DETT 611 Library and Intellectual Property Issues
in Distance Education
An overview of the development and delivery of digital resources for distance education. Discussion covers the intellectual property issues affecting the use of copyrighted works in distance education, developing and delivering library resources online to a faculty and student population, and the future of digital information delivery and the impact of digital rights management (DRM) technologies and social networking.
Course Attendance: Summer Semester 2009 (May - August)
Professor: Ilene Frank
Final Grade: A
Personal Papers: Review of a Copyright Article
Ownership Policy Review: UMUC
Analysis of Copyright adherence in two case scenarios
Faculty Podcasting in a Distance Education Environment
Professor: Ilene Frank
Final Grade: A
Personal Papers: Review of a Copyright Article
Ownership Policy Review: UMUC
Analysis of Copyright adherence in two case scenarios
Faculty Podcasting in a Distance Education Environment
Review of Copyright Article June 9th 2009
Lawhon, T., Ennis-Cole, D., Lawhon, D.C. (2006). Copyright laws and fair use in the digital era: Implications for distance-education programs in community colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 30, 479-483.
Article Synopsis
Lawhon, Ennis-Cole, & Lawhon (2006) article on Copyright laws and fair use in the digital era provides a broad overview of the legal responsibilities of the key players associated with online education. “The goal of this paper is to provide information that will protect instructors, institutions, students and copyright holders of information used in distance education courses” (p.480).
The authors first warn the reader that copyright violations can result in legal fees, paying compensation, loss of a position, and prison time. However they further note that the legal responsibilities in the online education environment has become murky and dynamic. The article asserts that the online instructor should understand two key copyright laws: the Fair Use Act, and the Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization Act (TEACH). The authors subsequently provide a cursory overview of these two Acts, although they advise the reader to gain a deeper knowledge by reading more specific articles which they reference. Finally the article discusses plagiarism.
The Fair Use Act is only vaguely described, however the authors note that the Fair Use Guidelines are more liberal if the access to the online media is restricted. These restriction techniques include using a secure site where a user ID and password is required, or using a Digital Rights Management (DRM) technique in which access is restricted to the software or documents under specific circumstances. These techniques are especially useful in allowing audiovisual media, and protecting original works by the instructor and student submissions from third party use.
Lawhon et al. (2006) provide little detailed information on the Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization Act (TEACH), other than it expands “the allowed works to include the display and performance of nearly all type of material; but the usage is subject to quantity limitations, as outlined by the Fair Use Act”(p.481). They did however highlight that students should be notified that material included in distance education transmission may be subject to copyright protection. The authors further urge instructors to check with their institutions for written policies or guidelines for copying, displaying, and distributing media content.
The authors argue that plagiarism is not only a violation of ethics but, in some cases, an infringement of copyright law. To combat plagiarism, the article strongly endorses the subscription-based service, Turnitin, to help instructors in the detection of plagiarized material.
Discussion and Critique
The article was selected as it is a fairly recent (2006) article on copyright laws and fair use within a distance education environment. While the article provides a very broad understanding of the key Copyright Acts that distance education instructors, institutions and students should be paying attention too, it was very disappointing in specific content. The understanding of a distance education instructor or student of their specific legal responsibilities as it pertains to copyright law is not advanced by reading this article. However the article does provide some (hopefully) useful references from which this understanding can be obtained. So in summary the article provides a taste of the distance education copyright issues, and points the way to interested and energetic readers to learn more from other sources. However, the article would have been significantly stronger if the key details had been included.
Reference
Lawhon, T., Ennis-Cole, D., Lawhon, D.C. (2006). Copyright laws and fair use in the digital era: Implications for distance-education programs in community colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 30, 479-483.
Article Synopsis
Lawhon, Ennis-Cole, & Lawhon (2006) article on Copyright laws and fair use in the digital era provides a broad overview of the legal responsibilities of the key players associated with online education. “The goal of this paper is to provide information that will protect instructors, institutions, students and copyright holders of information used in distance education courses” (p.480).
