Professor Sells Lectures Online
KnightMB writes "Students at NCSU have the option of purchasing the lectures of a professor online. The Professor did this as a way to help those that missed class, didn't take good notes, or from another country and have trouble understanding an English speaking Professor. The reactions on campus were mixed among the students as some saw it as a great way to keep up with things should real life interfere and others see it as something to pay for on top of the tuition cost at the university.
Each one cost $2.50 for the entire lecture. Some students feel it should be free or cost less. The professor brings up a point that doing this takes extra effort and it's only fair that they should have to pay for that extra time and effort needed to put the lectures online for sale such as editing, recording equipment, etc. No one is forced to purchase the lectures, they are only an additional option that students will have.
Quote Dr. Schrag "Your tuition buys you access to the lectures in the classroom. If you want to hear one again, you can buy it. I guess you could see the service as a safety net designed to help the students get the content when life gets in the way of their getting to class."
Schrag explained that $1.50 of the money goes directly to ind-music.com, the host of the Web site offering the service. One dollar then goes to Schrag to offset the cost of recording and editing the lengthy lectures.
If he's only getting that percentage anyway, he could have saved his students money by making it a podcast.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Years ago, when I was in school, there were services that did this at my university. They ran with the U's blessing and had to get Prof permission. They didn't sell lectures, just lecture notes. But if the midterm was approaching and you slept through a morning class, $1.50 for the notes on the lecture you missed was well worth it.
- Greg
Start a happiness pandemic
If it isn't DRMed to hell this could be great, for example one could make techno-remixes of professors, ect.
Philosophy.
Seriously, he might as well have added "Sue me!" to the site.
This sounds like the school equivalent of all those patents that take something common and add "on a computer". I was able to buy lecture notes for most of my classes in 1996. Admittedly, those notes were taken by someone paid to take the notes, and sold by the school not the professor, but still this doesn't seem particularly exciting or novel, just a natural progression. I do remember back then they printed the notes on this annoying red paper to make it more difficult to photocopy the notes, something tells me any measures on the web to prevent copying and sharing of these notes will be even less effective.
What a wonderful way to reward laziness. And hey, while you're at it, pad your pockets through your podcast? Ridiculous.
1/ Speak really fast / erratically so the students have difficulty paying attention / making good notes
2/ Sell copies of notes to students to replace what they were unable to make themselves
3/ Profit!
To whomever thinks the pricing is outrageous... it should dawn on you that the alternative is NO SERVICE for NOTHING. Those are the two alternatives and the only two. Now which would you prefer: The option of purchasing non-required lecture notes or no option at all. That's what I thought.
Seems like a good deal. If you don't want to pay extra, just go take the notes yourself... you paid for it already anyway. If you want the stuff for free, just get someone else to record it for you.
But yes, if he is offering very clear, and clean mp3 versions of his lecture, this could be a non trivial task to make sure the audio is audible, which is what your money would be paying for. This is on top of the lecture. He is isn't required to do this.
Most other professors have written notes instead... which probably would be more useful than this.
He starts racing through lectures and writes equations on the board faster than students can copy them, because "if they keep catch up, that can always buy the video."
I can see students getting together to buy them all for study purposes and then bundling them all together to either sell to people taking the class next semester or more than likely just sharing them all. Before long the professor is easily found on file sharing networks.
Information does want to be free after all.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
I missed my Stats class at NCSU last night :( I'd gladly pay $1.50 to get that lecture.
Jay | http://oldos.org
meh, i would be pissed if one of my teachers wanted to do that. but i guess its alright as long as he is not using any university equipment to produce the recordings. i guess it is still kind of a racket
i think this is a really good idea..
1. it will probably keep some kids who don't feel like being in class out -- this will help those who do want to participate
2. it is good for studying for finals, or finding some obscure point you missed in class
3. it is good for when you just can't make it to class for whatever reason -- WAY better than copying notes off some other person in class, who probably has even worse handwriting than you do
4. ???
5. Profit!
-- lol pwned
For the general Biology class, the professor sells the notes and slides to support the Biology club. $7 or so, gets you the packet of the slides shown in class. (Exactly the same as if you would have just written it down yourself)
Is banned in my classroom as is all other electronic devices except for ADA needs. I don't post the notes and I don't post the powerpoints. Why? Well, there is a direct correlation between bad grades and lack of attendance of lectures even if the notes and powerpoints are posted. I also found out that a teacher at another university was using my powerpoints with out attribution as his own work. AND what I say in class is my intellectual property. AND I don't want the David Hershowitz brown shirts holding the odd joke about US foreign policy during the Eisenhower era against me (actually happened).
Comparing it to Windows will be a moot point, since El Dorado is going to have a 40% larger code base than XP.
The professors at every University I've worked for have done something similar. They take a collection of all the notes for the entire semester and sell them in bundles at the book store. We simply called them textbooks. You didn't have to buy them if you went to class, but if you wanted to be able to avoid class you could buy it and read it. Imagine that. That said, I know at least 4 Florida Universities have professors who will put their notes out in PDF format for sale/download, and every state university I've ever been to has at least one professor who does something similar with powerpoint.
I am one of those people that like listening to class lectures for fun. I know, I know get a life, blah, blah, blah.
However, I have listened to people from berkley, Stanford and more. I like to improve on what I already know and driving around listening to music i have already 1000 times before . . . I am not buying anything that is DRMmed or from a RIAA label. So I stay with what I have and know.
-- A computer without Windoze is like a choclate cake without mustard
My Macroeconomics professor at Florida State records all of his lectures along with a screencast that shows the PowerPoint presentation, movies, websites, etc. he show during the class synced with the audio. Does it for every lecture (all sections), and for every class that he teaches. All for free, and up on the web (FSU uses Blackboard) around 9:00PM on the day of the lecture.
The professor should be shot for being a profiteering asshole.
Just take a look at MIT's approach: http://ocw.mit.edu/index.html
At my university in Australia we get all our lecture slides for free - sometimes they are incomplete which encourages students to go to the lecture. If the lecturer feels like he can also record the lecture using the recording software in every lecture theatre. These are then uploaded to the CMS for each subject. If a lecturer doesn't publish the lectures online... there is outrage. it's something that i have been accostomed too.. and it means i can be highly flexible with my part-time studies/full time job.
Another attempt to leech money from students.
When I went to school, I could get a copy of any lectures notes just by asking the professor.
It also presents a conflict of interest. It is not in their interest to present the lecture in a clear manner.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The Professor did this as a way to help those that missed class, didn't take good notes, or from another country and have trouble understanding an English speaking Professor.
Great idea! A better idea would be if the non-English-speaking professors would do the same thing, so that English-speaking students have a way of understanding their lectures.
Seriously: I had to drop a class once because I couldn't understand a word the Vietnamese professor spoke.
Most of my computer science professors at the University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign) post all of their lecture notes on the internet. In their cases, since they use the lecture notes in class to guide their discussions, it isn't any more work for them to just put them up on the internet. The majority of these lectures are available to anyone, whether they are university students or not.
One of my profs, who teaches a course that is also open to students in other countries who are paying to take an online course, has a TA video record the whole lecture, which is then posted on the internet for all students paying for the class (university and distance education, or online, students). He has the recordings password protected because the university has some rules about it and won't let him essentially give the course for free to anyone who wants it (at least I think that was the explanation he gave but I'm not completely sure).
Personally, I think either of these two scenarios are the proper way to do things. If a prof is charging to give out copies of his lectures notes on the internet, then should he be charging if students come to his office during his office hours and ask about what they missed in classed? Isn't that one of the things a prof's office hours are for? And further more, even though it is using the slippery slope fallacy, if profs start charging for lecture notes and people think it is acceptable, then why don't they charge for the booklets used to write tests on or extra materials handed out in class? The simple answer to that question is because the institutions they work for are providing them with copy machines and such. Along that logic, I would say that time spent creating lecture notes is time spent preparing for class. It's true that they don't have to do it, but I don't think that is a good enough reason to charge for it.
Well, that's not what he's claiming.
He's not selling lecture notes, he's selling audio recordings of his lectures.
At many schools materials produced for classes like handouts, tests, etc are property of the department, not the professor. Perhaps the professor doesn't have the right to sell his lectures.
My friend tried to start a business reproducing old tests for study guides. He had the ok from the professors who wrote the tests, but the school demanded such a large cut of the revenue that it wasn't worth his time.
Basically it's like a musician selling his songs on the side and not through his record label.
At the University of Florida, it's not atypical to have classes of over 200 students, especially the business area. To accomodate this, videos of course, are recorded and posted online. You can always watch the professor live, but most students opt to watch the lectures 2 days before the exam. From an engineering side, many students do distance learning. The notes and lectures are recorded, and put online. There is an extra fee to do distance learning, and it's to pay for the equipment and staff to do the recording. Luckily, if you are a student that attends the class, and it is part of distance learning, you get access to all the material. Many times I would watch parts of a clip over and over because my handwriting sucked, teacher went too fast, I was asleep, or whatever. If a professor is willing to take his/her time to do this, and they are not compensated by the school, I'd pay a minimal fee for them. Hell, get 10 of your buddies, buy 1 copy and copy it. Stick it to em!
Why is this news? Just a heads-up, The Teaching Company has been around for years selling lectures by top rated professors from America's best universities. They sell Audio-only or DVD video. The lectures are professional quality shot in a studio.
Their website:
http://www.teach12.com/
As for the professor selling them? Yes, I whole-heartedly agree that s/he should be able to charge a reasonable fee. The lectures are the property of the professor, and they take extra time to prepare to be able to distribute. Don't like paying for them? Too bad! Next time consider coming to class because isn't that what you really paid for in the first place? An education from a brick-and-mortar school? Otherwise, take courses with an online university. Besides, shit (re:life) happens and in case you do have to miss class for a legitimate reason who knows what kind of notes a classmate would take if you were to borrow from them. Don't trust your grade to the numb nuts sitting next to you.
P.S. Wish I could use my mod points to skew this discussion...
The lectures that are recorded at MIT are all provided free of charge.
I'm surprised that no one has mentioned MIT's Open Courseware program (ocw.mit.edu). The goal is to have every class available online, and many have taped lectures for free, for anyone to see, not just students. I had a horrible differential equations professor, so I watched the OCW lectures from the previous term. It sure beat walking to class in the cold.
Well let us do some math here. At $1 per lecture in his pocket, and let us say 25 people grab a copy of the lecture, that is $25 for what probably takes 2-3 hours to prepare. This assuming he doesn't have to cover some equipment costs, in which case he might even be losing money. Personally I think $2.50 for a lecture is cheap, and I paid for my own schooling. Why should his time be free? If you don't like having to pay $2.5 for the audio lecture, then bloody well show up for class or develop a network to cover for you when you can't.
