Teacher/Academics & ‘content generation’

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/opinion/academics-arent-content-creators-and-its-regressive-make-them-so

A video by a professor for only their class is akin to the single-copy, handwritten book disseminated to just one room of people, says David KellermannMarch 8, 2021David Kellermann

Suddenly academics became video editors – mostly bad ones – and our students turned to YouTube, because on YouTube you can get a better explanation of the same thing (for free I might add). Universities turned from communities of learning and collaboration into B-grade content providers. This is the death march of higher education. Universities are not content providers. Somewhere along this unplanned journey we lost our way.

(quote from linked article – see URL above)

An interesting article being shared by my colleagues working in Education. There is a lot of frustration in different university contexts, relating to institutional demands and expectations relating to teaching academics using technology for teaching, recording and thereby creating a resource, owned by the university, for which the producer, the teacher/academic, is not in control of. Another consequence is that as a sessional/casual/contract staff member, our work (or our performance) is not rewarded beyond our per hour of ‘teaching’ wage, and the fear is, that we will no longer be required and hence, no longer earn an income from our work.

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/dead-professors-course-alerts-faculty-covid-era-rights

I have colleagues who are forced to record their seminars, raising the question of who then ‘owns the content & IP’ (the corporation), which is not negotiated or remunerated, At the moment, working with UniMelb, we do not record our seminars and there is an 80% hurdle attendance requirement. This would seem very harsh to my last two HE employers – we need to be ‘flexible’, students need to be able to access lectures/seminars in their own time, we couldn’t possibly ‘force’ them to attend when it suits us. I’m sure there are studies out there, but in my humble experience, as soon as that expectation is removed, not only does attendance drop, but even ‘views’, engagement with materials and any kind of useful discussion all drop. And not only that, this is recorded by the Technology systems now in place. (Very interested if anyone can recommend any research in this area).

As a case in point (which I’m sure is familiar to others), I taught in a core unit for an education subject in 2015, at a particular university in Melbourne, with over 300 students enrolled. I had a weekly one hour lecture which was recorded and made available to students doing the course. I never had more than 20 people in the lecture theatre, which dropped to around 4 – one of whom was a note taker for a student with a disability. I thought that was ok until I found out how to check how many students had watched the lecture on line. The numbers consistently dropped week by week. Worse than that, it became clear that students did not even view the full hour. (This is from memory, I think I’m still in shock and humiliation…)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266173812_Why_do_Students_still_Bother_Coming_to_Lectures_When_Everything_is_Available_Online

Yes, there were take-away messages from this experience, and I might have improved my ‘style’ since then, but this seemed to be foreboding for the future of university learning, effort and engagement. I know that my planning was good, multi modes, engaging content, opportunities for discussion … but what could I do to get students to attend? ‘Good’ students passed their assignments because they knew how to respond appropriately, and not so good students struggled, but few failed. What did the content of the lectures even have to do with passing the subject, which was the main consideration of most students?

I may have crossed over a few topic areas here, but here in 2021, working with UniMelb (atm), all online zoom seminars, the students I’ve been working with have been overwhelmingly grateful, enthusiastic, engaged and collaborative . It is still online (not recorded) but I’m hopeful and no longer having to feel the kind of humiliation I did in my memory above. I’m looking forward to considering more about what students want, and what we as teacher academics, are willing and able to provide. And developing my competence at facilitating learning through online platforms.

5 thoughts on “Teacher/Academics & ‘content generation’”

  1. Nice critique and reflections @Abelspace – fundamentally I believe education should not be focused upon content delivery – although we need to scaffold and stage the implementation of creative learning environments that focus upon what the learner does – so not saying we should never deliver content, but that educational institutions need to fundamentally rethink the role of both the teacher and the learner, particularly in online learning. Critically simply recording a lecture for online viewing is simply bad pedagogy – designing creative learning environments should be about designing learning activities that are aligned and mapped to the core learning outcomes and graduate capabilities – and these interactions should be unique to each cohort of students and their needs as a unique community of learners. How might we design such learning environments? I’ve collaborated with various lecturers in different disciplines to explore this, one example is summarised in the following article:
    Cochrane, T., & Antonczak, L. (2015). Designing Creative Learning Environments. Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal – IxD&A, N.24, 125-144. http://www.mifav.uniroma2.it/inevent/events/idea2010/index.php?s=10&a=11&link=ToC_24_P&link=24_8_abstract

  2. Hi @Abelspace! I agree with what you have said, but I sense the issue is less to do with our shift online, but more to do with the range of options that have become available to students over the years – some provided by the university (think lecture capture), and others that are simply embedded in our daily lives (youtube). From a teaching perspective, I remember the moment my thinking about teaching shifted: I was asking our Associate Dean T&L at my faculty (FFAM) about content delivery methods, and she stated that I needed to think of myself as a “curator” rather than a content deliverer. That notion of curation has stuck with me ever since. Personally, I am fascinated by design approaches that allow students to take curated content and manipulate and expand on that content in ways that are meaningful to them. I can see that much of their deep learning occurs when they have to create content – from the content! – themselves, either directly or indirectly through manipulation, the act of sharing knowledge or experiences, or critical thinking. The one personal issue I find with a more curated approach to teaching is that there is generally less of ‘you’ in the process (i.e. less of your talking head occupying the space and time of the LMS or zoom), and therefore there is a personal risk of feeling like an imposter.

    1. Hi Solange and thanks for your thoughtful and well considered response! I agree with your initial comment, not so much to do with our shift online, but exacerbated by recent shifts, and hopefully encouraged more people to look at how they are managing their teaching/facilitating learning online.
      I’d love to know more about this idea of ‘curation’ in practice, especially in terms of what the point Thom raised in his comment and the uniqueness of every cohort/needs/community of learners. (I’ll hopefully have time to read some of the articles before Monday!)

      1. I have since had a look around as I thought about this idea of ‘curating online spaces’. I found this article useful: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016718519302507
        The online forum as a digital space of curation
        by JohanJansson
        Jansson introduces the concept of curation that ’emphasizes intermediary processes sorting and filtering the information overload that characterize contemporary digitalized society’. This seems to me a crucial point in regards to the proliferation of ‘information overload’, and helping our students to develop their critical media literacy skills to filter content thoughtfully and appropriately. In some ways, this article seems to appropriate the idea of ‘curation’ with helping to direct people to appropriate materials/content.
        “[T]he paper argues that contemporary digital curation is characterized by (a) digitally produced and mediated processes, (b) de-professionalization, (c) a combination of productive and consumptive modes, (d) space as a ‘quality stamp’, and (e) an increasingly underlying and/or everyday practice. The second aim [of the research] is empirical and, through a case study of an online forum dedicated to hi-fi and high-end audio equipment, the ambition is to identify curatorial practices and processes taking place at the forum and to understand how the online forum functions as a curatorial space.” (from abstract)
        This makes me think about my role as an educator who teaches online, uses online spaces, but also hopes to better ‘curate’ through my educational practices. Also relevant to the many arguments and prolific research relating to ‘digital natives’ and ‘digital tech skills’ .
        https://qz.com/1041828/a-new-study-shows-millennials-are-no-better-at-using-technology-than-their-parents/
        An ongoing and fascinating topic!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *