Well here is a view from the other side of the textbook... I started teaching embedded stuff at a technical college that wanted to move from Motorola 6809 to HC11 (1990 and probably at least 5 years too late if you ask me). It took 2 years to fully upgrade the course (it was a 2 term course so you have to work the old course material out before you bring the new stuff in), but it was much improved as a result. Better chip integration, EEPROM, bootloading, and all the other nice things you get using a microcontroller instead of a microporcessor. In a way the sadest part was that Motorola really lobotomized the CPU in the HC11 (compared to the 6809), but 2 steps forward, one step backward I guess. As a result of the move we were able to jettison the 6821 PIA and the 6850 UART material in favour of internal peripherals (SCI, SPI, A/D, etc). Plus we made the biggest change which was to add C to the course. We were lucky in that we had TONS of hours so we did everything from hand assembly to C.

The problem (for me) came several years later when it was time to revamp again. Some folks wanted to go to a discrete 8088 design. Inertia took over and the 68hc11 stayed on (but really a move to HC08 or HC12 would have been more appropriate). I think schools should rebuild their micro courses every 5 years, but I'd bet 10 years is more the norm. Due to impending stagnation, I left teaching and returned to industry.

I disagree with those that think it's OK to teach on old hardware. It doesn't make sense to spend the hours on old hardware because the graduate will be faced with a very different world upon graduation. People need to be taught current stuff USING CURRENT TOOLS.

GB