From TFA:
If you are in his class I'm sure you already have put in your share of the $12.50 that was used to get one master copy of each of the first five lectures.
Hear hear hear....
Students paying tuition are paying for fair access to course materials. Providing these materials selectively and at extra cost to privileged students is unfair and exploitative. It skews the bell curve towards wealthier students and thus obviates the level playing ground provided by a lecture-centric educational system.
If this good professor wishes to charge for his knowledge, he should abandon tenure and leave the university. Once the university is no longer pushing students into his course he can charge what he will for his pontifications. Any bets on whether that will reach $2.50 per download?
Notes are easy. Unless a professor is a crappy lecturer, they presumably have lecture notes/slides. So just digitise that (or create it digital in the first place) and you are good to go. However an actual video copy of the lecture is more work. I've done videos for professors and it does take a non-trivial amount of time to get all the video equipment up and running, and then afterwards to transfer it to computer, edit it, and convert it. I'm not saying it's a ton of work, but it is a non-trivial amount and the professor is doing it of their own volition.
If the university itself was going to install the facilities and hire the people as a part of the course then ok, but if a professor is providing the equipment and doing all the work himself, then I think he's got a right to charge. I mean he could, if he wanted, just not do it at all.
It's not fair to say "You have to spend your own time and money to make things easier for me for no compensation." That's not how it works. His job is to provide a lecture to teach you the materials and to test you on those. They are not required to bend over backwards for you.
So the teacher is selling notes, big deal. The little college I go to has been doing that for a while they even sell the power point presentation used during the lecture to the student for all history classes. Some of the info comes from retired teachers where as the rest comes from teachers still on campus. I personally think it is a good idea, I never did like having to bum note off classmates to fill in gaps from missing class or just missing some key point.
The professor isn't providing lecture notes for a fee. He's providing recordings of the lectures.
The U.K. educational system is apparently quite different from the system in the U.S. At the two universities I've studied at, only a few professors provide lecture outlines, and none that I know of provide full lecture notes. If you miss a lecture, it's your responsibility to get notes from another student. In the U.S., providing lecture notes is not part of a professor's job description.
Taking notes is an important skill. If you try to write down everything, you're going to get lost. You need to learn how to figure out what's important to write down and what's not.
Kudos to the professor for innovating!
The taxpayers of North Carolina aren't sending their hard earned money to the public university system in order to provide new markets for this professor to profit from. They are sending their money there to educate their children and their fellow citizens' children because they value the benefits of an educated citizenry.
If as the professor says, providing lecture recordings online can make a critical difference in the performance of students who may have missed class, who had a difficult time with the language, or who just need more time to let it sink in, then the university should, in the interests of fulfilling its taxpayer funded mandate, offer this program through the university at cost as an additional fee or as part of tuition.
Cut out the 3rd party hosting service middle man, and cut out the professor's profiteering.
He should be rewarded through the merit based university compensation program (wait, you mean they don't have one! *gasp*)
A taxpayer funded employee has found a more effective way to do what it is we are paying him to do. I don't bill my company an extra hour when I find a new method to increase the quality of my code, I'm expected to just do it. It's part of my job. The taxpayers of North Carolina should expect no less.
Some of the best lecturers that I had when I was an undergrad didn't provide any lecture notes at all.
This was only a few years ago and noone took it for granted that they were going to get given a set of notes after any particular lecture. One part of this was that everyone learnt how to take notes in a form that worked for them rather than relying on having some printed out powerpoint slides.
Notes were a nice addition to a lecture series and were useful for revision and adding to taken notes but they were just that - something extra that was not needed or expected, but did make life a little easier.
(I did my undergrad degree in the UK as well)...
This lecturer is not just putting some powerpoint slides up on the web - he seems to be recording, cleaning up and then providing the lectures in audio form which would require some addition time. Since this is not part of the standard job description then I have nothing against some money being made off of this... (Although in my experience one or two people would buy it and then copies would be made for everyone else).
[All Your Fish Are Belong To Us]
Was it a Vietnamese class?
I realized in my first week of college that approx. 60 percent of professors could be fired tomorrow without any effect on students. They aren't teachers, they are professors. They aren't required to teach anything, just to lecture about the subject. Some professors go beyond the call of duty and tell real life stories, and have real life experience in their subject. Those are the ones that you learn from. The ones that read out of the book? They would be better off in retirement. I pay 120 bucks for a book, I don't need you to read it to me. I can read it myself. I have no idea if this professor has lectures worth the $2.50. If he does, go for it. If not, read the book yourself folks.
www.kb3juv.com
You're missing the point. It doesn't matter which medium the lecturer is providing this post-lecture information. The point is, he's selling it.
Why has nobody pointed out that the $2.50 is FAR FAR CHEAPER than the tuition money the students are paying for the original lecture in the first place??
I read a lot of replies saying "Professors give out lecture notes, so they should give the recordings away for free, as well."
/. readers seem to be saying that lecture notes are a right they are due as a student. It seems to me that they are making a jump, from some professors being nice and doing this, to being ENTITLED to this.
Maybe things have changed since I was in college ten years ago, but it used to be that *some* of my professors gave away lecture notes, or put them online, and some did not. Some only put up problem set solutions, and some had every paper given in class away online. Some refused to put anything online, except the syllabus.
They then make the jump that if they are ENTITLED to lecture notes, they are ENTITLED to free recordings of the lectures.
You completely lose me on either one of those jumps.
I do not look at the $2.50 as a racket to make money, but rather an incentive to make sure that students continue to come to class, and not just skip "since the lecture and lecture notes are available online."
Sure, he could try giving away a free download to every student who showed up, but are you going to say that no student will give his/her free pass to his roommate who slept through the class?
- (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
He will sell less if people don't like his lecture in the first place. They might even use the lecture notes of a different professor.
And the recordings etc. of his lecture will probably not be much better than the lecture either.
It is in the best interest of the professor to make a good lecture and sell the lecture notes for a low price. Then many people will come to the lectures, and many people will buy the notes.
I myself have used the lecture notes of a different professor a couple of times because I liked them better. Quite often professors refer to the lecture notes of others because they're done well. So he might even be able to sell some to the students of other classes or universities, if it's worth the money.
Oh, and some professors turn their lecture notes into books and sell them... the professors here that do this often hand out the drafts in their lectures and get feedback and corrections from the students. Maybe they should pay the students for proofreading his book? What bullshit is this fighting for $2.50 for a lecture? Thats a single slice of pizza. If it's not worth the money, don't but the recordings.
Debian GNU/Linux - apt-get into it.
This system sounds at least a little bit unfair to those students who are in tight financial circumstances. If recorded lectures are available for a fee (even a nominal fee), then students with money to burn have an advantage over students who have to pinch pennies.
"I've been thinking about this Mister Hand. If you're here and I'm here, doesn't that technically make it our time?"
$30 Off All Plans: Use code TRIPLESAWBUCK
I suppose this means that, if students volunteered to record and edit the lecture and distribute it for free, the professor would have no objection?
Yes because the highest calling of the techno-cyber-people is to invest time and effort to deprive someone of their $2.50
Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
P.S. Wish I could use my mod points to skew this discussion..
I would too, but I want to join in.
I am a student at NC State, working on a doctorate in Adult Learning. I don't kow this guy, but what he is doing is crap. 'extra time to prepare?' 'my intellectual property?' 'why free music download a myth and a lie?' (all quotes from TFA) This guy comes across as selfish and an agenda pusher.
The time is only extra if he sees his job as talking in front of a room, rather than helping students learn.
His slides are his IP, sure, but the ideas he present sin class - a sophomore level Communications class - are a bunch of other people's thoeries. What if they charged him for the right to teach the stuff? From TFA, he feels burned by people using his materials to teach elsewher. If a powerpoint presentation took him that much intellectual energy and time, he may want to reconsider being an academic.
Nice push of FUD, coming from a professor no less, about the cost of digital products.
This guy has a skewed version of what education is. He is a great example of the 'little empereor' syndrome where faculty think they rule the world because they can make 18-24 year olds jump throgh hoops in order to get a degree.
It really desturbs me that people still keep thinking small. There is an Internet out there and it's BIG. Even if you are having lectures in a very narrow field, there are plenty of people that are interested in it.
So why not put some effort in putting the material on the web and then get money from ads? It works just fine for TV, but Internet is much cheaper and better to use.
That's a pretty good bargain; $2.50 is less than the going rate I used to pay to have people attend boring classes for me and take notes. I think two slices and a soda was my average trade. As this was tech school, in many cases the instructors lack of ability to explain the material (these men were paid to get research grants, not explain things to students) meant that actually attending the lectures would leave one more confused than had you missed it and just read the book instead. Still needed somebody to go in order to figure out which sections would be tested.
Even for people who actually do show up for class, having a version of the lecture you can rewind and mull over at your leisure has a significant value. This is especially true for slower students, like the communications majors this guy is selling to.
If there is not enough time to simultaneously take notes and understand the course, the professor is going too fast. This is how you get classes (especially on the graduate level) where a bunch of intelligent students spend so much time furiously scribbling that when the professor finally decides to stop and ask a question, half of the class is too preoccupied with catching up in their note-taking to answer and the other half has no clue what's going on because they haven't actually analyzed a word they've just written down yet. I know. I just came from one of those classes.
By the time students do get around to analyzing their own notes, the class is over and the opportunity to ask the professor questions in a class setting is lost.
This is when PowerPoint slides might actually come in handy. Many professors misuse them, but correctly used, they are a powerful tool for presenting large amounts of information in a small amount of time. This method lets students outline the lecture (the lecture itself may be more like an outline as a result of the slide format as well), filling the specifics either from research, the textbook, or an online copy of the slides. If you miss all of the information on a slide, you can go back to the course page (or directly to the professor, if the slides aren't posted anywhere) after class and find it in its entirety, with no time pressure to copy the information down.
If I tried to outline the notes I just took at the class I came from, I would probably miss some information I need to do the homework. Since the notes are gone as soon as the professor erases them from the whiteboard, this leaves me with no way of getting the information if I miss it in class. Since my professor has an attitude, I can't count on him to tell me what those notes were if I miss them, either - he'd probably quip about how I should have been paying more attention in class.
I''m finishing my Law Degree at the moment at Monash Law School, in Melbourne, Australia. Since i started my degree 95% of my lectures have been available in taped format RealMedia format for streaming - although it was never recommended that students skip class, recording never had that impact, and in my opinion increased the numbers attending class because they can easily relisten to portions in which they fell asleep or missed out on because the lecturer was moving too fast.
