Slashdot Mirror
Podcasts of University Lectures?
theslashdot asks: "I'm working at a major university in the US, and have been charged with posting pod-casts of class lectures on the internet. The problem is whether or not posting the videos would allow students to skip class and just download the lecture, instead. I guess the problem is trying to strike the right balance between allowing good students to take advantage of this resource, but discourage bad students from staying at home all the time and watching all the lectures right before the exam. So what methods can be used to provide these pod-casts for the students who actually attended class? In terms of when the lecture should be posted, what would be a good time-frame? Immediately after the class? 24 hours? One week? One class behind schedule?"
"In terms of trying to prevent this, here are some possible solutions I've come up with:
- Post the lecture with authentication based on the class list for those enrolled in the course, although this would not really discourage truancy.
- Post the lecture with authentication based on those who attended the class (student cards would have to be barcode-scanned at the beginning of class); this would prevent those who missed the class from downloading the lecture, but presumably they could receive a copy from a student who did attend the class. Additionally it would create a major hassle for all students to ensure that their attendance is registered.
- Post the lecture with a single password that the professor distributes to the class during the lecture. This would discourage students from missing the lecture, but likely those students missing class could simply obtain the password from another student who did attend the class."
- Post the lecture with authentication based on the class list for those enrolled in the course, although this would not really discourage truancy.
- Post the lecture with authentication based on those who attended the class (student cards would have to be barcode-scanned at the beginning of class); this would prevent those who missed the class from downloading the lecture, but presumably they could receive a copy from a student who did attend the class. Additionally it would create a major hassle for all students to ensure that their attendance is registered.
- Post the lecture with a single password that the professor distributes to the class during the lecture. This would discourage students from missing the lecture, but likely those students missing class could simply obtain the password from another student who did attend the class."
If they can get the information from other places, why are you concerned if they come to class or not? As long as they are learning, your job is done.
People who are going to skip class will either way, and they'll eventually get a copy regardless of your counter measures. Why make the "good" students jump through hoops or make the job overly difficult for yourself?
I don't really see why you're worried about discouraging truancy. Most students will probably desire to attend the class anyway, if nothing else for the social aspect. MIT posts videos of all their lectures (or is trying to get to that point, I'm not sure how far they are) and I don't see them having any problems.
Another thing, I suspect this would be beneficial to some students who, like me, are not morning people. If I have to drag my ass out the door for an 8:00 class there's a good chance I'm not going to be paying much attention to the lecture. If a student chooses to defer his viewing of the lecture to a time when he's actually awake I don't see why he shouldn't be allowed to do so.
As long as he is learning, I see no reason why you should try and hide lectures from kids who choose to learn in a different way. (audio as opposed to sitting through class) Listening to all of them the day before an exam is no different from cramming the night before.
Making anything available outside of class time enables students to skip classes. Some students will skip more classes because they know they can get the notes later, other will never miss class, still others will miss class no matter what.
If you really want to help out good students put up these podcasts. Don't make it harder to get at because of a few bad apples, don't penalize good students because of the bad ones.
And then, there's the bottom line for all universities. Are they still paying for the class? Then get off their fuckin' backs about showing up all the time.
Whoo, signature!
DesireCampbell.com
If there is something to be gained by being in the class, then I'll be there. If I can get just as much out of it by not going (and face it.. bachelor's degrees at least in the US are becoming so common as to be meaningless, and the standards are lowered to accomodate this as well in most cases), then why should I have to go? Lectures are about giving out information. It's usually a one way mechanism, occasionally (and rarely) does someone ask a question during the lecture. If you want class participation, make a discussion course. Oh, but discussing integrals doesn't really make sense, does it?
I treated college as a rubber stamp that I needed to get a job. Did I learn things? Yes. Did I do it by sitting in class? No, I did it by doing the assignments, or just learning what I needed to right before the test. I pick things up quickly and one reading of the textbook of a subject I'm interested in is good enough for me to remember where to go when I need the information again (or to classify the information so I can find it later). College isn't (and shouldn't be!) about rote memorization of stupid facts. If you're teaching me to think, then do it by challenging me (not making me sit in a lecture while you talk at me and I'm eyeing the girl two rows away). If you're trying to force me to learn something, give up hope right now -- you can't force someone to learn something when they don't want to.
