The editor's note in the last issue of the Forum tried to sketch a rough parallel between "conversation" and "picturing" and the processes of teaching and numbering. If "counting" and "numbering" (as Lee Shulman had used the ideas to represent the deep roots of scholarship) seemed static, explaining via words and pictures formed the necessary complement, the mode needed to pass on whatever facts and ideas seemed "nailed down." This issue of the Forum picks up where the last left off. Its several articles seek to leave faculty with a few ideas to ponder over the summer, ideas to consider applying to the courses being planned for next fall.

Only the rare picture is really worth a thousand words, but a picture can go a long way in clarifying ideas. Mary Beaudry's article on course graphics makes a case for the value of a well-constructed diagram in helping students understand and integrate concepts. A good diagram functions like a map. It presents knowledge whole (or seems to) and lets students discover as their eye directs and revisit as their curiosity and need demand.

Thomas A. Marino, Matthew Eager, and Taryn Draxler offer a combined view, combined in a number of ways. First, while Marino is faculty, Eager and Draxler are students. Together they present a teaching and learning conversation in progress, the faculty member's idea, how it went over, and what he plans to do in response to what the students thought. It's also a very modern conversation and a very modern and practical use of new technology for pedagogical gain. Students view and listen to the straight out lecture material online, at their convenience--a situation rather like having a map available. Then face-to-face time becomes richer because it can be used for more give and take rather than simply a lot of "giving" on the professor's part.

Donna Qualters of MIT has used a structured set of guidelines called "Dialogue" to create a safe social space for faculty to probe deeply and honestly into their lives as teachers. Excerpts from these conversations show the value of these meetings.

Qualters' conversations are face-to-face, but much of our communication these days flows through e-mail. E-mail offers a tremendous blessing and has revived letter-writing and more frequent communication among all those with access to it who do not proudly count themselves among the neo-Luddite population. But even for enthusiasts, e-mail presents challenges. Like automobiles and the telephone, it's a mixed blessing. Do faculty have a role to play (beyond their own personal challenges in coping with e-mail) in helping students and the campus in general learn how to cope with the digital missive? Ron Cramer's job has him pondering these questions every day, even as he works to keep the e-mail flowing and the rest of the new technologies up and running for faculty.

Finally, Linc. Fisch offers another practical AD REM column that ties together aspects of the new pedagogies and some age-old teaching problems. Let's say you've prepared wonderful case studies and put them on the Web, but when you arrive to teach your class, the students sit mute as posts. What do you do? Linc. has some ideas.

Speaking, finally, of ideas, let me remind readers that the Forum wants to hear yours. Manuscripts on teaching and learning topics are always welcome. Send yours to the Forum via e-mail at jrhem@itis.com or via "snail mail" to James Rhem, 213 Potter Street, Madison, WI 53715.

May we all have a good, good summer.