The authors first warn the reader that copyright violations can result in legal fees, paying compensation, loss of a position, and prison time. However they further note that the legal responsibilities in the online education environment has become murky and dynamic. The article asserts that the online instructor should understand two key copyright laws: the Fair Use Act, and the Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization Act (TEACH). The authors subsequently provide a cursory overview of these two Acts, although they advise the reader to gain a deeper knowledge by reading more specific articles which they reference. Finally the article discusses plagiarism.
The Fair Use Act is only vaguely described, however the authors note that the Fair Use Guidelines are more liberal if the access to the online media is restricted. These restriction techniques include using a secure site where a user ID and password is required, or using a Digital Rights Management (DRM) technique in which access is restricted to the software or documents under specific circumstances. These techniques are especially useful in allowing audiovisual media, and protecting original works by the instructor and student submissions from third party use.
Lawhon et al. (2006) provide little detailed information on the Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization Act (TEACH), other than it expands “the allowed works to include the display and performance of nearly all type of material; but the usage is subject to quantity limitations, as outlined by the Fair Use Act”(p.481). They did however highlight that students should be notified that material included in distance education transmission may be subject to copyright protection. The authors further urge instructors to check with their institutions for written policies or guidelines for copying, displaying, and distributing media content.
The authors argue that plagiarism is not only a violation of ethics but, in some cases, an infringement of copyright law. To combat plagiarism, the article strongly endorses the subscription-based service, Turnitin, to help instructors in the detection of plagiarized material.
Discussion and Critique
The article was selected as it is a fairly recent (2006) article on copyright laws and fair use within a distance education environment. While the article provides a very broad understanding of the key Copyright Acts that distance education instructors, institutions and students should be paying attention too, it was very disappointing in specific content. The understanding of a distance education instructor or student of their specific legal responsibilities as it pertains to copyright law is not advanced by reading this article. However the article does provide some (hopefully) useful references from which this understanding can be obtained. So in summary the article provides a taste of the distance education copyright issues, and points the way to interested and energetic readers to learn more from other sources. However, the article would have been significantly stronger if the key details had been included.
Reference
Lawhon, T., Ennis-Cole, D., Lawhon, D.C. (2006). Copyright laws and fair use in the digital era: Implications for distance-education programs in community colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 30, 479-483.
Ownership Policy Critique: UMUC July 6th 2009
Introduction
The University of Maryland University College policy on copyright ownership is contained within an overarching policy on Intellectual Property which can be found on the university website at http://www.umuc.edu/policy/research/research19000.shtml.
The objective of the UMUC’s intellectual property policy is clearly and succinctly summarized in the policy introduction:
“The primary mission of universities is to create, preserve, and disseminate knowledge. When that knowledge takes the form of intellectual property, a university must establish a clear and explicit policy that will protect the interests of the creators and the university while ensuring that society benefits from the fair and full dissemination of that knowledge”. (UMUC Policy 190.00, 2002, p.1).
The policy covers the university’s ownership policy on copyrights, patents, computer programs and software, and other types of intellectual property (trademarks, service marks etc). This paper will summarize the university’s policy on copyright ownership and critique it against its stated purpose of protecting the interests of the creators and the university while ensuring that society benefits from the fair and full dissemination of that knowledge.
Policy Background
The policy has been in effect since July 1st, 2002, and applies to all intellectual property created on or after July 1st 2002. Intellectual property created prior to this date is subject the University System of Maryland (USM) policies: IV- 3.00 (patents) and 3.10 (copyrights). The framework for UMUC’s policy is the current USM Intellectual Property policy IV-3.20; however there are a number of unique differences pertaining to UMUC’s distinct characteristic of being a leading distance education institution. This approach was a conscious decision of the USM intellectual property committee to develop a policy framework which specifies the rules of how each institution within the USM will develop its policy, but leaves the specific policies to be developed by the individual institutions. “This approach was efficacious because of the significant differences among the institutions in their mission, personnel policies, and level of involvement in distance education (Kelley et al., 2002, p.261).
Copyright PolicyOwnership
The UMUC Policy 190.00 (2002) states that personnel “shall have all rights in copyright for (a) personalized course material and (b) scholarly works” (p.3). Where personnel is defined as “persons who are employees of the University of Maryland University College either full-time or part-time, including without limitation all faculty categories, student employees, contractual employees at other University System of Maryland institutions who are employed or assigned to the university” (p.1).