I welcome all the responses telling me that I'm an idiot or whatever, that's fine. I'm a bit full of myself with regards to how quickly I pick things up (and no, I don't remember everything -- but I will remember that there was something that I don't know the details of 100%, and will then know to look for it again to re-learn it when I need to use it). Why force me to be on the same level of the people who are also there for the rubber stamp, but are on the bottom end of the pool of applicants? I went to a school and in to a major that had a rather noticeable lack of various groups (blacks, women), and it was somewhat apparent that there were a few people in the school who got there to equalize the numbers and not because of ability. Why force me on their level? The person I'm thinking of actually asked a college level, calculus-based physics-for-engineers professor to explain how 3x = 2x + 10 became 5x = 10, x=2 (the numbers might have been different, but it was similarly simplistic).
I was a TA in one-on-one labs, gave several lectures and presentations, etc. I continue to do so to this day, at my current job. Guess what? I don't care if the students remember what I say, that's up to them to want to do. If the people who DO care remember that the information is out there and it's accessible later, then I've done my job. If all they have is a powerpoint presentation with a couple brief sentences at the end when they want to go back to the information, then I consider my job a failure, but that's another discussion.
Basically -- You're going to do this, some of the students will find a way around it (the smart ones), the other students will use said way around it (the lazy ones, not necessarily different from the smart ones), and you'll just piss people off. Don't.
Seriously, if the students can blow off lecture, or it's not necessary, why is that a problem?
Take the case of a university student who does as you say, and skips lecture, downloads the podcasts, and still does well in the class. The university still gets paid. The professor still gets paid. Class size is smaller, allowing greater attention to the students who do choose to be there. The skipping student does well, and gets a good grade, and the professor has a more attentive and interested audience. Everyone wins.
Now, take the case of the student who skips lecture, downloads the podcasts, and bombs the course. The university gets paid. The professor gets paid. Class size is smaller, allowing for greater attention for the students who are there. The skipping student does poorly, and either learns to go to lecture in the future, or gets booted out of school. Everyone wins except for the student, who only screwed himself.
Just put up the podcasts.
So what methods can be used to provide these pod-casts for the students who actually attended class?
An attendance policy? Miss class 6 times, you fail. That's the policy at my university, and it works.
[ check out my ruby book @ http://ww
I don't see what would be wrong with having the more static subjects, like algebra, lower-level calculus, undergrad chemistry, physics, history, etc., primarily taught by video lectures. After a few years of working at it, a handful of lecturers in each field would be recognized as having the best recorded lectures, and everyone would just use those.
Any university-level classes for those topics could exist simply as a battery of exams to verify understanding of the topic, preceded by a period of time (say, a semester) during which the student has access to an expert in the field and goes to them with questions, but just watches the videos and reads printed material most of the time. Anyone who wants to learn it but doesn't want to pay and doesn't care about any kind of official recognition of their understanding of the topic can just pay for the videos, or download them for free (it's not like they'd need to keep making new ones, after all), or whatever.
Labs, language classes, and higher-level courses could all be taught the traditional way.
Why not?
As a college student, I can only inform you about the conditions at my university, and in the classes I've taken. Also, IANAS (I am not a statistician) but I can say that a high percentage of the professors I've had, and the professors my friends have had, don't ask questions, or encourage any interaction from the audience at all. In fact, many I have frown upon it.
In stadium classes, for example, interaction has been deemed impractical. Most professors simply lecture, and people with questions are forced to wait until afterwards and scramble for the few moments the professor is cleaning up, or attempt to make office hours, which consist of a small hour or two hour window that usually falls during one of your other classes. In a class like this, what's the difference if the students are there or not? If they have questions, they just try to make office hours anyway.
In smaller, but still lower level classes, interaction between the student and teacher may be encouraged by the professor, but is usually never reciprocated by the student. Most of my classes, the students just sit there silent when the teacher asks a question, and the professor is forced to answer themselves. I assume this has come about due to the abundance of unfriendly or quiet teachers, as well as the fear of getting questions wrong, or the fear of peer ridicule. Usually, I'm the only one in my classes who even speaks to the professor, let alone answer questions. Again, what's the difference? I'd rather have those quiet people at home anyway, so the teacher pays more attention to me.
