Tag: Teaching

The Social Media Game

I have keratoconus, which is a degenerative eye condition, and it’s flared up, resulting in a dramatic loss of vision, primarily in my right eye. This means that I can’t read, let alone write, for more than ten minutes at a time before fatigue and headache sets in, which is not very useful in my line of work. I have an appointment to see what can be done about this tomorrow, but for the last few days I’ve just be meandering around the world, trying not to look at things.

Which means I’ve been thinking a lot about my second love, teaching, and how I can integrate the modern into to the classical (if you will allow a blind man a little leeway in his similes).

I don’t know how many of you follow my Twitter account (@HORansome) but I recently found out that the course I helped redesign, PHIL105, has a a twitter feed, and that got me to thinking. How, I asked, can we integrate the twitter feed into the teaching of the class? At the moment the twitter feed is used outside of class, mostly to point students towards examples of bad reasoning, but there is no reason why it couldn’t be used in class by the students to suggest examples, in real time, to the teaching team.

The same should be true for the class’s bespoke e-mail address; why not get students to, say, submit their reconstructions of arguments in standard form via e-mail rather than the currently lengthy process of getting them to read out the reconstruction as someone at the lectern writes it out?

So, sometime next week we are going to experiment with the idea of integrating e-mail and Twitter into the class. It needs to be done with a certain amount of style; you can’t really have the lecturer constantly looking at incoming e-mails and tweets because it will disrupt the flow of the teaching, so a qualified assistant is going to be needed, one who can sort the good questions from the bad and know which reconstructions are going to be the most productive to put up on screen for the world to see. We also need to be cautious not to reveal who is sending us the questions or reconstructions; one virtue of going all ‘social media’ in the classroom is that people who might not want to raise their hand to ask a question might be willing to tweet or e-mail material if they know they won’t be outed.

I’m quite excited about this; I like teaching and I like making it easier for students to engage in the learning process. Now that wifi connections are pretty ubiquitous at the University of Auckland, and a lot of students have laptops of portable internet devices, this means we can make use of the technology ((Of course, it would be better if you could have integrated computers at each seat in the lecture theatre; that way you don’t have the problem of the person who might like to tweet a question but can’t because they have no tweeting device.)).

More, as I say, news as it comes to hand.

To do with teaching, somewhat

Morning all.

It’s almost the end of the first “half” of Semester One and rather than working flat out on my thesis I find myself working flat out turning a course designed for hundreds of students into a course that functions for six; this is very difficult to do and I wish I had been advised just how small the enrolment was going to be before taking it on.

Still, one must make do.

As some of you are doubtless aware, I record my lectures and provide the narrated slides to the students. It’s a good idea for two reasons; I have to keep on my toes and make sure I’m actually being rigorous in my pedagogy… and the students benefit because they can revisit my explanations at a latter date (as well as catch-up should they miss a class).

The long-term plan is, once the thesis is finished, I will put, online, a series of videos on Critical Thinking; a sort of online primer made up on ten minute chunks of argument detection, extraction and analysis.

Which leads me to my related point; at the moment everything I put up online for the students is H264 video with either MP3 or AAC audio. Some of you might be aware that H264 is currently not the darling of internet nerds and geeks because it has patents attached to it and someone, somewhere, has to pay a license fee for you to watch material encoded with such a codec. There is a good argument against the use of such patented video codecs; programmers in developing nations are not usually in the position to pay the MPEG-LA group the necessary monies to license H264 and there are issues even in the developed world, with Firefox, famously, refusing to pay that license (and thus needing a little ledgermain to view H264 outside of a Flash container).

Theora is the darling of people who argue this way; it appears to be patent-free and Wikipedia, for one, is pushing it hard. Theora is based on a much older encoding algorithm than H264, but it’s free and, the argument goes, we should prefer to use free software whenever possible.

It also produces much larger, uglier files than H264, and this is what concerns me. I need my recordings to be small and tight; I don’t want my students to waste their precious bandwidth downloading these files (for foreign readers: most citizens of Aotearoa/Te Wai Pounamu do not have unlimited bandwidth in re their internet access) so size matters. Visual quality; not so much; it is mostly text and I can happily reduce the framerate down to about 8 frames per second, with infrequent keyframes, to little visual detriment.

The other issue is that Theora encoding is slow; in the time it took to write this post I could have outputted my H264, remuxed the audio and had coffee; I’m only 42% through the Theora encoding at the moment, which, to use the vernacular, sucks.

[TIME PASSES. YOU MIGHT GET EATEN BY A GRUE]

The resulting file is, well, bigger and slightly blurrier than the H264 encode. 20% larger is a significant difference in size and it seems pretty consistent; I’ve tried re-encoding several other lecture recordings and the results are bigger and blurrier every time.

I’m keen to use patent-free video codecs and when I do the video primer I’ll look into this in more depth to see how things stand, but at the moment, it seems patent-laden codecs really are more user-friendly and easier to work with.

Sad but true.

Final Call for the Conspiracy Theories course

You can still enrol; I know it starts on Monday but if you were thinking about enrolling and have not got around to it I’d just like to say that it’s still open and it would be great to have you along for the ride. Especially since this may be one of the last times it gets offered; given the adult education budget cuts coming in next year and the year after next courses like this one may well be part of the 80% of courses that will just disappear.

Reminder: CCE – Conspiracy Theories

Funding cuts

(This is a bit rambling. I apologise in advance. There is an argument in here but it’s also a bit of an emotional outpour.)

I’ve been trying to work up a post expressing my horror and dismay at National’s budget cuts in re Adult Education. As someone who teaches in the Adult Education sector I’m concerned not just that, come 2010, my courses may no longer be offered but that, generally, an important part of the education sector might well just close-up.

