Online media vs. Classroom Lectures
From Ray Schroeder’s Online Learning Update
Maybe I shouldn’t be amazed, but I can’t help it.
Treating “podcasting” like a cassette recorder, sans cassettes.
Whenever I hear an educator talk about podcasting, more often than not they consider the recording of lectures “podcasting”. From the standpoint of strict definition, I suppose they are right. Even lecture podcasts are still time-shifted audio. What amazes me is this: why are we not exploring new ways to engage the student outside the classroom rather than treating podcasting like a cassette recorder sans cassettes. Worse, perhaps is the faculty who wants to record his 90 minute lectures as a video because, “…if they can’t see me, how can they learn?”
Lest I am misunderstood, let me be clear. There is a definite place for recording full lectures and making them available to your students. University of Michigan School of Dentistry students would tell you such digital assets are very helpful to them as they near exam time.
Creating rich course media without a plan for the media’s strategic contribution to learning.
The prof described in the article (link) must have been baffled. However, if we as faculty do not provide clear guidelines, expectations, and requirements, we should not be shocked when students (unwisely) chose digital media over live, classroom interaction. Of course, this raises another question, which Steve Dembo articulated so well, “If the student could just as easily get all the information from a podcast, then isn’t the lecture period being completely wasted?”
The scholarship of teaching and learning-what gives with higher ed?
I am amazed that higher-ed is the only learning institution where are faculty not required to be trained to teach. I mean, if you applied to a Sylvan Learning Center, you would have to provide some proof of your ability, and/or experience in teaching. And of course, don’t even think of trying to get a job as a K-12 teacher in any state without state certification.
Again, let me say that many college and university faculty have been teaching for decades, and have done exemplary jobs. I do notice however, that the exemplary faculty are generally not the majority of faculty at any institution I’ve attended, or worked at. The exemplary faculty became “exemplary” over time, because they wanted to improve, and worked to improve. More than that, at times they had to stretch themselves to make substantial gains in teaching proficiency.
Institutional priorities for improving faculty proficiency in teaching and learning.
I know that in many institutions the challenge of improving teaching isn’t due to a lack of desire on the faculty’s part. Sometimes faculty are simply expected to do too much. Combine heavy teaching loads with advising, and committee work, and pretty soon there’s barely enough room to have a life.
If faculty are to improve their teaching proficiency, the institutions need to address the long-standing cultural impediments to improvement.
- No more 7 Deadly words: “We’ve always done it this way before”.
- Stop talking about excellence, and make the needed changes.
- Make improvement in teaching proficiency a requirement.
- Change load assignment such that faculty have the time to learn.
- Resource the departments who have the responsibility for faculty development.
- Track improvement, but be patient.
- Celebrate success. Award improvement.
By requiring, and investing in faculty improvement we see more faculty who have the time and energy to think innovativly rather than being concerned about what button to push.
