Slashdot Mirror


iPods Valuable in the College Classroom?

Infonaut writes "The Christian Science Monitor has an interesting article called When iPod goes collegiate, examining the iPods for students program at Duke University. It seems that while many students and professors find them valuable for classwork, this is America, so questions about intellectual property rear their ugly head: "Do they have permission from the person who wrote the lectures to share it?" asks one IP attorney, referring to lectures recorded on iPods."

12 of 364 comments (clear)

  1. Valuable? Yes. by Neil+Blender · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's easier to zone out with a little music.

  2. Illusory benefits by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Some of the most popular student uses included recording lectures, taking oral notes, and even using the devices to create electronic flash cards.

    Professors reported that students seemed more engaged in classes where they could use the iPods. They also cited strong student use of the audio capabilities of the iPod in their presentations, and more accuracy in quoting from interviews they did using the iPods.


    How long will this last? If a new device comes out, an iPod-killer so to speak, will students require those to succeed in school? If so, this says more about students and the education system than about iPods and their perceived educational benefits.

  3. YES! by Free_Trial_Thinking · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For $10,000 a year in tuition, yes, I do own the lectures!

  4. Re:If I paid fees to attend the lecture... by nacturation · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have the right to make a copy to listen to it later (or to share with other students).

    Replace "lecture" with "movie" and see if your theory still applies. :)

    --
    Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  5. Hey. The Apple section is just a shilling section. by James+A.+Y.+Joyce · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Hey, Taco, let's post yet another story about something that's been done for decades with tape recorders...only now it's with IPODS!!!!!"

    Yeah, amazing. How is using a modded iPod (they can't record out of the box) different from using a tape recorder? The hard disk? Whoop-dee-fuckin'-do.

  6. Re:Ummm by nacturation · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's different because it generates publicity. Looks like their plan to dominate the media with iPod stories is working. Speaking of a generic recording device is completely uninteresting... but an iPod? Start the hype engine! Create controversy where none exists! Get it posted on slashdot! This is the Marketing 202 course that Apple and other media outlets excel in. How many people would click through to a Christian Science Monitor (hah, what an oxymoron) article about analog tape recorders? But if CSM spins it as an "iPod against the machine" story, it gets impressions which generates ad revenues for them.

    --
    Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  7. The real issue... by Urkki · · Score: 5, Funny

    Who cares about recorded lessons? The real issue is, does a student have a right to remember or use, let alone share any information gained from a lecture (or a book or whatever) without written permission from the lecturer (or the author or whatever)? After all, isn't that protected IP?

    I mean, just think about it... The student might some day be a lecturer himself, so what right does he have to distribute the IP he may have memorized?

    I wonder why for example NSTA hasn't taken such a firm stand on IP issues, like MPAA and RIAA have. Such lackluster attitude towards these serious issues will undermine the future of modern society!

  8. legal issues? by blew_fantom · · Score: 5, Informative

    when i took business law back in the day, the lecturer was a former chief prosecutor and had lots of experience. but if there was one policy he enforced, it was that we were NOT allowed to record his lectures. that sucked, since most of the test material was from his lectures. his stated reason was that because he will (and did) say controversial stuff, as well as mentioning specifics of certain cases (without naming names), if there was a recording of what he said out there, it *could* be used against him. it was his way of protecting himself. so i imagine in this day and age of mp3's and decentralized distribution, i can see how a) some professors could have a problem with their lectures free floating out there or b) see devices such as an iPod as the greatest invention since the typewriter in helping them teach...

  9. Re:Copyright issues? WTF??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're confusing the issue of the copyright on the recording of an audio work (P) vs. the copyright on the written version of the same work (C). While a recording of plain spoken word doesn't necessarily benefit from (P) protection (as you say, depends if it's original or not), the text conveyed by the word most certainly.

    Put it another way, reading a piece of copyrighted text doesn't instantly make that text public domain.

  10. Re:Ummm by pokka · · Score: 5, Informative

    Did you read the article? Because it's not about "iPod against the machine" and it's not written controversially at all. In fact, the Christian Science Monitor - despite the name - is a very reputable, non-biased news source. The article is also fairly thorough - especially for a non-tech news source.

    The actual FA discusses why Duke thought it was a good idea to give iPods to students at all. The first question - why choose the iPod instead of a player with more function? The iPod requires additional accessories and hackery to do all the things that students want to use them for. Casual iPod users would find it difficult to share downloaded lectures, for example, because Apple makes sure that it's difficult to transfer files off of your iPod - protected or not.

    And secondly, is it really a good idea to give them away without really coming up with good uses for them? "Let's give everyone an iPod first, and figure out how to integrate it into our curricula later!" That's certainly what seems to have happened - and that's how students feel as well.

    If anyone's generating stupid publicity, it's Duke University. The article just tries to figure out what effect (if any) it has had on students and their learning and interaction methods.

  11. We at Duke agree by DSLAMngu · · Score: 5, Informative
    Overall, this is an extremely well-elaborated and accurate article. However, here are some links to what Duke's Chronicle has been saying, in case you were curious:

    iPod Experiment

    Duke iPod program to continue next year

    Also, you can go to The Chronicle and search the archives for "iPod" and get any number of negative student editorials on the topic. Basically, all of us at Duke agreed that the project was a marketing campaign, plain and simple; on the other hand, you won't see us complaining. We got free (as in, paid for by a fund accumulated from previous years) iPods, and next year's freshmen will get them if they take the appropriate classes.

    In addition, Carolina can go to hell. Go Devils :-P

  12. Re:Also as a bargaining tool by kyojin+the+clown · · Score: 5, Interesting
    So, the information the professor gives you is his intellectual property is it? what about the parts he was taught by someone else? if you pass the information on to someone else, is it your IP or the professor's IP?

    at what point does 'learning' become 'IP theft'? something is seriously wrong with the culture at your university, and with society in general, if knowledge is going to be wrapped up in disclaimers and intellectual property rights.

    in fact, it sickens me.