Just this semester we have about 70% of our lectures podcasted, so that we can listen to them any time we want - which is very handy considering most studnets work, and often forget what lectures they last listened to. It also allows students to listen to other lectures in other streams for the same subject, who may provide better explanations on certain issues.
charging money was never a part of our scheme, and i dont see why it should be. All the infrastructure was in place in our university though, and it was up to the individual lecturer to record, or not to record.
having videos of the lectures are a great idea, but I think he should try to get the university to pay for it instead of the students. non-native english speakers or students who get sick and can't attend lecture shouldn't be penalized. you only need to pay for the video equipment once, and in terms of the extra time it takes to make the videos, having the videos online will probably save him the time of answering many questions that students have later that could be answered by simply re-watching the lectures.
Didn't Thomas Dolby already do that?
SCIENCE!!!
... The idiots are ALREADY more creative.
From the article...
Quote Dr. Schrag "Your tuition buys you access to the lectures in the classroom. If you want to hear one again, you can buy it."
From the parent post...
So, if this lecturer is claiming it is extra effort to produce lecture notes, then he is not doing his job, frankly.
One of my disappointments in college was to find that every professor has their own theory of what they are "obligated" to offer as professor at a university. Some professors see classes as an obligatory tax paid in return for support from the university; they see themselves first and foremost as scholars in pursuit of knowledge and understanding, and classes are a burden yet a formality of the lifestyle which they choose. These professors walk into a lecture, often times purposefully parading their vast genius before their students to deter the weak-minded, confuse the passive learner, and leave the few that actually possess a parallel academic mastery in that field busy with such a plethora of challenging thought and theory that the majority of students are left in shock, unable to question one who has made them feel inferior. These professors are not interested in helping students; they are only interested in helping themselves. And they see the only people that they need to impress are the deans, the boards, and their colleages. One of my old college profs told me about a math professor he had at Vanderbilt who taught his lectures in a rectangular hall; two of the four walls were lined with chalkboards, with the second chalkboard ending right at the door to the hall. The professor would come in, set his briefcase right by the door, walk to the opposite end of the hall, grab his chalk, being lecturing and writing on the chalkboard, continuing to walk, chalk, and talk his way across one blackboard, across the second blackboard, finishing at the end of the blackboard, putting down the chalk, grabbing his briefcase, and exiting the room, signaling the end of the lecture.
On the other hand, I encountered many professors who would go above and beyond their "contractual obligations," providing lecture notes, plenty of office time, and especially individual instruction for anyone who did not understand the lecture the first time around. What was really neat was that the foreign professors (many of which were IMPOSSIBLE to understand the first time around) were especially willing to try their best to help students out of the classroom. I guess they themselves especially understood what opportunity really means.
I personally wish that universities would do a better job at defining obligations of professors, for both the students' benefit and the universities'. I think students who can expect professors to offer additional help and encouragement, rather than (through verbal or nonverbal communication) be made to feel incompetent and stupid, will feel a lot more comfortable about their own knowledge and seek that which they don't understand. As the old Unix fortune goes, "Those who don't know, and know that they don't know, they are ignorant. Teach them."
Oh, and one final bit of advice for students: go to class. You're paying for it. Don't miss class and then expect the professor to bend over backwards for you. Don't demand another opportunity when you pass up the one provided for you.
And we probably shouldn't allow tutors or all those help guides that cost $30 apiece either. Because equality is the golden rule.
Thank god didn't apply to me-- I bought my way thorugh college while working 55 hours a week. The lucky poor guys on grants had 55 hours a week to study that I didn't.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Ironic that students would complain about this, and then blow $10 to $20 a night on beer!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
And Harvard too
For example, my professor records his lectures in Organization and Management digitally. Half the
course runs online, and half is lectures. So he offers his lectures online through the same service
that we get the online tasks through. For free. I'd never pay for something I had paid for before,
or something the government paid for me(this applies in my case). Putting it online is not a hassle
worth $1 per download. Our University allows him to do it on his personal(but university) webspace,
with unlimited upload.
She: Hey, are you a traitor? Me: No, I'm atheist.
Have you never had to cough up the $10/class to the webassign people?
Jay | http://oldos.org
If he wanted to "help those that missed class, didn't take good notes, or from another country and have trouble understanding an English speaking Professor" he'd make them free. (This is assuming that everyone he's selling these lectures to is a student at the college he works at. I could easily see him selling the lectures to people not enrolled at the college)
I'm surprised he's actually allowed to do this with lectures he gives at the college. Sure, he gives the lecture, but who pays for the lecture hall, the seats, and his payroll? One could make the valid argument that he's being paid to give these lectures and no one is forcing him to record them (so it wouldn't cost him anything if he wasn't allowed to sell the tapes), so they must be free.
There are a lot of professors that record their lectures and make them freely available to help their students, this guy just seems to be trying to make a quick buck.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
Classroom experiences are (should be?) interactive now, not just one-way broadcasts. Our class meetings belong to myself AND my student colleagues.
If it's a 'lecture'--a straight information download--it should be offered for free. Or, even better, insert a DVD and press 'play'.
With all due respect, I disagree strongly with your comment.
You said...
and what I say in class is my intellectual property
Repeat after me: copyright is not an absolute right.
Go ahead, repeat it: copyright is not an absolute right.
There is something called Fair Use. I should know, as I rely upon it when creating my podcast, [shameless plug] Life of a Law Student. In LoaLS I build upon my notes from the lectures I took part in at law school to create audio episodes explaining the cases and the law. I then make these episodes available, for free, to anyone who wants to listen and/or download. They are licensed as CC-Attribution and GNU FDL to enable others to build upon them freely.
Out of respect, I informed my profs and the administration what I was planning on doing before I started. Most thought it was a great idea or at least would not stand in my way. Unfortunately, I had one of my professors tell me that he only gave permission for his students to take notes for their own personal use, and so he wouldn't allow me to do LoaLS off of his class. I politely told him I wasn't seeking his permission because my Use was a Fair one and thanked him for his time.
Fair Use has four articulated prongs (although there are potentially more factors to balance).
Let's consider a student setting up a tape recorder and simply recording your lectures. (We'll set aside any Honor Code violations that explicitly give you the right to ban taping; we'll only deal with your "intellectual property" right.)
In summary, a student would likely have a legal right to record your lectures under Fair Use because three of the four prongs (and both of the important ones) would cut in their favor. If you would like make your lectures available for sale or distribution that might change the analysis. But the key thing is to disabuse yourself of this notion that your "intellectual property" is an absolute. Fair Use is explicitly codified in the Copyright Act because it is recognized that oftentimes the incu
My legal education, in nifty podcast format
Here's the "vital point" you seem to be missing: lots of other profs give away lecture notes etc. for free. Sure, in most cases it isn't an audio recording, but depending on how visually-oriented the material is, powerpoint or whatever is probably better anyway. And sometimes, if you get lucky, the professor posts nearly verbatim transcripts of all his lectures!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
for a college class? Nonsense! And these BOOKS I have to buy should be free too!
Not only is this cheaper than the book for the class, but it's not required. And probably has more useful information.
In data structures we used the department head's book. And *gasp* people make money on books! And the way I understand it, it's not that shady since they've been trying to get more of the department to Java and it's one of the few good data structures with Java examples books.
I've spent money on far worse. Accounts on systems that grade your homework and we only used it twice. Physics departments seem to love those IR remotes that allow for live graded quiz questions, and I've seen "upgrades" that make the old ones not work so that they sell new ones instead of allowing students to buy/sell used. Really, it's funny that someone that seems to be trying to do something good is getting picked on here, when far crazier things are going on.
//TODO: signature
Ha! You can make podcasts of different professors teaching the same topic in their own way.
Students probably pay upwards of $100/hour of classroom instruction. $2.50 is the biggest bargain on campus!
Spoon not. Fork, or fork not. There is no spoon.
$2.50 is $2.50 too much, and as for the poor, put-upon professor, dude, you're already getting paid to do whatever you can for your students' educations. My partner, who teaches at university, burns CDs for her students, hires dvds for them to watch, edits together practice tapes and cds (she's a language teacher) and all for $50k a year.
Boo-fucking-hoo, professor. Step up and help your students out, and kiss the dollar goodbye if you're any kind of teacher.
Ha ha, no. It was an electrical engineering class, and worse, it was one of the required ones. I took it the next semester with a better prof.
Excuse, me, but who gets the fee for the lecture, the professor or the university? The students are paying tuition to be provided an education that fufills the requirements of course xyz (his argument that the student's tuition gets them the lecture in the classroom is bogus -- tuition is more than just his classroom time - otherwise, shouldn't distance classes and classes taught by a TA be less than those taught by a professor?).
Therefore, the lecture is already being provided to the students as part of the contract for taking and paying for the course. The ability to download said lecture is the same content, just in a different format.
I am assuming that it is the professor who is collecting the fee, but then that raises the question of whether he is producing said downloadable lecture using university equipment (recorder, internet, web server, etc.) and on university time or not. If he is deriving income from the download, then wouldn't that be using university resources for personal use?
Also, the question of $2.50 a lecture seems steep. Maybe not for one, but a 13 week class at 3 classes a week comes out to be 39 lectures or $97.50. It doesn't take too many students before the professor makes a nice little income on the side. If the professor teaches three classes with three sections each, well, that's a nice supplement to his income each semester.
Maybe not only the university should look into the use of school property for personal gain, but maybe the IRS should look into reportable income.
I provide a flash video/powerpoint based version of all of my lectures for my corporate finance courses for free. I considered charging for the materials but the amount that I would receive (a few hundred $ per year) is such a small amount that it wasn't worth justifying the price to the students (to me). I purchased the software (Articulate = $800), host the files, and spend the 4 hours each necessary to record the lessons on top of the time necessary to create the powerpoint lessons.
I am very surprised, but many of the students report that they review the lessons several times. Personally, I can't imagine that they have that much time, but that is what they say. I think that any professor that truly cares about the student's learning would do the same thing. I see very little value in having a video of the lesson, but the flash/powerpoint/audio version seems to be useful especially since it has searching and FF/RW built in.
My view is that if the students find it useful, it was worth my time.
As a student at NCSU..all my teachers already make lecture notes available online, for free. I don't see why this guy wants to charge for them....but i don't see a problem with it at all.
What, is he going to start charging for showing up at office hours too? He's a jackass. You shouldn't be charging for class materials when that money's just going into his own pocket. If the school were charging it would still be annoying, but not awful. THIS, however, is awful.
--
RumorsDaily
Having taught at what passes for very good undergraduate liberal arts colleges and a major research university, all I can say is the above. You can get a lot of course material on the MIT web site for free. The same for many, many, other colleges and universities. If this turkey really needs $2.50 for his efforts, maybe he should start working for one of the "commercial" universities...
That would be a violation of the lecturer's copyright.
