For any further information on the programme, write to The Senior Administrative Officer, IIM, Lucknow, Prabandh Nagar, Off Sitapur Road, Lucknow-226 013; Ph: (0522) 361 891-7; Fax:(0522) 361 843, 361 840; E-mail: mdp@iiml.ac.in

E-commerce for managers

There's yet another management programme at IIM Lucknow soon. This one is very topical-Electronic Commerce: The Enabling Technologies. To be conducted from August 2 to 6, the programme aims to discuss the organisation impact of e-commerce and various enabling technologies necessary to make it a viable concept.

Intended for middle to senior level executives involved in taking IT initiatives in organisations, the programme fee is Rs 12,500 per person for residential participants and Rs 10,000 per person for non-residential participants.

Programme director Bharat Bhasker is a professor in the area of IT and systems and has been with IIM Lucknow since 1996. Prior to that, he spent 11 years working in the leading research establishments in the US.

For further details, contact The Senior Administrative Officer, IIM Lucknow, Prabandh Nagar, Off Sitapur Road, Lucknow-226 013; Ph: (0522) 361891-7; Fax: (0522) 361 843, 361840; E-mail: mdp@iiml.ac.in

Internet not a threat

Despite talk about how the Internet could transform higher education and make ``brick and mortar'' campuses obsolete, Gregory C Farrington, president of Leigh University is one technology enthusiast who believes residential undergraduate colleges are unlikely to close shop anytime soon.

Farrington's thoughts on technology and undergraduate residential education were published recently in a 21-page essay he contributed to a book called Dancing with the Devil, a collection of essays published by Educause, an organisation that promotes technology in higher education, reports New York Times.

Often, discussions about computers and education center on the pros and cons of distance learning efforts and whether these programs pose competition to education in classrooms. But these ventures are targeted largely at working adults, Farrington says, and are more likely to compete with community colleges than residential schools. What makes Farrington'sessay unusual is his examination of whether technology could change academic life for the 18-to-22 dormitory crowd, too.

His answer? Yes, probably, which he views as a good thing. If administrators and faculty members are wise, he says, they will view the advent of the Internet not as a threat, but as a chance to launch an overdue examination of teaching methods.

``We've become a bit monopolistic, a bit complacent,'' says Farrington. ``We've put too little of our energy into focusing on the challenge of how we create the most effective learning environment at the undergraduate level. We know how we want to teach.''

Farrington, who oversees a small university in Bethlehem, Pa. known for its engineering as well as its liberal arts program, believes that the Internet is good for many educational purposes. For instance, posting images of art online enables art history students to view them long after the slide projector has been turned off, and online discussion groups that extend debate outside theclassroom can help students improve their writing skills. ``To some extent,'' he said, ``[the Internet] is sending us backwards into an age of letters.''

Farrington believes the Internet could prove a valuable way not just to deliver information but to explain concepts as well.

By way of example, Farrington points to basic science courses, which are often taught in large lecture halls to hundreds of students.

He asserts that a student actually learns a subject like introductory physics not through listening to lectures, but by sitting down quietly with the material, grappling with it and working through problems.

Given that, Farrington says in his essay, it might make sense to scrap the lectures. He suggests breaking the course components down into bite-size chunks, putting them on a Web site as a kind of interactive textbook with illustrations and audio, and then allowing students to work at their own pace through the material. ``Save live class time for the intellectual interactions that only humanscan provide,'' he writes.

On the other hand, Farrington says, technology is not cheap. And online courses, if they are taught well, are by no means less labour-intensive than traditional classes.

Perhaps most important, Farrington asserts, is that there is irreplaceable value in a campus community, in students engaging face-to-face with professors and other students. Computers might come in handy when a language student needs to memorise French verbs, he says, but discussion of Victor Hugo requires conversation.

Not everyone agrees with Farrington's take on technology's role on the campus.

David F Noble, a history professor at York University in Toronto who has written a series of essays critical of educational technology, says he likes Farrington's emphasis on the need for student/faculty interaction, but he believes Farrington is caught in a ``glaring contradiction.'' Noble believes a campus cannot make wideranging use of technology and still have sufficient rapport between students andprofessors. If computers teach some things that used to be taught by people, Noble says, they will necessarily displace professors -- and thereby leave campuses with fewer professors to interact with students.