However, the “university shall have the rights in copyrights for work produced under Third Party Agreements as stated in those agreements” (UMUC Policy 190.00, 2002, p.3).
This ownership policy provides UMUC personnel with distinct advantages in being able to create, utilize, and retain ownership of their personal work without fear of the recent court trend in awarding the ownership to the university based upon the work-made-for-hire doctrine (Bonner, 2006). At the same time, the university can ensure the ownership of specific work by entering in a third party agreement with UMUC personnel or external contractors on a case-by-case purpose. For example in UMUC’s undergraduate group course modules are developed by an instructional development team which includes a content expert who is usually a faculty member. Once developed these course modules are inserted into every future section of the class. This development is conducted under a third party agreement in which the content expert relinquishes any claim of content ownership to the university in lieu of payment. This can cause issues with some faculty members who do not wish to relinquish ownership of their work and thus do not participate in the course module development even though they may be the expert in the field.
In addition, the UMUC Policy 190.00 (2002) also states that “students shall have all rights in copyright of all intellectual property created without the use of Unusual University Resources” (p.3). While this appears to be a positive attribute to facilitate and encourage student creativity and scholarly work, the term Unusual University Resources is not defined, and as such makes this clause ambiguous to the layperson.
Right of Use While granting the creator with all rights to personalized course material and scholarly work, the UMUC policy does establish specific usage rights which are especially appropriate in a technology-mediated teaching environment.
“The university shall have the following rights:
a) Personalized Course content: A worldwide, perpetual, royalty free license to use Personalized Course content, in any media or format whatsoever, for the following purposes:
i. Inclusion within the Academic Content for those sections of University course(s) taught by the personnel who created the personalized course content.
ii. Embodiment in one or more copies as part of that Academic Content for the delivery of those sections of University course(s) taught by the Personnel who created the Personalized Course content.
iii. Publication or delivery as part of that Academic Content to participants in those sections of University course(s) taught by the Personnel who created the Personalized Course content.
iv. Retention as part of that Academic Content in order to archive that University course and the use of the archived record for all usual archive purposes of the University, including course evaluation, evaluation and comparison of the Personalized Course Content or the Personnel member who created the Personalized Course content, implementation of other University policies, research, library or record-keeping purposes”(p3-4)
The above rights not only pertain to personalized course content developed by the faculty member, it also applies to the student content that is developed within the course.
These provisions appear to be aimed at a Learning Management System (LMS) environment where the faculty member incorporates and stores his or her personalized learning material within the Academic Content of the online course section that they are teaching. At this point the university has the right to deliver this material over any media or format to all students enrolled in this course. In addition, the university maintains the right to retain this material within the confines of the particular course section taught by the material creator. Under this policy, the university does not have the right to utilize this material in sections that are not taught by the content owner, nor does it have the right to utilize the material in future course sections.
A further interesting aspect about the policy is that while the policy does appear to be designed around an LMS learning structure, there is no specific reference to this approach, nor is there a reference to distance education in general. By utilizing the terms “any media or format whatsoever” UMUC cleverly leaves technology transparent to the overall policy intent, and by doing so allows for all current and future technological delivery methods.
Technology-Mediated Instructional Material
The desire to ensure technology transparency within the university policy is further illustrated by a specific policy on technology-mediated instructional material. While acknowledging that technology-mediated instructional materials are core to the mission of the university, the UMUC Policy 190.00 (2002) states that “it is the policy of the University that for the purposes of this Policy such materials cannot be differentiated from or given different consideration from any other instructional materials” (p.7). As such the ownership of instruction material whether it is delivered via written text on paper or computer, or audio, video and any other future technologies are all handled in the same manner.
Compliance and education of the community
The UMUC Policy 190.00 (2002) policy also specifies the responsibilities of the university, personnel and students to comply with the requirements of copyright law. The university’s responsibility being to provide guideline for the use of copyrighted materials including addressing library and educational fair use exceptions for research and scholarly work (these guidelines are included in the policy appendix), and the UMUC personnel and students have the responsibility of complying with these guidelines.