. . . only mine were free and publicly available for the entire semester and any class I'd ever taken. It was primarily Computer Science, but I had a few other classes on there, like the generic classes everyone had to take and a few of my electives. I had faculty and staff blessing, but the faculty never provided their own notes. I had FTP upload for anyone that wanted to provide notes from their classes, just e-mail me and I'd give them an account. Honestly, a lot of the students that used my site told me I should charge and make a few extra bucks off of it, that they'd gladly pay. Of course, most of them were suggesting like $5/semester or something like that. I just ran it off the PC in my dorm after getting so many e-mails asking for notes since I always typed them on my laptop in class. Faculty even referred to my site when students asked about a class they missed. One student said he didn't know where my site was, and the professor actually said in disbelief, "Everyone knows his site". When I interviewed for a job in Computer Services they asked if I had a resume, and when I said it was on my site (It was an unplanned on-the-spot interview) preparing to give them the URL, they just typed it in and asked where to go from there.
I even provided extra content, like funny quotes from professors (of which the most famous one always gave me a hard time, but just in fun).
If any faculty or staff member had ever asked me to remove their content, I would have without question (I even had that notice published at the bottom of every page).
Summary: It's a great service, and students will pay if they need it. But why on EARTH is the professor paying so much for web hosting?
If the market supports a note-taking service that is wonderful. But neither the professor nor his teaching assistants should profit from providing supplementary educational materials to courses they are grading. There is a genuine conflict of interest.
Students are right to expect fair access. If this professor wishes to treat recordings of his lectures as essential course materials he should put them on the required reading/listening list. This is the normal way of structuring courses. As soon as materials are on the syllabus professors typically work with various libraries on campus to arrange lending access. I have never taken a university course where the necessary materials were not available free of charge to those willing to visit the library.
My issue is with someone putting themselves in a position to profit from turning their classroom into a two-tier system. This is a clear conflict of interest, and the fact that there isn't a lot of money at stake makes this issue even more absurd. This guy could easily find a student willing to record his lectures and put them online.
I can't fault the professor for charging for his genuine time and expense needed to put these lectures online. However, I can and do fault the university for not providing the video equitment and hosting to make this process painless and requiring professors to put their lectures up in this fashion.
Many students learn in different ways. Some students, such as myself, are almost incapable of learning from sitting in class and taking notes. At the moment students like myself are totally screwed over in classes that don't offer a book or other written material to learn from. While I would prefer written matieral when this doesn't exist (and often the prof couldn't create it in a reasonable time) a video that one can watch at home and skip around to the parts you need to hear would at least give me some reasonable way to learn.
A university would never allow a professor to screw over the students who learn best from lecture by only providing written (or even video) material and only holding office hours or question sections. Fair treatment demands that the professor not screw over students who don't learn from lecture by not providing any at home learning method.
Unfortunatly there is a nasty prejudice that many people have that if you don't learn well from lecture your just lazy. It's not true but even if it was it wouldn't matter. Making sure that people don't 'get away' with learning on their own is no justification to deny saving time and effort by providing take home materials. The current practice of everyone going into lecture and blindly copying down what the professor says is just stupid.
If you liked this thought maybe you would find my blog nice too:
In my collage all the lecture notes are available through class forums for free in pdf format. And only geeks would actually pay for lecture notes.
The students have already paid tuition to hear the content of the lecture, why should they pay again.
Maybe as incentive not to miss class.
Id knuckle down, listen closely and take proper notes... that would show him!
He's probably already bought that boat on the back of his genious business idea of selling recordings of something the students have already paid for.
God Be Gone
Well, first of all, this is a state school, and the professor is a Government employee. So state conflict of interest laws apply.
First, North Carolina State University permits faculty to own copyright in instructional materials: "NC State does not, however, claim ownership of faculty-created instructional materials or courseware merely because it requires faculty members to teach courses as part of their regular responsibilities."
However, the department has the option of taking title to such "Directed Works": "Directed works also include works created by faculty or staff in an institute, center, department, or other unit that, with approval of the Provost, has adopted rules providing that copyright in materials prepared by such faculty or staff in the course of their work with that unit vests in NC State and not in its creator. NC State holds copyright to Directed Works."
However, see Conflicts of Interest and Committment Affecting Faculty and Non-Faculty EPA Employees. "Activities requiring disclosure for administrative review ...
An EPA employee requiring students to purchase the
textbook or related instructional materials of the employee or
members of his or her immediate family, which produces
compensation for the employee or family member."
Provided that the professor made the proper disclosures and those disclosures are in his personnel file, he's probably OK. The university has the option of taking over this business from the individual faculty.
Policies vary with the school. The University of Michigan permits commercial note-taking services but prohibits faculty from selling notes. (This resulted in a note-taking startup, Versity.com, which was acquired by CollegeClub.com, which dumped the note-taking business to focus on entertainment content.) Yale is at the other extreme; they let faculty control their content. That's what you'd expect; state schools have to be much more careful about conflict of interest issues.
I think one thing that seems to be ignored is that this is only one professor's decision. His decision in no way relates to what the rest of the university is doing.
Many professors already have their lectures taped. Some of these are available online for free, some are only for students of the course, and some are spefically for distance ed. courses. There is also a growing number of professors who are offering podcasts of or related to their lectures. The university is working on a framework to allow those professors who aren't quite as tech savvy to put up podcasts in a central location.
At the two universities I've studied at, only a few professors provide lecture outlines, and none that I know of provide full lecture notes
Really? I find this surprising. Though what major were you? I found that makes a big difference.
I did a survey of my undergrad transcript, making notes of which classes I took offered notes and which didn't. I didn't count classes where there wasn't really note taking (e.g. fencing or piano) and one class I couldn't remember if we got notes or not. All classes here are standard 3 credits. The results are:
Outside of computer science:
22 classes did NOT provide notes
3 classes did (a physics class, a psych class, and a poli sci class; in particular, there were no such math classes except one cross listed with CS (which is counted in the computer science section))
Within computer science:
5 classes did NOT provide notes
12 classes provided notes
Of the CS classes that provided notes, almost all were powerpoint slides used during lecture. There were:
at least 5 classes that provided notes/slides before the lecture in which they were used
at least 2 classes that provided the slides after the lecture in which they were used
4 classes that I don't remember wheter we had access before or after
Furthermore, I am currently in two grad classes at a different institution. Both classes provide slides; one class makes them available before and one after the corresponding lecture.
So I don't think it's necessarily a US/UK split; it's either a major split or just where you happen to go.
Because they got what they paid for already.
RTFA. It's not hosted on university servers; and how do you know he's recording it with university equipment? In any case lots of universities have the policy that academics retain IP rights on their work; others don't. I guess NCSU does.
What, you think he should be compelled to do give his work away for free? Even if he should be (which would be monstrous), it's a purely nominal profit anyway -- to cover the effort and materials, as TFA says.
RTFA before letting a knee-jerk reaction effect a regime change on your brain.
FWIW I think it's ethically a grey area when academics choose to withhold their work by not putting it in an open-access archive, or by publishing only in for-profit journals -- just as much as most people around here have mixed feelings (at best) about proprietary computer code. But this isn't the same ballpark: the grey area is still miles away. And legally there's certainly no question of there being anything fishy here, unless the university has completely corrupt policies.
Troll-feeding time!
They pay for the *availability* of the lecture during the class time scheduled, for which they still need to contribute their presence to complete the transaction/receive what they've paid for. Nobody's forcing anybody to pay again for the content: Consider rather that they're offered an additional convenience. As the professor is doing these on his time (above and beyond scheduled class work hours), he should be allowed to charge for them, and personally, I'm surprised more profs don't do this and that he lets the students get away so cheaply.
Take the 90-Day Challenge! http://rwmurker.bodybyvi.com/
This is when PowerPoint slides might actually come in handy. Many professors misuse them, but correctly used, they are a powerful tool for presenting large amounts of information in a small amount of time.
I found the same thing to be true, but I'll add something else: I find them to be FAR less useful if they are not provided until after the lecture that they are used in. In fact, I think the difference in utility between "professor does not provide slides" to "professor provides slide after class" is less than the difference between the latter and "professor provides slides before class." In the latter case, you can print the slides out and bring them to class and take notes directly on the slides. It's rare (at least in my experience) that you are in a class where you both need to learn the material and don't need to take notes (even if provided slides), so the difference is whether you write stuff down on the slides or not. It's my habit that if I can't use the slides themselves, I tend to duplicate most of the information on the slides in my notes anyway, because then when I'm going back through there's actually context to the added information. Thus we're back to the scribbling thing.
(Note that a REALLY good student might take just the added notes on paper then go over the slides and add these notes to the slides after the fact, but I'm not that dedicated.)
The benefit of getting them pre-class is even more enhanced if the class involves picures or diagrams in the slides, because they take a long time to copy down and you usually can't abbreviate them. (Like if there's a finite automaton you can't be like "oh, I'll just leave off this state here, and this other transition there".)
Finally, I had one class where in order to stimulate discussion during class the prof had us look over the notes before class we were going to go over that day, and gave us a daily quiz on the material from those notes. (It was basic stuff; even if you didn't understand everything as long as you looked at the slides reasonably carefully you almost always did fine on the quizzes.) It sounds horrible, but somehow it managed to still be one of the better classes of my undergrad.
But the MIT lecture videos are free.
l l1999/VideoLectures/index.htm- and-MagnetismSpring2002/VideoLectures/index.htmi deoLectures/index.htm
Newtonian Physics: http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Physics/8-01Physics-IFa
Electricity and Magnetism: http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Physics/8-02Electricity
Vibrations and Waves: http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Physics/8-03Fall-2004/V
You can almost certainly find more by poking around the MIT OpenCourseWare website. The lectures linked above by Prof. Lewin, however, are particularly good!
But 99% of my professors just posted their powerpoint slides on the web for you to download.
It was as nice as getting full complete notes for the lecture, but they were good enough most of the time and the professor had already made them, so it's no real extra work.
Don't see what the big deal is unless the professor just delivers everything off the cuff with no notes whatsoever. even if it's a scrap of paper five minutes with a scanner could makes things easier for the students in a "no assurances" sort of way.
I dunno, taping and selling the whole thing seems kind of lame.
In the course that I teach, and have taught, I make my lecture notes and powerpoints available for downloading by all my students. I tell them that I don't want them to necessarily be taking copious notes, but rather to be experiencing the learning that is embodied by the in-class experience. Later, they can download the notes and reflect on the combination of the text and the experience.
I have had one or two students in the past that, despite my warnings in the very first class, chose to avoid the seminars and just download the notes. Invariably, they fail the course miserably, since they literally miss half the material - the experiential half - despite the fact that the text that is performed is the text that is downloaded.
A good prof will create a sufficiently engaging and useful experience in the classroom so that the students will do whatever they can to not miss the class.