The funding cuts are quite drastic; I’ve heard the 80% reduction claim from many a reliable source and that, to a certain extent, means that an awful lot of courses will go out of existence. At the moment a course of mine costs $125 dollars and for that you get twelve hours of lectures, plus the coursebook plus the prep time I and the other staff spend on the course. The reasons why the courses cost so little are twofold:

1. People aren’t willing to pay more.

2. Subsidies.

If you get rid of 2 then that leaves us with the problem of 1; if course costs go up enrolments go down and if enrolments go down then the cost eventually becomes uneconomical.

I’ve been to many a meeting about 1. Even when wallets were flush and the Economic Recession only a pipe-dream to those ‘wacky’ ((I was going to say ‘wanker.’)) bankers in the US of A it was still the case that people didn’t want to pay much more for their adult education. In part this is because we rightfully associate ‘education’ as a necessity; schools and universities should be engaging in outreach programmes to educate the ‘great unwashed.’

We need more education, not less, in our population. We need to be able to offer educational opportunities to all and sundry. We need decent early childhood education, we need to stop the standardisation of the Primary sector, we need to work at improving the Secondary sector, maintaining the Tertiary sector and expanding, not contracting, our Adult Education offerings.

That’s a lot of needs.

I realise that the Education Budget is never going to fund everything (although it really shouldn’t be funding private or integrated schools at all; I’m all about the Public Education, I am) and so choices should be made, but cutting funding to the Adult Education sector (and not adjusting for inflation) is not a good idea. It’s not even in the ballpark of ideas we might need to consider.

We need to be offering not just a range of education choices but we need to be offering this range to a range of people. Not everyone goes to uni; not everyone, until recently, finished school. Adult education provides educational opportunities to those who may have missed out for a variety of reasons, many of them not of their choosing ((For example, it was never in my family’s plan that my Mother go to uni; due to CCE she has been able to see what uni is like and had learning opportunities that she otherwise missed out on.)).

It provides these opportunities in a cheap but effective way.

Now, a lot of people complain about the kinds of courses that are offered, although I think you would be hard-pressed to find something truly silly in the CCE offerings. Cooking courses are not silly; people need to be able to not just cook but prepare meals with nutritional value. Courses on Comparative Religion are not silly, as aren’t Sociology or Anthropology courses; we should be studying our beliefs and how we form them.

Anyway, contentiously, education is an end in itself.

This leads to my other angle on this, which is that the entry point for further education should always be low so that people can become further educated. Now, when we have to deal with the dread of standards and assessment the entry point must be somewhat inflated so that resources can be spent on students who can succeed, but when standards and assessments are not an issue it is in the best interests of society as a whole to be as educated as it can be. Cost, then, which is a barrier to entry-cum-engagement, is something that needs to be as low as possible.

Now, Matthew, why don’t you academics just take a paycut, you may well be asking. It’s a good question. I imagine that a lot of us will; adult education is very much a vocation (which is funny, given that teaching really is a vocation; adult education is just more vocational; it has vocationality-plus) and its not well paid at all. Some people will jump ship and argue that as the benefits to teaching adult education are so low it won’t be worth it at the lower salary and others, like me, will continue on, because it isn’t really about the money, it’s about teaching others.

The problem is, even with paycuts, the system will grind to a halt. There are still costs associated with adult education. Rooms, course materials (whether printed or hosted online) and the like all cost money, and even if I take a paycut the other expenses like administration, et al, will absorb money.

The more I think about this the more I am disgusted by National’s move in this Budget. When Labour cut our funding I was unhappy; there are fewer courses on offer through CCE now than there were four years ago and several colleagues have not had the numbers to run a viable course for a few semesters now. National may well have destroyed adult education; that seems harsh but given that people are already disinclined to pay for further study of its like in the recession the combination of increased enrolment costs and less of a portfolio of courses on offer will make adult education a meagre experience.

My other worry is, of course, that this is merely the tip of an iceberg; the Arts are probably already in the firing line. Labour lost of a lot of its traditional support in the academic sector when it failed to pay even vague lip service to the ideal that education as an end to itself, rather than as a pathway to a career, is a good thing. National, which to be crude gets a lot of its traditional support from the kind of people who think that academics are a lower form of life than the scum that grows on pond scum, aren’t likely to be even thinking of hoovering up that support.

Now, my discipline, due to the quite silly metric the PBRF is based upon, scores very well in the Performance-based Research Fund index (we’re the top, actually, so nah-nah to all those ‘practical’ subjects), but even Labour were trying to change the metric to stop that from happening again. Give it a few years and (I now sound like a Conspiracy Theorist) the Arts, with its grouping of Humanities, Social Sciences and the like, will be funded into not extinction but a state almost worth than death…

Gah.

(Apologies, once again, for the ramble… It’s been a stressful week.)

CCE – Conspiracy Theories and Critical Thinking

It is that time of year again, the time of year where I advertise my Conspiracy Theories course to the world. If you’re rushing to enrol, then go here. If you are more circumspect, well, I’m not sure I can help you, although I can tell you that this year I propose to:

    Cover both Dan Brown’s ‘The Da Vinci Code’ and ‘Angels and Demons,’ as well as discuss what travesties of writing and historical revision he might be planning in his upcoming book, ‘The Lost Symbol.’

    Expand on the Aoteroa/Te Wai Pounamu (New Zealand) section by adding in the ‘Celtic New Zealand’ thesis as a subject of discussion.

    Talk even more about how Conspiracy Theories and Official Theories interrelate and how one can easily be the other.

    Introduce the material from my upcoming talk to the New Zealand Skeptics ((More on this later.)) on Epistemically Authoritative Sources.

    And (probably) lots more.