On the surface this seems to be a reasonable policy; however it does not cover the educational training of the policy itself. While the university can develop an outstanding set of guidelines for the use of copyrighted material, it has no relevance if UMUC personal and students either do not know about the document or have not been exposed to its significance.
Resolution of Disputes
No ownership dispute mechanism is highlight in the policy other than to indicate that the President may enter into agreements with respect to a number of intellectual property issues including resolution of disputes.
Discussion
Content The UMUC policy 190.00 on Intellectual Property is a well crafted document which succeeds in its mission of establishing clear and explicit policies that protect the interest of the creator and the university. In establishing that UMUC personal have all rights in copyright for personalized course material and scholarly works, the university has facilitated an environment for unreserved freedom of expression, and in doing so, established an innovative, creative and scholarly environment. In addition the university has protected their mission through the capability of entering into third party agreements on specific mission critical material in which the university is the copyright holder, and in establishing the policies on the university rights of use.
While I would agree that these policies ensure that students enrolled in specific classroom sections benefit from the resultant fair and full dissemination of knowledge, I would disagree that there any direct benefits to society as a whole. This is due to the fact that the policy restricts the right of use to solely to the course(s) taught by the personnel who created the personalized course content. As such the university could not, without permission, use the material in sections taught by other professors, or enable the general public to view the course content. Thus the policy does not completely satisfy its stated mission of facilitating fair and full dissemination of knowledge benefits to society.
References
Bonner, K.M. (2006). The center for intellectual property handbook. New York: Neal Schuman Publishers, Inc.
Kelley, K. B., Bonner, K., McMichael, J., & Pomea, N. (2002). Intellectual property, ownership and digital course materials: A study of intellectual property policies at two-and four-year colleges and universities. portal: Libraries and the Academy2(2), 255-266.
Loggie, K. A., Barron, A. E., Gulilze, E., Hohlfeld, T. N., Kromrey, J.D., & Venable, M. (2006). An analysis of copyright policies for distance learning materials at major research universities. Journal of Interactive Online Learning 5(2). Retrieved June 27th 2009 from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/getfile.cfm?volID=5&IssueID=18&ArticleID=88
UMUC Policy 190.00. (2002). Intellectual Property. Retrieved June 24th 2009 from http://www.umuc.edu/policy/research/research19000.shtml
The University of Maryland University College policy on copyright ownership is contained within an overarching policy on Intellectual Property which can be found on the university website at http://www.umuc.edu/policy/research/research19000.shtml.
The objective of the UMUC’s intellectual property policy is clearly and succinctly summarized in the policy introduction:
“The primary mission of universities is to create, preserve, and disseminate knowledge. When that knowledge takes the form of intellectual property, a university must establish a clear and explicit policy that will protect the interests of the creators and the university while ensuring that society benefits from the fair and full dissemination of that knowledge”. (UMUC Policy 190.00, 2002, p.1).
The policy covers the university’s ownership policy on copyrights, patents, computer programs and software, and other types of intellectual property (trademarks, service marks etc). This paper will summarize the university’s policy on copyright ownership and critique it against its stated purpose of protecting the interests of the creators and the university while ensuring that society benefits from the fair and full dissemination of that knowledge.
Policy Background
The policy has been in effect since July 1st, 2002, and applies to all intellectual property created on or after July 1st 2002. Intellectual property created prior to this date is subject the University System of Maryland (USM) policies: IV- 3.00 (patents) and 3.10 (copyrights). The framework for UMUC’s policy is the current USM Intellectual Property policy IV-3.20; however there are a number of unique differences pertaining to UMUC’s distinct characteristic of being a leading distance education institution. This approach was a conscious decision of the USM intellectual property committee to develop a policy framework which specifies the rules of how each institution within the USM will develop its policy, but leaves the specific policies to be developed by the individual institutions. “This approach was efficacious because of the significant differences among the institutions in their mission, personnel policies, and level of involvement in distance education (Kelley et al., 2002, p.261).
Copyright PolicyOwnership
The UMUC Policy 190.00 (2002) states that personnel “shall have all rights in copyright for (a) personalized course material and (b) scholarly works” (p.3). Where personnel is defined as “persons who are employees of the University of Maryland University College either full-time or part-time, including without limitation all faculty categories, student employees, contractual employees at other University System of Maryland institutions who are employed or assigned to the university” (p.1).