(As an aside, relative to the "it's my intellectual property" thread, I make all of my materials on applied media theory freely available on request to any professor anywhere in the world who wants to use them under an appropriate CC license. Yes, it's material that I have evolved and developed over years. Yes, it represents a considerable amount of work and scholarship. And yes, it enables me to influence and touch so many more students than I could ever hope to reach directly. In return, I achieve recognition and reputation that are among the important currencies of the academy. Doing so also results in invitations for paying gigs in various cool places around the world.)
The students have already paid tuition to hear the content of the lecture, why should they pay again.
So, as an analogy, if you pay to see a play, you should get to see it as many times as you want since you have already paid your admission? Or maybe you think you should be provided with a recording of the performance as well?
The interpretation here is that paying tuition gives you the right to attend the lecture. Not the right to view it however you want - but to attend it at a specific time and a certain location - just like a ticket to a 7:15 movie - you don't get to use it to go to the 7:30 movie in another theatre.
Plus, he's recording all of this and hosting all of this with university equipment.
No, he isn't. He's hosting it on an indie music site. Also, even if it is university equipment he may have to pay for use, or he may have purchased his own equipment. He mentions a cost for the equipment, but not how that cost is incurred.
As for taking time and effort, I'm pretty sure a microphone and tape recorder is all it takes to record a lecture (that's how I did it in school in the "old" days). Then you plug the headphone jack into the line-in and record it to an mp3 or whatever format you want and you're done. Not much more work than ripping a CD.
If you read the article, and I can tell you didn't, you would also have found out that he does perform editing of the lecture. The extent of the editing is unknown. It could be as simple as taking out any extended pauses or it could include re-recording audio that isn't clear, or taking out ambient noise. Without purchasing one, (and attending the actual lecture), it isnt possible to know what editing is done.
I don't think he is doing anything wrong with this. Sure, he could do this out of the goodness of his own heart, but there would be students who would then blow off the lecture since they could listen to it later. Statistically, this will result in a lower grade for them, so an educator should try to minimize the number of students who skip class. A small fee seems to provide a good balance between convenience and assisting the students.
Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
Interesting point. It hadn't occurred to me that there might be a big difference between CS and other disciplines.
I never had any CS courses in college. I had courses in math, physics, philosophy, religion, psychology, economics, history, music, and literature. None of the professors gave out lecture notes. (There was one graduate student who gave out lecture notes for the cryptography course he taught.) But CS, I suppose, is a different world.
This sounds like Dr. Ngo from University of Florida. I hear he's a big No No!
$2.50 is a fair price if you didn't pay for taking the class. Sure it takes more effort, but then working takes more effort than being unemployed. If I could have gotten tapes of lectures, I would both get the tapes and go to class. Isn't it about time we expected more from our professors? Would he complain if a student wanted to record his lecture while the student was there?
Current semester is here, I believe if you go looking around on that site you can see archives of past semesters too. The classes are a mix of a few high-enrollment courses which tend to get taped every semester, and courses that are taped once every few years to refresh the archive. You can see these on iTunes too, there may be a phobos URL somewhere on the website if you look.
I must be of those rare old school that still think that your notes should be a set of short personal reminders of what you have learned during the class, instead of just a blanket copy of everything written or said.
If you just want a blanket copy, why not take a camera and record the lecture yourself? If you notes contains everything, why not just bring a book and mark sections covered during the lecture instead?
Oliver.
The interpretation here is that paying tuition gives you the right to attend the lecture.
Although that may be the policy of some individual instructors, many will let a student "sit in" for free. Your tuition pays the instructor to evaluate your work.
A Digital Recorder makes it even easier. Saves to a CF card, just rename the file and upload it. Granted, it's a $500 device, but if time is all so valuable, it's a good solution.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
I'm amused by the lownsess of the price which says: professors don't know how to price, their lecures aren't worth much, or maybe it says something else?
John M
The EE department of my university posted streaming video of certain classes. The audio was from the professor's lapel mike and the video switched between a scanconverter of the PowerPoint slides, and camera views of whatever he drew on the blackboards. The .ppt files, and sometimes class notes, could also be downloaded.
They were a great way to, say, study for a final by reviewing classes from the beginning of the year.
Public engineering university, btw. No DRM or authentication, either. If you find the right URL, you can watch the entire semester without even being enrolled. The downside was, only certain classes got this treatment, mainly due to a limited number of staff and camera-equipped rooms.
The US free market: two halves of a government-granted duopoly are free to set the market price.
Except when you go to the play, there aren't any expectations to learn the play. How would it be if an actor told the play's production company that they only paid for the actor to show up and not learn the material?
The above is just as bad an analogy as your original one.
I also found out that a teacher at another university was using my powerpoints with out attribution as his own work. AND what I say in class is my intellectual property.
Even though you yourself are just ripping off someone else's work by mostly just repeating what you yourself were taught? If you really are a professor, you're just a work for hire. It's not your intellectual property. It belongs to the university that pays your salary.
If it were me, I'd simply have asked the other professor to share any improvements he made to the powerpoints and encourage others to assist in the development of them as well. That way, you are left with a collaborative effort that transcends any singular person's diminutive knowledge of the subject.
:-)
I never had any CS courses in college.
I guess that's the difference then.
Truth be told, I was really surprised at the difference too. Like I was writing a reply to your post that was basically just a generalization of my experiences, saying that "oh, I've had plenty of profs who gave out lectures" and stuff. I had it pretty much done and was thinking about it more, and decided that I should go back and look at my transcript and get actual numbers. One of the points was that I had the notion that there seemed to be a difference between CS and not-CS (though again, I was very surprised by the magnitude of it), so I decided to tally the categories separately, and out came the difference. I decided that it was likely the reason for the difference and rewrote the post with that as the central point.
Then they should get out of the bar, attend the lecture and take their own notes.
$2.50 is a more than reasonable price.
Norman Cook's Ode to Sl
How about a student recording the lecture and selling the result for $2.50 a pop? It takes no extra time or effort away from the professor and the student already paid for the content. Why not profit from their attendance by providing a service to those who cannot attend or chose not to?
....
I'd be willing to bet either the University or the Professor would try engaging copyright rules however. But then the students have paid for the content so they're not voiceless in the matter. What if the recording was sold to non-students or students of other universities? What is the copyright ramifications to the student, professor or university that accepts public funding?
Or in the case of the good professor who created extra income selling such material... Did he create it with university equipment? Did he use student labor in whole or in part? Were they paid/reimbursed? Did the professor state this extra income and meet the tax requirements? Was the professor authorized by the university to resell material he was already reimbursed for and does the professor hold reproduction rights over this material?
And so on and so forth
Slaves have better benefits.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
In several schools professors fund themselves from the govt. grants (NIH etc.)
I m not sure if Joe Smith, law-abiding tax-payer, has to pay $2.50 to get access to the intellectual property in the lecture slides developed using the grant money.
What if a student or a group of students decide that they do not want to pay for the video and just bring there own camera and tripod to record his class? Would he refuse to let them just so he can gain a profit? Ive heard many people bring tape recorders into class rooms to help them, is this disallowed? Personally I think it should be free, the process can be automated and college costs way to much already.
The fact that some universities and/or teachers post their lectures notes without a perceived cost doesn't mean that they should be free.
In fact, those lectures (I mean the global set) are probably the most valuable thing our civilization has.
If some of their creators post them for free or at low cost it's just because they love to teach and they love what they teach. If they were there for the money they would be MBAs, not teachers.
So I don't really think the teacher sells them because he wants to profit, but because he knows that most people don't value what doesn't have any cost to them. And he wants students to value what he is trying to teach, either in the classroom or reading his lectures.
We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
At UC Davis, the service is called Classical Notes. In this program, the professor does nothing at all, and may even be completely phobic of computers. Students apply for positions as note-takers, attend the lectures in question, and sell the transcribed notes for a reasonable price through Classical Notes, a division of the student government.
Given this background, and the fact that a $1 fee on the professor's part is by no means extortion, the article looks like a non-story to me. University professors have a lot of freedom in how they conduct their classes, and little services on the side like this are absolutely nothing to have a fit about.
Then they should go hear the content of the lecture. During the lecture. Because he's lecturing. Maybe my school is one of the few big-name schools that does this on a regular basis, but we take attendance in a lot of my classes. If you miss three classes, often you fail.
HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
While in medical school, we had a "notetaking service" where students were paid to record and then transcribe notes of assigned lectures. This was funded by subscription fees paid for by students who wished to use the service and then receive the transcribed lectures.
For the average student body it may be fair to charge, and $2.50 it a pretty reasonable fee in my opinion. However, there are circumstances where the lectures should be made accessible. For students with learning difficulties or hearing problems it's not fair to charge. Also, much depends on the quality of instruction. If the professor is an 80 year old Russian eccentric that's virtually impossible to understand, then free lecture downloads should be mandatory. A Japanese friend of mine studied at the University of Florida for a year. Her English began pretty shakily and she had difficulty with one of her classes. The professor was new, spoke too quickly and made roundabount, indirect points. He charged around $7.50 for one 24 hour access to the lecture, or $15 for unlimited access. Since this was a three day a week class, that would get prohibitively expensive. Ironically, he was a marketing instructor. I understand the desire of Professors to profit beyond their normal salary, but there is definitely a point beyond reason where its more akin to extortion. It's like a red-headed step child that charges you to get angry at him.
... didn't come out of YOUR pocket. Seriously, I went to a school populated by far too many rich kids where the cost per year was about $40,000, many kids had a monthly wire from home for $1,000 for "walking around money", and one student got $9k of Neiman-Marcus furniture for an apartment she lived in for a whole year. And when a particular department charged $5/semester for copy fees for the daily worksheets there were howls of protest. That, after all, competes with beer money, in a way tuition charged to scholarships/trust fund/student loans do not.
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
A gentle reminder, not even the GPL requires the owner of a work to distribute it for free -- only for a reasonable cost to make up for the time and effort required. So, if the professor's lectures were somehow licensed under the GPL equivalent for an in-person performance, taking $1 profit for recording, editing and uploading the lectures to a host is still completely acceptable.
Taking it a bit further, let's calculate the value of the professor's time to provide this service -- my guess is, to break even, it's about 1-2 minutes * the number of students who pay for the download, probably a small number. For a 50 minute lecture, it takes 25-50 students paying for the download for the professor to break even, so I suspect this still falls easily within the bounds of a charitable act.
I've had a number of professors who simply refused outright to put any lecture notes online, among other dirty tricks, in order to screw anyone who skipped class without a very good reason. And they're allowed to, too. There is no reason to flip out over any of this.
I"m a student in australia and our university actually records all lectures and makes them available online for free to students. It's a good resource but if the university doesn't feel inclined to offer the service and the lecurter puts it together then i don't see anything wrong with selling it, it seems like a fair price.
I'm gonna call BS on this guy. I get my lectures online for free at college.
