Re: Schools and IETF

[Ray Harder <[e-mail]>]

> At  1:24 3/20/94 -0800, Ray Harder wrote:
> >John, Tracy, Bill, Connie, all....
> >
> >I attended several IETF mtgs last year and I have to wonder aloud with Bill:
> Is
> >this an appropriate forum for K-12 schools? This is an important
> *ENGINEERING*
> >group that is concerned with the nitty gritty details of the Internet etc.
> What
> >possible reason is there for the average teacher to participate? Do we send
> >teachers to the meeting of the Cable TV engineers? Or the Telephone
> Engineers?
> >The CCITT/ITU etc?
>
> Why not?  Sometimes the engineers neglect the forest by concentrating too
> much on the trees.  It certainly wouldn't hurt for teachers and
> administrators to understand something about the technical world they are
> getting into (and there is *NO* turning back folks) just as it won't hurt
> to have the engineers understand something about the problems teachers and
> school administrators are trying to solve in the school.

I agree with both of these ideas. Engineers need to know more about the real
world and teachers/school personnel need to know much more about school
technologies, the question at hand is: Is the IETF the best place for the
needed interaction?

>
> We (Lloyd Internetworking) regularly set up elementary, middle, and high
> school building/campus LANs.  We regularly set up their Internet
> connections and district/county wide WANs.  (We at Lloyd Internetworking
> are actually making a living at it!)  We always make a point explain *why*
> we are doing what we are doing and to involve the responsible school
> personnel in the design and implementation process.  I *always* make a
> point to spend time teaching the teachers and administrators (those I can
> get to sit still and listen, that is :^) the basics of routing, routers,
> servers, and clients.  It means that they have a fighting chance to keep
> their network running smoothly.

I am delighted to hear this! As a service provider, I feel it is your
obligation to do so. Unfortunately, you are a minority right now. Most network
providers idea of *training* is a close up view of a technician's back pockets
while he/she is installing wiring, software, etc. and mumbling in
techno-babble. It is entirely appropriate for you as a provider to change this.
I assure you that this will be rewarded by repeat business! Again, however, the
IETF is *NOT* a service provider for the end user. They are a standards
organization dealing primarily with the most extreme details that the average
user has absolutely *no* need or desire to know. This is different from
router(s/ing), Client/servers, etc. which I agree they *must* start learning
about if they are going to adequately educate students for the future (actually
the past! It has been essential for some time now!).

>
> I am sure that many in the education field view building LANs/MANs/WANs as
> rocket science.  It isn't.  I have taught people with no prior computer
> experience to design LANs, configure routers, and install networking
> software.  All it takes is a grasp of the fundamentals (only takes a few
> hours) and an ability to break a problem down into its component parts and
> then deal with the parts independently.  (Aha!  We are talking basic
> *problem solving skills*!)  The hardest part is just convincing people to
> try and not give up out-of-hand.


Absolutely! I agree again. (Actually they tell me rocket science isn't so hard
either! ;-)> We must break this down into basics and patiently explain each and
every part and piece. The question here is more along these lines: Suppose
China suddenly became the central force in world politics and economics. If I
were going to function and compete, I would need to know about China first and
then eventually go so far as to learn and then teach Chinese. What sense would
it make for me to go first to a conference on Chinese linguistics where all of
the participants spoke in and about Chinese?

This is exactly what is happening at the IETF. While there are some who are
bilingual in "Chinese" and other languages, and are wonderful people who are
happy to patiently draw characters on napkins and spin stories over a cup of
coffee to anyone who asks, it is fundamentally *not* the reason they are there.
(It is a philisophical question about whether or not they should be. And this
is not meant to denigrate the excellent work of Joyce Reynolds and others in
the user services area.) They are dealing with technical problems that schools
will probably never have to worry about --nor should they.

> So I strongly urge more educators to get involved in the technical aspects
> of their schools; whether they be networking, telephony, audio/video,
> heating/cooling, computers, plumbing, electrical, whatever.  The more
> different technical areas one experiences, the more one discovers that the
> same laws and processes tend to apply everywhere.  It tends to turn people
> into technical generalists.  And isn't that what a teacher is supposed to
> be?

Again I cannot agree more. "Technical generalists" is a good, right, and noble
goal. The question at hand is: Is the IETF the best place for this. The
schedule is too frequent and inconvenient for teachers, the level is too
esoteric (Though absolutely appropriate and essential in that realm), the sites
are too widespread, and the majority of teachers would be ill-served by
attending.

Please understand. I am not trying to criticise either the teaching profession
or the IETF. I just am questioning aloud whether the two have much to say to
each other at this stage of things. They live in very different and not yet
overlapping worlds. Each group has a central role to play in their world. I
just think that there are some other more appropriate places where more
meaningful dialog could take place. There are some like you who should, and I
hope *do,* participate in both worlds, I am questioning whether teachers and
school personnel are in the same category?

I would also point out on a purely pragmatic level, that we have been
unsuccessful at attracting teachers to participate in the IETF meetings
regularly. I can't think of one who I have seen at more than one meeting.... I
just don't think we are (should be?) meeting those needs.

> Brian Lloyd, President                         Lloyd Internetworking
> [e-mail]                                3031 Alhambra Drive
> [phone] - voice                         Suite 102
> [phone] - fax                           Cameron Park, CA  95682

Oh, yeah, although I'm opinionated, I'm not so arrogant to believe that I can't
be wrong! I'm listening! If the ISN feels that IETF is a place to work with
teachers then I think some serious changes are in order. If teachers are a
target group, then the IETF ISN-WG needs to change more than I think they are
comfortable with.

Ray



****************************************************************************
* Raymond G. Harder                  "Can't walk today, I don't feel well."*
* Educational Technology Consultant  "Why don't you sit out in the sun?"   *
* 909-983-4713                       "What? People will think I'm lazy!"   *
* [e-mail]                         -- My 92 year old grandmother    *
****************************************************************************