However, the “university shall have the rights in copyrights for work produced under Third Party Agreements as stated in those agreements” (UMUC Policy 190.00, 2002, p.3).
This ownership policy provides UMUC personnel with distinct advantages in being able to create, utilize, and retain ownership of their personal work without fear of the recent court trend in awarding the ownership to the university based upon the work-made-for-hire doctrine (Bonner, 2006). At the same time, the university can ensure the ownership of specific work by entering in a third party agreement with UMUC personnel or external contractors on a case-by-case purpose. For example in UMUC’s undergraduate group course modules are developed by an instructional development team which includes a content expert who is usually a faculty member. Once developed these course modules are inserted into every future section of the class. This development is conducted under a third party agreement in which the content expert relinquishes any claim of content ownership to the university in lieu of payment. This can cause issues with some faculty members who do not wish to relinquish ownership of their work and thus do not participate in the course module development even though they may be the expert in the field.
In addition, the UMUC Policy 190.00 (2002) also states that “students shall have all rights in copyright of all intellectual property created without the use of Unusual University Resources” (p.3). While this appears to be a positive attribute to facilitate and encourage student creativity and scholarly work, the term Unusual University Resources is not defined, and as such makes this clause ambiguous to the layperson.
Right of Use While granting the creator with all rights to personalized course material and scholarly work, the UMUC policy does establish specific usage rights which are especially appropriate in a technology-mediated teaching environment.
“The university shall have the following rights:
a) Personalized Course content: A worldwide, perpetual, royalty free license to use Personalized Course content, in any media or format whatsoever, for the following purposes:
i. Inclusion within the Academic Content for those sections of University course(s) taught by the personnel who created the personalized course content.
ii. Embodiment in one or more copies as part of that Academic Content for the delivery of those sections of University course(s) taught by the Personnel who created the Personalized Course content.
iii. Publication or delivery as part of that Academic Content to participants in those sections of University course(s) taught by the Personnel who created the Personalized Course content.
iv. Retention as part of that Academic Content in order to archive that University course and the use of the archived record for all usual archive purposes of the University, including course evaluation, evaluation and comparison of the Personalized Course Content or the Personnel member who created the Personalized Course content, implementation of other University policies, research, library or record-keeping purposes”(p3-4)
The above rights not only pertain to personalized course content developed by the faculty member, it also applies to the student content that is developed within the course.
These provisions appear to be aimed at a Learning Management System (LMS) environment where the faculty member incorporates and stores his or her personalized learning material within the Academic Content of the online course section that they are teaching. At this point the university has the right to deliver this material over any media or format to all students enrolled in this course. In addition, the university maintains the right to retain this material within the confines of the particular course section taught by the material creator. Under this policy, the university does not have the right to utilize this material in sections that are not taught by the content owner, nor does it have the right to utilize the material in future course sections.
A further interesting aspect about the policy is that while the policy does appear to be designed around an LMS learning structure, there is no specific reference to this approach, nor is there a reference to distance education in general. By utilizing the terms “any media or format whatsoever” UMUC cleverly leaves technology transparent to the overall policy intent, and by doing so allows for all current and future technological delivery methods.
Technology-Mediated Instructional Material
The desire to ensure technology transparency within the university policy is further illustrated by a specific policy on technology-mediated instructional material. While acknowledging that technology-mediated instructional materials are core to the mission of the university, the UMUC Policy 190.00 (2002) states that “it is the policy of the University that for the purposes of this Policy such materials cannot be differentiated from or given different consideration from any other instructional materials” (p.7). As such the ownership of instruction material whether it is delivered via written text on paper or computer, or audio, video and any other future technologies are all handled in the same manner.
Compliance and education of the community
The UMUC Policy 190.00 (2002) policy also specifies the responsibilities of the university, personnel and students to comply with the requirements of copyright law. The university’s responsibility being to provide guideline for the use of copyrighted materials including addressing library and educational fair use exceptions for research and scholarly work (these guidelines are included in the policy appendix), and the UMUC personnel and students have the responsibility of complying with these guidelines.