When I went to school in Boulder ther was a business set up which had students take notes from a class and then offer those notes for sale. The business was called "Class Quotes" circa 1980/81. If I remember correctly it was a subscription model. So the selling of lectures has definately been done before--just never heard of the professors offering the information.
I wish some of my professors would have done this. Sometimes it would be because I missed a class, but mostly it would be because I would have an easier time demanding that the professor's lectures be coherent. I took many courses where the lectures were incomprehensible, but most people still passed because the professor was too lazy to make unique exams, so people just memorized the exam questions from previous years. (And most seemed to be happy about that, and complained about the professors who actually taught useful information and expected their students to understand it. Fricking children.)
http://outcampaign.org/
at QUT all the audio visual theaters used to give lectures have MP3 recording software built into the pc that controls the lights and mic, an always-on-top recording app, which is simply a subject code and a duration you want to record for - 1, 2 or 3 hours ... the process of then uploading the MP3 to the subjects website is also automatic. Not all lecturers use it, but it's there, and easy to use, if they want to. I think it's total crap that he's charging again for the recording.
Informative. To the GP, at least.
Game... blouses.
When I was in college at UCSB they sold the notes for lectures. They being the associated student body. Students could sign up as note takers, and go to lectures and take notes, for which they were paid.
In fact, for one class, the professor was so friggin boring I decided to get the notes, only to discover that he was reading his lectures FROM the AS notes, which he had provided! Sweet! Never went to class again and got an A.
Did I learn the material? Apparently so. IMHO college is about the information you can gain, and less about the medium in which you receive it.
A professor from my alma mater has been doing this for years - recording his lectures, then posting them to his website, on department servers. For free.
If you want a refresher course in Intro to CS, check this out. Disclaimer: I've never actually had this professor. . .
When John Rawls discovered that many of his students were trying to take down his lectures word for word, he started offering copies of his lecture notes for forty cents. This was in 1977. The 1991 edition of his lectures is now available as a book.
I'm afraid I have to call you an idiot. I'm not a professor, but I do work in academic support (computers in particular). Part of my job is dealing with supporting electronic educational needs, like posting notes online, recording and streaming classes, and so on. Also my degree happens to be in cognitive psychology, so I have a little bit of knowledge about how people actually learn.
This ivory tower attitude that your knowledge is somehow something special that you are supposed to keep locked away is simply contrary to your job. Your job is to teach what you know to students in the most efficient and complete manner possible. That's what you are being paid for when you teach a class. We do not ask someone to teach a FPGA course to try and keep it a mystery from students, revealing only the barest of facts. We ask them to do it so the students will learn all they can about how to design and program FPGA circuits.
Further, things like notes, audio recording, and so on are valuable learning tools. Not everyone learns the same way. There's a number of different theories on this, and a number of different domains in which it applies, however one of the most basic is simply how people absorb information. The three fundamental styles generally recognised are visual, auditory and kinesthetic. Visual learners learn by seeing, auditory by hearing (and sometimes by talking), kinesthetic by doing. So denying tape recorders to your auditory learners is a problem. Saying "take notes" is ignorant, that's not how they learn best. They learn best by hearing, so for them it is most valuable to record what you say and listen to it multiple times, and perhaps re-verbalise it. Likewise for your visual learners, taking notes is a waste of time, it's just them getting down the information to look at later. Better that they have the notes, so they can pay attention during class rather than scrambling to get things down.
So, really, YOU are the one who needs to learn: Specifically you need to learn about how people learn. You might want to start with Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of educational objectives and Howard Gardner, Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice. You also need to understand that the grades students get aren't representative of what they are learning, they are representative of how well they can take your tests. They only paint a good picture of what they are learning and retaining if you write good tests, and I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you probably don't write good ones. Bad tests are easy to write, good ones surprisingly tricky.
Finally, you've got to drop the "It's my intellectual property," attitude. No, it isn't. First off, since you are teaching a course for the university it belongs to THEM, not you. The knowledge in your head is yours, of course, the content of the course is not. It's a "work for hire" so to speak. Their dollar, their goods. Further if you work for a publicly funded institution, a large amount of what you do belongs to the public, since their tax payers funded it. Even if you don't the students have a claim to what's in your class. Their dollars paid for it, you can't claim exclusive rights to it.
For that matter why would you want to? Are the students supposed to remember what you taught just for long enough to pass the test and the purge it entirely from their memory? I would hope you'd decry that. Your goal should be for them to gain real knowledge they can use, skills not just abstract facts, that stays with them for a lifetime. You should hope that they will retain as much as possible from what you taught.
If your materials are being nicked by other teachers, well that's between you and them, or rather your university and them since the university owns it. However if you are worried about that (please note it may not be illegal) do something sensible like password protect your course site. Don't try and deny new and better tools to your students. You should be seeking at all times how to better optimise your students' learning.
This is just a twist on the old way of doing things. When I was at the University of Nebraska from 88-92 they had a thing called Jon's Notes. Jon was a guy who hired people to take notes in many classes and then sold you those notes for $25 per semester. He always got permission from the professor beforehand to do so though. He had a very suscessful business and it had already been running for several years when I first got to college. It was also popular from the lazy student who couldn't be bothererd going to class to the kid that just had to have everything possible to get that A. Jon died somewhere around 95 (iirc) and it was taken over and the name changed but, as far as 2000 I knew the program was still up and running. The only difference here is that this professor is keeping all the money for himself, making it available online and in other formats than the paper versions we had in college.
The students have fair access. This is not suplimentary material, it is the material available if you bother going to class. When I was an undergrad, you could be failed for missing enough lectures. I have no problem with this at all.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
I have never heard of ANY professor selling notes. The closest thing was when one of the academic fraternities was selling old tests (with the professor's permission) as a fund raiser. Luckily I'm in the College of Engineering rather than Communication, but I know I can download full video of lectures in certain classes for free. I've downloaded semester's worth of video lectures for courses I haven't even taken yet (mostly graduate courses for subjects I'm interested in). This professor's just trying to make a quick buck off his students and they're stupid enough to buy into it.
Go to class, take notes, if you need to review further look over your notes after class and go to office hours. If you miss a class, get the notes from someone else in the class or study from the book on your own. It's not that hard, especially for a 200-level Communication course.
at the RWTH in Aachen, Germany we have dozens of (video)recorded lectures... students ask the professors if they may record the lecture, then THE STUDENTS record the lecture, edit the stuff and upload them to our student information site, where you can download them all for free...
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
and have been for many years,
I went to the Technion Israel institute of technology which for many years
now maintains a video library of lecture recordings, containg all popular
courses(mostly first&second year) and many advanced courses.
not every course is recorded every year, but the material in most lectures doesn't
change much(or at all) and watching a 3 years old tape is practicly as good as
sitting in the lecture.
With modern technology they digitized there collection and available over the intranet
from any campus computer.
They also set up video libraries where you can watch the recordings in comfort
or lend a copy to take home(just like lending books).
lecture slides are almost always published on the Net.
Lecture notes are compiled by the student association and sold for the cost of printing(with
an add on the front and back sheets to make some money for the student association)
The service is so good, many students skip the lectures all together.
I for one enjoyned being able to watch my physics lectures at double speed(much smaller
chance of falling asleep).
Me.
I always found the information put up on the blackboard (or the overhead projector, gads how I hate those things) to be of equal or greater value than the words coming out of the professor's mouth. Besides, about 30% of the time, the professor was either older or had such a thick accent that his speech was hard to follow.
But, of course, almost no one does.
The error I think many of the posters here are making is that they are treating students as if they are customers buying a product, and that professors are, say, cashiers who are paid to help them. That isn't really the right analogy, especially at large research universities.
Personally, I don't use slides when I lecture (to quote someone I know, "no one can learn any faster than I can write") so I don't make them available. If I were going to make audio recordings of myself available I don't think I would charge for them, but that's a huge if: I wouldn't go through the trouble this guy is going through in the first place. How does he even have the time? Even if every student in his class donated a dollar to him, it wouldn't be worth his time to do it. Profit surely isn't the motive.
Students should come to class. Students who don't come to class aren't holding up their end of the bargain, and they typically pay for it. Anything anyone does to help them out, in general, is providing gravy. I appreciate the effort to maintain balance between giving them gravy while not encouraging them to screw themselves over by having an excuse to not come to class.
Peace.
This is really interesting to me because for the longest time I have wondered why there are no (to my knowldege) accredited online universities. I mean there are 100's of online courses now, so to me the next logical step is to create a complete online university where you can actually get a real degree just by doing everything online. My thinking is that a university like this can heavily discount tuitions by paying professors a one time fee for creating the online course and then just pay undergraduates to mark and grade the tests.
Adventure City Tours
Slaves have better benefits.
That is why Denmark was the first country in the world to abolish slavery.
While I think that the professor is not doing anything wrong by charging $2.50 for a taped lecture, it does not seem like a smart move to me to charge for it. It gives him more responsibility which is not adequately paid for, and does not provide him with arguing opportunities.
First, he charges for a lecture. Can a student complain about the product he bought if part of the tape is not understandable? If the professor starts to cough? If the professor misses a taping opportunity and one of his lectures is not for sale? There, all kinds of responsibilities which the professor gets $1 per file for. That's not a good deal for the guy.
Second, imagine this conversation:
"Professor, I failed my exam because I did not know about subject A."
"I covered that in my lecture dated xx/xx/xx."
"I know, but I missed that lecture, because I was ill."
"GOTCHA! That is no excuse, the lecture is available online!"
"Yeah, but it costs $2.50 and I cannot afford that."
"..."
(Granted, if I were the professor I would end this conversation with "You can afford beer, right?", but still, no arguing would be necessary if the lecture was there for the taking.)
So, as an analogy, if you pay to see a play, you should get to see it as many times as you want since you have already paid your admission? Or maybe you think you should be provided with a recording of the performance as well?
Plays prohibit the recording of their content, by the audience, students are allowed to record lectures already, so I'm not sure this example actually applies.
The interpretation here is that paying tuition gives you the right to attend the lecture. Not the right to view it however you want - but to attend it at a specific time and a certain location - just like a ticket to a 7:15 movie - you don't get to use it to go to the 7:30 movie in another theatre.
That was the professor's assertion, however, I'm not sure that would be the University's assertion as it could produce other undesired consequences if all of a sudden tuition becomes a fee for specific services to be rendered (and if so, maybe refunds are owed to students for failure to deliver on the service). The movie ticket analogy also is faulty, becuase, again, in most Universities, if I miss a class and the same class is offered later, I can sit in on it. Heck, I can even sit in on a lecture periodically, even if I am not enrolled in that class or pay a reduced fee to sit in on it all the time but for no credit.
No, he isn't. He's hosting it on an indie music site. Also, even if it is university equipment he may have to pay for use, or he may have purchased his own equipment. He mentions a cost for the equipment, but not how that cost is incurred.