Only in the higher level, VERY small classes have I found the reverse to be true. Here, interaction is the point of the entire class. If there are only 10 people in your class, and you don't get it, comprehension has just dropped 10%. (Can you tell I'm a Math/Computer Science major?) Of course, in these classes, such a podcast doesn't make sense, but I assume it's not the sort of class the news post is asking about.
Of course, if the professor in question is a good professor, the engaging, interactive, interesting, imaginative type who we always want as teachers but never seem to get, they shouldn't have a problem drawing people to their actual lectures anyway. People should WANT to come, and the ones that don't want to probably shouldn't be there anyway: they just sit in the back, and cause disturbances when their cell phones ring or they spill their Vente Mocha Decaf Frappichinos.
No, Mr. Green. Communism is just a red herring.
I am one of those good students. The last two quarters I got on the dean's list. I am also 34 years old. I prefer full access to all notes, podcasts, etc as early as possible, so I can choose to go to class or not. I pay in full for all my classes, and feel that I should be the final arbitor of whether I get anything out of actually being there.
This whole 'keep the bad students from skipping' is a ridiculous stance in the first place. There is an obvious correlation between class attendance and overall grades in most cases. It is irritating as all get out when I get into a class where a TA or professor decides to play nanny, and take attendance, or restrict access to class material because 'students will skip'. All you're doing by restricting access is making students like me, who do go to class and do get excellent grades, jump through a massive number of irritating hoops.
It's college, not a babysitting program. Whatever happened to personal responsibility of the student to get to class? We're all adults there.
Nothing hides evidence like a stew. -Gus Pratt
As a graduate student and college instructor, I would argue that one thing that students will lose from skipping the lecture is the horizontal social connections between students. Even if there's no discussion or opportunity to stop the teacher and ask questions, attending class gives students the opportunity to forge social relationships before and after class that allows them to compare notes and share experiences. Students could time-shift a lecture and discuss it later, but it seems less likely, and there's something to be said for talking when the lecture is still fresh in their minds. I also wonder how attentive students would be watching a podcast compared to sitting in a lecture hall. Sharing the same physical space demands at least the appearance of attentiveness.
Somebody please, tell this machine I'm not a machine.
Skills are one of the sets of learn-able things that are often best taught by a live person. The ability to use a language is definately a skill, and happens to be one that especially favors live teachers as the best learning method.
Many, many classes at a given university are not like that at all.
In order for, say, a history class to be worthwhile, you need either
A) informed discussion of written material that draws heavily upon the superior knowledge of your professor (who is, hopefully, much better-read than the students) or
B) original communication from the professor, that has not yet been put down on paper (or, at least, not widely published) and is also worth learning (the prof's pet theory about some particular author probably DOES NOT count)
B is very rare these days, and can be considered nonexistant at the undergrad level for all practical purposes.
A is less rare, but far less common than it should be. It requires small class sizes, which aren't the norm at many universities, and especially in lower-level classes.
I would go as far as to say that, for most majors and at most universities, roughly 2 years worth of a 4-year bachelor's degree could be more quickly, cheaply, and efficiently learned through simple reading, with ZERO interaction with professors.
For many majors, it's very nearly the whole four years that would be better devoted to just reading the right material.
Yes, classes in addition to the reading would be great, but the classes should augment the reading, NOT the other way around. The point of the classes should be to help you get more out of the reading more quickly than you could on your own, not just to teach you every damn thing out of a given book when you can read it yourself for free (assuming a nearby library has a copy).
Hands-down the most valuable thing that I've learned at my university is that, for probably 75% of the stuff taught here (not just in my majors, but in ALL of them) at the undergrad level, I can read the material and teach it to myself better than I can learn it from some professor who's just telling me what the book says. For that discovery alone, I see my time here as having been worthwhile.
That's basically what this all boils down to.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
"Let me ask the reverse question: why would you not come to lectures at the scheduled times? You're in school, you're paying good money for it, the curriculum is designed to enable you to take the courses without conflicts, and the courses are designed for steady, regular attendence. What earthly reason would there be to skip classes except in cases of dire emergency?"
Let me give you a few examples because I've run into these situations.