On the surface this seems to be a reasonable policy; however it does not cover the educational training of the policy itself. While the university can develop an outstanding set of guidelines for the use of copyrighted material, it has no relevance if UMUC personal and students either do not know about the document or have not been exposed to its significance.
Resolution of Disputes
No ownership dispute mechanism is highlight in the policy other than to indicate that the President may enter into agreements with respect to a number of intellectual property issues including resolution of disputes.
Discussion
Content The UMUC policy 190.00 on Intellectual Property is a well crafted document which succeeds in its mission of establishing clear and explicit policies that protect the interest of the creator and the university. In establishing that UMUC personal have all rights in copyright for personalized course material and scholarly works, the university has facilitated an environment for unreserved freedom of expression, and in doing so, established an innovative, creative and scholarly environment. In addition the university has protected their mission through the capability of entering into third party agreements on specific mission critical material in which the university is the copyright holder, and in establishing the policies on the university rights of use.
While I would agree that these policies ensure that students enrolled in specific classroom sections benefit from the resultant fair and full dissemination of knowledge, I would disagree that there any direct benefits to society as a whole. This is due to the fact that the policy restricts the right of use to solely to the course(s) taught by the personnel who created the personalized course content. As such the university could not, without permission, use the material in sections taught by other professors, or enable the general public to view the course content. Thus the policy does not completely satisfy its stated mission of facilitating fair and full dissemination of knowledge benefits to society.
References
Bonner, K.M. (2006). The center for intellectual property handbook. New York: Neal Schuman Publishers, Inc.
Kelley, K. B., Bonner, K., McMichael, J., & Pomea, N. (2002). Intellectual property, ownership and digital course materials: A study of intellectual property policies at two-and four-year colleges and universities. portal: Libraries and the Academy2(2), 255-266.
Loggie, K. A., Barron, A. E., Gulilze, E., Hohlfeld, T. N., Kromrey, J.D., & Venable, M. (2006). An analysis of copyright policies for distance learning materials at major research universities. Journal of Interactive Online Learning 5(2). Retrieved June 27th 2009 from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/getfile.cfm?volID=5&IssueID=18&ArticleID=88
UMUC Policy 190.00. (2002). Intellectual Property. Retrieved June 24th 2009 from http://www.umuc.edu/policy/research/research19000.shtml
Analysis of copyright adherence in two case scenarios July 26th 2009
Introduction
This paper analyzes two educational case scenarios to determine if they conform to copyright regulations. A key consideration in both of these scenarios is whether or not they adhere to the fair use doctrine which was included in the Copyright Act of 1976. This doctrine was introduced in order to balance the rights of the copyright holder with the benefits to society through the advancement of the arts and sciences. “Fair use enables the use of the copyright owner’s exclusive rights for activities that serve the common good and foster debate, criticism, education, and scholarship” (Kelley & Bonner, 2006, p.9). The Copyright Act provides four factors to be used in determining whether or not a particular case is fair use:
“(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copy-righted work as a whole;
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copy-righted work.” (U.S. Copyright Law, 2007, p.19).
The two educational scenarios will be assessed against these four factors.
Case Scenario 1: An instructor scans an entire book he has authored onto a password protected website for students within his class even though the publisher holds the copy right.
Copyright Ownership
The first interesting thing about this case is that the instructor is the author of the book. The fact that the publisher is the copyright holder, and not the author, would indicate that there must have been an agreement in which the author relinquished his or her rights of ownership to the publisher for either a financial benefit or to gain access to their publication services. As part of these negotiations the author could have gained an agreement with the publisher that (s)he would have free use of the entire text of the book within a protected website for the purposes of personal teaching. If this agreement was obtained then this scenario conforms to the agreement, and thus conforms to the copyright regulations. However if this agreement was not obtained, the fact that the instructor is the author is irrelevant; and the question becomes whether or not the instructor’s actions conforms to the fair use doctrine.
Fair Use Analysis
Analyzing the instructions against the four factors in the fair use doctrine:
(1) the purpose and character of the use: the purpose in this case is for educational purposes which meets the fair use doctrine.