It is true that he is hosting it on an indie music site, which is interesting. The only valid reason would seem to be to allow a fee to be charged as the University probably isn't set up for that.
If you read the article, and I can tell you didn't, you would also have found out that he does perform editing of the lecture. The extent of the editing is unknown. It could be as simple as taking out any extended pauses or it could include re-recording audio that isn't clear, or taking out ambient noise. Without purchasing one, (and attending the actual lecture), it isnt possible to know what editing is done.
Actually I did read the article, that just doesn't mean I have to agree with it. Yes, it says he edits the lecture, but doesn't define what that means, so it really isn't any information at all. If he edits it too much, then he would be provided different content for those who pay a fee than those who attend class. In short, it wouldn't be his lecture he is selling, but something else. Maybe he edits out student's questions from the recording, since he doesn't have permission to use them? Of course, that would mean that he would be recording his lectures live (which would get rid of the first problem) but basically would be running a second business while on University time, unless of course, the University has given him permission to use their classrooms and courses to generate this additional revenue for himself. Last time I checked, though, most Universities allow research projects but not the selling of services.
don't think he is doing anything wrong with this. Sure, he could do this out of the goodness of his own heart, but there would be students who would then blow off the lecture since they could listen to it later. Statistically, this will result in a lower grade for them, so an educator should try to minimize the number of students who skip class. A small fee seems to provide a good balance between convenience and assisting the students.
Many people seem to share your view that there is nothing wrong with the professor profiting from offering extra help to students. Of course most are assuming the students are skipping class, and some probably are, but attendance tracking is how you deal with that. Many students, however, need help with note taking skills and depending on the subject matter just trying to grasp concepts. They are hardly the dead-beats that the posters
Also, he isn't charging extra for something he's obligated to give you, he's charging you for something he isn't obligated to give you.
One can argue that this is a bad idea, but I think your particular position rests on invalid premises.
One view of this effort is that he thinks such things should be available to students who need it, but has no support from the university to do so. As such, he has tried to make the service available himself. Despite his feelings on the matter, he doesn't think HE should be paying for it himself, so he's trying to recoup his cost (and to avoid creating the incentive for students to skip class and pay the price often associated with that). Note the "free" examples thrown around this thread typically involve university and/or department support (in the form of servers, recording equipment and IT support), as opposed to work on the part of the individual faculty member or instructor.
Peace.
Great. Let students record the materials as well and there is no problem with it.
I agree, use attendance to handle absenteeism. That's what my school did. That's what my son's school does. That's what I do. However, there are many more reasons to want the recording of lecture than the fact that somebody missed the class. In my courses, exams are pretty much based from the lecture, the books supplement the lecture material and is a reference. Very often, students are taking heavy class loads, are distracted by relationship problems, home problems, work, etc. While I don't record my lectures, at any given class, there are probably a dozen recorders sitting on the counter in front of me.
depends on what the prof teaches.
If it's Economics, I say "Good, no surprise there."
Else: "Wow, a non-economics teacher who understands economics."
Support the FairTax
I don't think he is doing anything wrong with this. Sure, he could do this out of the goodness of his own heart, but there would be students who would then blow off the lecture since they could listen to it later. Statistically, this will result in a lower grade for them, so an educator should try to minimize the number of students who skip class. A small fee seems to provide a good balance between convenience and assisting the students.
What's interesting is that charging a fee for the lecture recording might actually increase absenteeism. There was a day care center that had a problem with parents picking their kids up late. So, the center made a new policy - if you're late, you pay $10 for being late as a fine. Turns out, parents felt "Hey, $10 for being late... Not a bad price!" and MORE people picked their kids up late. They felt that the $10 cost excused their behavior.
When I miss a class, I *hate* it - but I could see waking up late, feeling a little sick and saying "Hm, well, I can pay $2.50 and it's like I didn't miss class at all..."
Personally, I think the idea is a fine one - the professor is providing his students what they contracted for (if they show up for class) AND giving ones that missed it (or just want better "notes") what they need. But, beware of unintended consequences....
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
Yeah. Distributing your raw DV capture via bittorrent is really a great effort. *g*
"Many people seem to share your view that there is nothing wrong with the professor profiting from offering extra help to students. Of course most are assuming the students are skipping class, and some probably are, but attendance tracking is how you deal with that. Many students, however, need help with note taking skills and depending on the subject matter just trying to grasp concepts. They are hardly the dead-beats that the posters here are painting them out to be."
Why deal with absentees through attendance tracking? If you're in college, you're almost guaranteed to be a legal adult. Just like any other adult, you should be responsible for your actions. This means you show up or, in this case, you can pay $2.50 to cover your lack of responsibility. As for the note taking skills, learn them. I'm sure I'm not the only one who learned these skills by, well, showing up to class, listening, and actually taking notes. If you can't grasp the concepts, try asking questions or using office hours.
"Again, many, share your view that he's not doing anything wrong, but he is. He's profiting from offering extra help to students. If he was charging for extra for students to have problems or questions answered, it would be considered unethical. How is charging so somebody can re-hear his lecture any different?"
You actually believe this? This professor is recording or re-recording his lectures, doing some type of editing, then having them posted on a web site. He's not being paid for this extra effort by the university, so he's charging a minimal fee to those who want to benefit from his efforts. What if he was to take his lecture notes, edit them, have them bound, and sell them at the university bookstore? Would that be unethical? He's going above-and-beyond, so why shouldn't he be able to do this?
Answering problems and questions is part of the job, it's what professors are paid to do. Those activities are not over-and-above. What he's doing with his lectures _is_ over-and-above, so I still don't see why it would be considered wrong.
"It's too bad stupidity isn't painful." - A. S. LaVey
Tuition is not like a movie ticket that admits you to selected lectures. Should professors be allowed to charge students directly for holding office hours? Answering questions after class?
What the Schrag's supporters seem to be missing is that most professors' academic positions are not directly connected to tuition. They're hired to be creative people and to support the mission of the university. Teaching is a large component of that mission, and professors who teach are paid, partly by tuition, partly by state grants or private endowment, partly by alumni donations, to teach, not to deliver lectures. Likewise, students are not paying to sit in class, they're paying for the opportunity to learn and to interact with recognized experts. If Schrag feels that providing handouts, transcripts or recordings of his lectures contributes to the effectiveness of his teaching, then it's part of his job and not something for which students should be double billed.
One might even make the argument that by offering his lectures for private sale, Schrag is actually in competition with NC State.
I don't know if there's anything wrong with what he's doing, legally speaking. Even less clear to me is whether it would be wrong for one student to buy them and then share them with the others (fair use).
One thing is for sure. He's a jerk. Let him do it and let the market forces play. Assuming those courses are taught by at least one other professor, word will get out and students will flock to the other(s). Unless there's something else that offsets the jerk factor.
Although I can't say he's doing anything wrong, per se, his attitude shows that he really doesn't get his profession, and that's a sad thing. Many students don't learn by going to class, they learn by absorbing and using the information taught. If you don't provide enough material for students to learn the basics on their own even if they miss class or fall asleep in class, (at least in the form of a decent recommended textbook) then you are failing your mission. If you believe for one minute that students learn more by frantically scribbling down useless notes that will be inconsistent, incomplete, illegible, and cause the student to miss out on the opportunity to digest and understand what the teacher is saying in class, then you are sorely deluded. I have learned far more in math/physics classes where I didn't have to take notes (because the teacher's provided notes or the book were sufficient). As a sophomore I noticed this effect and vowed not to become a slave to notes. I keep a notepad handy for the occasional gem or logistics, but I read the material (novel idea, I know) and go to class prepared, and then PAY ATTENTION. It's amazing how much more you learn when you're paying attention than when you're frantically scribbling whatever words are floating through the air.
PhD Student, 3.7 GPA
I think you are right in a lot of ways. I really don't get people complaining about the price though. If you miss class you have a few options
a) not have the material
b) get notes from someone who was there (depending on how they take notes this could be a recording)
c) spend extra time reading the material the lecture covered and hope the book has everything the professor talked about
or the added option of
d) pay a small fee to get a recording of the lecture.
I actually agree that the small cost may increase absenteeism. To use the example of a daycare center you mentioned, that is why the daycares around here charge $5 a minute that they have to keep someone there to watch your child after closing time. When you start realizing that 30 minutes late would have paid for the entire next week, very few parents are late. To be fair if it is honestly only a minute or two they usually let people slide on the fee. If lectures start costing $10-20 a recording very very people will rely on it as a way to not have to show up to class. Personally at $2.50 a lecture, I would get all the recordings from the previous semester and listen to all of them ahead of time. This would help give you a really good idea of what parts the professor thought was important in the class ahead of time to have an edge in getting good grades.
When I was in grad school at NCSU several years ago, some of the classrooms were set up for video taping and were also sent out to students at remote locations. At least some of these were available for viewing at the library- in fact, in one class I took, rather than meeting in the classroom the whole semester, part of the semester we were supposed to watch the tapes of some past lectures. So reading this story what I'm wondering is whether the professor was using the facilities that would normally lead to the lectures being available freely at the library, or was taping things at his own expense in one of the "normal" classrooms. And whether the lectures were also made available at the library, with the podcast being simply a convenience, or if the prof in this case has a monopoly on the lecture's distribution.
Is there is a gray area in teaching for profit? Look from the point of view of the worker. The professor is being paid to teach by the university, and indirectly, by his students. This work is to teach them classes.
Besides this, he is doing some extra work taping and delivering copies of his teaching for a personal fee. If it's not forbidden by the contract of his other job, and permission is given by the university, he is allow to do it. It is his free time and he is allowed to ask whatever price for it.
But Copyright law has evolved to be the prime concern of profitable companies and has the potential to control everything. It is law that rules on creativeness and humans, being naturally creative, are being wrapped in it unintentionally. It is exactly like "The Trial" by Kafka. We have become so entangled in copyright law, that a Professor asking to be paid to teach, rings like trespassing on our individual rights, because of Copyright Law.
The problem is not that he is being paid for teaching, but if are students allowed to learn. When Professor X publishes his work for profit, it is Copyright Law again falling over our heads, and "danger of being sued" alarms sounding all around. It's psychological. Pure and simple fear.
The question is "what can students do with this material"? How is his work Copyrighted and licensed? Should he sue people that take notes in his class? After this, are his students allowed to learn at all? Should them be Joseph Ks waiting in line for trial?
BTW, Kafka's "The Trial"'s Copyright has expired so you can legally read it. http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/7849
Enjoy.
I'm not saying that he should or should not offer audio of his lecture for an additional fee, but for the price, it's a steal.
