, or intuitive. The proper use of technology requires hard work by everyone involved, the school board, the principal, the teachers, the technical support team, and the students.
• It is the job of technology coordinators, concerned members of the community, and
  interested staff to persuade school administration to implement Linux.
• One can not implement Linux just because it is cool. Linux must fulfill a given function otherwise it is just another useless computer.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

This first series is a selection of papers written by Rev. Dr. Jeffery B. Williams. Dr. Williams holds a Ph.D. in Computer Science and taught at Concordia College in Mequon, WI for years. He is currently serving as Pastor for Faith Ev. Lutheran Church in Denver, CO as he is also a Lutheran Pastor. Dr. Williams has been around computers for over 4 decades – he started when computers filled rooms. I love to listen – and watch – him talk about the “old days”; hands flit about an invisible console, his eyes half open, as he dumps core. He is also an accomplished PERL programmer, and, not coincidentally, quite a regular expression guru as well. I’ve tried to talk him in to writing a sermon fraught with *nix metaphor’s and Free Software anecdotes, but he remains a staunch professional, not wishing to cross contaminate his crafts – okay, he just doesn’t want to bore his parishioners. I find his contributions both insightful and educating, as only a man of his experience as scientist, educator, and weekly orator can provide. If you ever want to “nerd it up”, and then have an intelligent theological discussion, look him up sometime.

rackIT believes that the more you know, the better you are able to make informed decisions. All of the content on this web site is written and presented by us. While we make every effort to be objective, it is always good to hear what other people have to say. This section of our site offers papers from sources outside of the GWD Network. As with any part of our site, if there is something that you would like to see covered, please let us know.

I first heard of GrandCentral the last week of June on techcrunch.com when it was revealed that Google may be acquiring the company. Well, chalk another one up for Mr. Arrington as Google announced on July 2nd 2007 that they have in fact acquired GrandCentral.

Kudos to GrandCentral for the free service they provide that allows you to have one phone number (in your local area code, no less), of which you can assign multiple phones to ring when it is dialed. I have a local phone number that I picked from a large list on GrandCentral during the registration process. When it is called, my home phone and my cell phone will ring. Caller ID, and all can be transmitted to these phones, so I can decide if I want to talk, or let it go to voicemail. Anyone that I give the number to can call. It’s a “real” phone number that requires nothing on the callers end other than a dial tone. They don’t have to sign up or register for anything to call me. When people do call, their caller id info is stored in my address book on GrandCentral. I can then chose which phone rings depending on who is calling. If I’m getting calls from a telemarketer, I can program their number to receive a “this number is disconnected” message. There are tons of other features too, so have a look at their site if you are interested in the service. The cool thing is, if I move or one of my phone numbers otherwise changes, I just login to my account on GrandCentral, remove the old number and put in the new one. I no longer have to notify people when my number changes.

This brings us to our caveat.

The main issue that warrants a caveat would be this sudden ambiguity of phone numbers. In addition to my home and my cell phone, I can also set up my work phone with the GrandCentral number. This presents a potential problem for employers. If my sales rep has his GrandCentral number on his business cards, or is otherwise distributing it to his leads and accounts, that’s great. Customers can reach him anywhere and any time with only one phone number. If the rep leaves the company, he just has to go into GrandCentral, remove the old work number and replace it with the new. All of his leads and your customers are still getting a hold of this rep at the same number, problem is, he doesn’t work for you any more and he may have taken many accounts with him. In my opinion, companies should make policies protecting themselves from situations like this as soon as possible. With the Google Brand behind it, GrandCentral will not be an obscure service for long, leaving unprotected employers open to many issues related to this phone number fronting.