| 1. |
What language lab system do you currently
have and who is the vendor? |
| 2. |
How long have you had the system/been
actively using the system? |
| 3. |
What has your experience been with: |
| |
The equipment/hardware:
N/A
The software: N/A
The integration of hardware and software:
N/A |
| 4. |
Have you found that the following have
lived up to the claims of the vendor? |
| |
The equipment/hardware:
Yes
The software: Yes
The integration of hardware and software:
Yes |
| 5. |
What has your experience been with the
vendor in terms of |
| |
Quality of installation: Excellent |
| |
Meeting schedules set: Has met every
schedule so far. |
| |
Skill and knowledge of hardware/software/how
to integrate existing language learning software
with the system: Expert. Chip Howe knew
everything about the hardware, the software.
He answered all questions thoroughly and with
full demonstration using the system itself
until we understood or were satisfied. We
did not get the same sense of expertise, or
that the other vendor was as comfortable with
and knowledgeable about each and every aspect
of the system as well as about the applications
of all the parts of the system. He did not
seem to know as much about language learning
and teaching as the CTS vendor and did not
have a good a sense of how to show teachers
how to use it. This is something we considered
to be very important because the ability of
the tech and the trainer would be very important
to how effectively teachers would eventually
be able to use the system. |
| |
Efficiency of Service: Excellent
|
| |
Return calls promptly?: Yes |
| |
Get whatever problems you may have had
solved promptly?: They always return
calls the same day and answer all questions
fully, come to campus as promised. |
| |
Responsiveness to repeat calls for training
of newly hired faculty/lab staff or faculty
that needed more extensive training after
the initial training:
This is one of the reasons we chose CTS. We
like their continuous training plan. Tandberg's
plan for training seemed to focus on the initial
trainings for faculty, but did not promise
the kind of continuous training we need for
a language faculty of 30 where turnover is
frequent. |
| 6. |
Describe the process you used to decide
which lab system you wanted. What, if any,
other lab systems did you consider? Who was
the vendor? Why did you choose the system/
vendor that you did? |
| |
Tandberg and Sony were considered. We
had a demo by ETI and CTS. One of the things
our ESL chair really liked about the Sony
Teacher Console was the dual monitors, the
ease of the use of the Sony. She thought
it was more intuitive and user-friendly
than the Tandberg.
Also we had had an analog system supplied
by ETI and Tandberg had stopped making the
parts, so service was a problem. We just
felt we didn't want to go through that with
this new lab and we felt we couldn't be
sure that it would not happen. |