Let's say he records the lecture digitally (say, with his ipod he already owned) so that he has to do minimal post processing of the lecture, and the initial investment in equipment is near-zero. Now, if he were to screen the content and make minor edits to clean up the file, you might expect him to spend 30 minutes on a 1.5 hour lecture. I'm assuming he's pretty efficient here, as the last time I recorded a book to CD for my daugter, it took about 20 minutes to combine and clean a book that finished at 7 minutes of audio (I Wish That I Had Duck Feet, if you must know). So 30 minutes to quick-review and prep, another 5 to upload. If he gets 80% of the cost of the product after processing fees and such, that's $2/purchase. Now, if you had to hire a professor at rack rates, you'd be looking at about $150-$350/hr, depending on the purpose (research vs expert witness) and the efficiency of the school's financial system (many have well over 200% overhead).
So for a typical lecture, this guy would would need to sell $200/hr x 35 min / $2 = 58 copies to break even on a "fee for service" basis. Maybe he's got some big lecture classes, but most classes above the freshman or sophomore level rarely have that many students total. I'd say, aside from the ehtical issues, $2.50 is a bargain.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
There was a great joke about that in Real Genius.
"Math is important! Listen carefully!"
I agree with your point and this could easily get out of hand and that the professor has a conflict of interest here. There are all kinds of equality tho- and I had to trade money for:
a) a $300 calculator (in 1989!) that I joked could make a "B" if I put it down on the test.
b) about $500 worth of "study guides" (big 3" thick books full of problems and solutions)
c) illness (to the extent of and probably including cancer in my junior year)
d) any other advantage (except oddly- tutoring-- no time!) I could get
for
40 to 55 hours a week of free time because the government gave a grant because the person was "too poor". I wasn't lucky enough to be that poor and I wasn't rich enough either. I was stuck in the middle- again.
There are all kinds of equality. Rich kids have their own problems- motivation, drugs, partying too much. Oh if I could have only suffered with those problems...
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
"Why deal with absentees through attendance tracking? If you're in college, you're almost guaranteed to be a legal adult. Just like any other adult, you should be responsible for your actions. This means you show up or, in this case, you can pay $2.50 to cover your lack of responsibility. As for the note taking skills, learn them. I'm sure I'm not the only one who learned these skills by, well, showing up to class, listening, and actually taking notes. If you can't grasp the concepts, try asking questions or using office hours." When I was in University and now that I am doing a second diploma, I am meticulous about note taking and because of that, do very well. However, there are times that I would gladly spend a little money to get a copy of a lecture, especially if it includes video and is in an area that I am weak in, or an area that I may want to pursue later on like a master's degree or something like that.
I make a reasonable middle-class wage by going to work and not spamming blogs with scams.
The information is free. You are always welcome to go to the library and gather the information for yourself. You are paying someone to teach it to you. You are paying for that person to research, organize, and present the information to you.
There is a huge difference between a play and a lecture.
A play is for entertainment, lectures are for education. Lectures are designed to transfer knowledge. The students are paying for the access and presentation of the material - most of which is already known.
Students will be tested on this knowledge and assigned a grade for it. This grade may be used as a part of their overall employment rating. The risk of missing something is quite a bit higher depending on the setting too.
This also leads to ownership questions. If a lecture consists of "facts", which it should, who owns it?
My last question would be: what would the professor's reaction be if a student recorded the lectures and sold them for $1.50 or gave them away?
Who owns the information? To me, tuition is essentially a contract. I pay the instructor to present the information to me, after which I own all the rights and have the responsibility to learn it. Maybe my idea isn't the right one, but paying ever increasing tuition rates for "the same material" as past years just seems wrong.
When I was an undergrad, you could be failed for missing enough lectures. I have no problem with this at all.
There's an alternate theory that you enrole in a class to learn the material. You "pass" and get credit by showing that you've learned the material. You can learn the material by attending class lectures, sure, but if an alternate approach such as reading the lecture notes and textbooks gives you enough information to pass the tests, that should be considered as getting what you paid for. Some profs are good lecturers, some aren't. So maybe you want to attend the lectures for some profs and not for others.
I often considered that, as a good reader, I could read the lecture notes 3 or 4 times faster, than any lecturer could speak. I could assimilate an hour's lecture in 10 to 15 minutes. And with the notes, I could stop and reread passages, something that's rarely possible in a lecture. So using lecture notes was usually a better use of my time than attending the lecture. The only exceptions were the rare lecturers who put useful things up on the board (or displayed useful pictures), and who would answer questions from the audience. But this was rare, and the pictures could go into the notes, too.
I did once see the cute comment that the lecture system is the best method yet discovered for teaching people who can't read. Rather to the point, I'd say.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
So he charges $2.50 for each person in a lecture, say you have 100 people in the class and about 25% of them actually purchase the download. That would be 25 people @ 2.50 a pop for a total of 62.50. Now for every transaction he "pays" $1.50 to the hosting company (why he doesn't just host the mp3 on the university site is beyond me, except that they probably wouldn't support/condone paying for this). So that leaves him with $25 in his pocket per lecture. At 3 lectures a week that's $75, or roughly $1200 a semester. You expect me to believe that his costs are $1200 a semester. That's total bullshit. He is making money off of this. If I were a student I would record the sessions and undercut his price by half. You could sell the mp3s for $1.25 and get roughly $1500 a semester, that would pay for most state tuitions.
Wayne State University, Detroit,MI,USA MBA program has online classes which are recordings of classroom lectures. Most of the classes give you the option of either going to in session class or accessing the online lectures and other study material.
..... best things in life are not so free..........
Actually, that's part of the problem. $1.50 of the cost is because he is explicitly NOT using university equipment to host this.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
My point is that there are some very easy ways he could reduce the cost in both time and materials. I still think he deserves to charge for his work, but even using public systems he could reduce the cost to the end user to about $1 or so, by chosing the right software and equipment. OR the university could just take his idea and use it as a service.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Yes, they LET you sit in. They are under no obligation to allow you to sit in, and in some courses, they don't allow it since it would be a distraction/problem. In fact, if you want to have the right to sit-in on the course you have to audit that course - which means you have to pay tuition for those credits.
Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
My apologies. The sentence "I have no problem with this at all" referred to TFA rather than the punishment for missing lectures.
That's probably fair. However, many drivers would be safe drivers even if there were no legal, enforced speed limits. We keep them regardless. Sometimes we just pander to the lowest common denominator.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
"Then why are you all paying for an education?"
Because employers don't tend to take Joe-off-the-street and hire them.
There are some companies that do thorough testing of applicants for knowledge, but for most employers, it takes a college transcript to get in the door.
If this wasn't the case, people could actually be hired based on knowledge/performance. That isn't the way the system works. Employers like to see transcripts to ease the hiring process. They can set a bar: 3.0GPA. Doesn't matter what classes - did they learn? [or play the game well]
A dedicated person could find most/all of the material in any degree much faster/cheaper on the internet or with just textbooks compared to spending $20k/yr for the grade on a piece of paper.
but employers don't have ways to quantify that. Paying tuition gets that piece of paper that gets you in the door.
Is it a violation of copyright?
I can see how it might be, but I don't know if all of the facts are in. Consider:
[less likely] This is a public university, supported by the state, hence the professor is a state employee. Anything created by an agent of the state is public domain [may vary by state]
[more likely] Paying tuition is a contract to receive the information. This isn't a license to "use" the material such as a software license, this is a direct "transfer" of knowledge, as in "I am required to demonstrate proficiency in all aspects" to get a good grade. If I contract out for information [even code] I take full ownership of that material - and can do as I please with it. The contract is for the knowledge. The professor can't revoke my knowledge of the material at will.
[unknown] A lecture is a presentation of facts, not for entertainment purposes. Can facts be copyrighted?
specific interpretations of facts can be copyrighted, but is that what we have here?
If that was the case, wouldn't discussing research journals in class be considered a copyright violation? The professor is doing a public performance of copyrighted material, and for current research may not have permission to do that from the journal/author [textbooks are probably different].
You will want to check out this guy if you have not already run into him during your studies:
f
http://www.emichaelharrington.com/emhintro2006.pd
I took two semesters of Copyright Law in Nashville (I am an audio engineer) and he was a guest lecturer at one of my class meetings. Great guy, very on top of things, and very knowledgeable.
Libertas in infinitum
Then again you probably had no idea what the GP was talking about with "retain IP rights on their work." Some universities let professors keep the copyright on their research/writings, and some don't. It looks like this university does. For someone who pretends to be a slashdotter, you have a dismal grasp of IP.
"The use-mention distinction" is not "enforced here."
Yes, several years ago. Try to keep up, please. Oh, by the way we're changing discussion formats again.
Going back to school for entry-level jobs?
Not at the universities I've been to. The kindly professors would let me sit in for FREE. Ergo, I did NOT have to PAY to enter the classroom and take a seat. Which means, as I said, the money the other students paid was for their evaluation --- an evaluation I did not pay for and did not receive.
Acording to the Technician (NCSU's Student Newspaper) The University has asked the professor to pull the information from the website. Quote:
g e/paper848/news/2006/09/15/News/University.Asks.Pr ofessor.To.Pull.Information.From.Web.Site-2279161. shtml?sourcedomain=www.technicianonline.com&MIIHos t=media.collegepublisher.com
"After comunication professor Robert Schrag decided to go public Sept. 7 about his idea to make his communication and technology course lectures available to his students for download, his dean and department head asked him to remove his site Wednesday afternoon until further notice."
It continues
"As a result, Schrag chose to delay his usual lectun class Thursday in an effort to get his students' points of view on the situation."
"The idea of selling vocal intellectual property via the Internet is a new idea not only for the University but also for communication technology. Schrag complied with the University's request to remove the Web site because he said he understood his proposal to sell the information is a new and evolving idea." (Technician 9/15/06)
Linkage: http://media.www.technicianonline.com/media/stora
-Aradon
Sure, many profs allow it. However, many can't or don't allow it. Sometimes the room isn't big enough. Sometimes there are too few students in the course. Sometimes they just don't want you there. Yes, kindly professors will let you sit in - they are already going to be giving the lecture so what do they care? BUT, if a room is overcrowded, they are not going to let you sit in since the seats are for registered students.
Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
BUT, if a room is overcrowded, they are not going to let you sit in since the seats are for registered students.
Well, in that case, you won't be able to buy your way in either --- the class will be closed.
This is one of the reasons students are asked to audit courses as opposed to just walk in. The administration has to figure out which rooms to give to which courses. That's difficult if they can't tell how many folks are really in each course. Of course if almost everyone is playing by the rules, there will be enough slack to let a small number ignore them.
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye. Then it's just fun.
Peace.
Hi there. I've written an article that expands on this topic to discuss lectures as a new digital content category that are ripe for monetization. Check out "Podcast Predictions" at http://vitalpodcasts.com/ Shred at your leisure! Erik