I love this post from Kate. Lectures are an incredibly touchy subject in Higher Education and they tend to polarise people. They hate them or they love them. This polarity of opinions means that there’s very little middle ground on which to stand for those who sit somewhere in between. This post carves some space out for the middle.
This part in particularstrikes a balance between the affordances and costs of online and traditional lectures:
The university lecture is the city where all faiths converge. Until we work out how to make online content as updatable and responsive as a live presentation, then investment in video production is just being added to capital investment in buildings and their maintenance, salaries and on-costs for the permanent staff, and quality assurance procedures for both domestic and international students, all cohering around the idea that content is delivered not found, and delivering content matters more than other forms of teaching.
She also carves out space between the arguments between staff and students:
This means understanding that just as we measure staff contact time as the tip of an iceberg of preparation and consultation, so we should expect students to calculate the opportunity cost of showing up at least in terms of travel and work.
I think its very easy to look at the cost component of staff time for lectures, but when was the last time we factored in the costs for students in those equations?
The comments below the post are also worthy of a read as there’s plenty of great questions, reponses and knowledge apparent in their.
Source: What would Stampy do?
Image: This Is What You Should Be Asking About Stampy’s Minecraft Videos