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work: the scenario does not provide details on whether or not the copyrighted work is factual or fictional, or even whether or not the book has been published at this time. According to Hoon & Davis (2006), “it is easier to assert fair use in factual works than creative ones” and that “works that have been published are more easily subjected to fair use than unpublished works” (p.41-42). However, one can make the assumption that the book has an educational purpose since it is being used in an educational setting. Secondly that as publisher is the copyright holder, and the text is complete, that even if the book was not published at the time of the posting, the publication was imminent. As such one can reasonably assume that this scenario meets the fair use doctrine on this count.
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copy-righted work as a whole: The fact that the instructor scanned the entire text is a major issue under the fair use doctrine. The 1976 Copyright Act does not specify how much of a work can be used under the fair use doctrine; the general consensus is that the smaller the portion of the work is used the greater likelihood of it being considered fair use. A guideline was established by a working group of academic, government and other copyright interest groups in the Conference on Fair Use (CONFU). This guideline suggested that “up to 10% or 1000 words, whichever is less, in the aggregate of a copyrighted work consisting of text material may be reproduced or otherwise incorporated as part of a multimedia project created under Section 2 [Educational use] of these guidelines” (Lehman, 1998, p.53).
In this scenario, the use of the entire text clearly violates this guideline, and as such violates the fair use doctrine.
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copy-righted work: In the Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc v. National Enters (1985) case, the “Supreme Court said that the effect of the use of the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work is the single most important element of fair use” (Hoon & Davis, 2006, p. 44). In this scenario, one can make the assumption that if the students did not have access to the scanned version of entire book within the protected website then they would have to purchase the book from the publisher. As such the action of the instructor scanning the entire book in the course website has a negative impact on the potential market of the copyrighted work, and would contravene fair use.
Summary
The analysis of this scenario finds that the instructor’s actions violates the third and forth factors of the fair use doctrine, and as such would not be considered fair use under the Copyright Act of 1997. The only possible scenario in which the instructor’s actions could be appropriate is if s(he), as the author, gained agreement from the publisher as part of the initial copyright ownership negotiations
Case Scenario 2: A faculty member takes the best student papers each semester and creates an online journal that makes available to students in subsequent semesters to show them examples of good papers.
Copyright Ownership
The first question is who is the copyright owner? Is it the student who wrote the paper, or is it the educational institution since the paper was written as part of the coursework at that institution? One of the guiding principles in copyright legislation is that the author of the work has guiding control over the public use of their work (Kelley & Bonner, 2006). This principle holds unless there is a different agreement between the author and another person or institution on the ownership rights. In an educational environment, most institutions have developed an Intellectual Policy which covers copyright ownership. For example, University of Maryland University College (UMUC)’s policy on copyright ownership states that“students shall have all rights in copyright of all intellectual property created without the use of Unusual University Resources” UMUC Policy 190.00, 2002, p.3). Under this interpretation, students have the copyright ownership of their papers unless they received significant help from university support groups (faculty, writing center, librarian etc). In this scenario, it is thus a good assumption that student are the copyright holders of their papers.
Fair Use Analysis
Analyzing the instructions against the four factors in the fair use doctrine:
(1) the purpose and character of the use: the purpose in this case is for educational purposes which meets the fair use doctrine.
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work: in this scenario, one can reasonable assume that the nature of the student work is educational (although it could be factual or creative), and the work is unpublished. The fact the work is unpublished is a concern under fair use doctrine, “since the right of a creator to decide when to publish work is highly valued in copyright law” (Hoon & Davis, 2006, p.42). While the probability of a student publishing his or her paper may be low, the faculty member’s action in posting the paper does contravenes this factor of the fair use doctrine.
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copy-righted work as a whole: the entire student’s paper was used which as discussed in the previous scenario violates the fair use doctrine for this factor.
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copy-righted work: in reality the use of the student’s paper probably has negligible impact on the potential market for or value of the copy-righted work. However, it does in a small way expose the student’s unpublished work to a broader audience and in doing so may impact the potential market for the paper.
Summary
While the faculty’s actions may appear to be relatively harmless, and in fact be based upon a genuine desire to help and encourage future students to produce a higher standard of work, the analysis of the fair use factors finds that it does contravene the second, third and forth factors in the fair use doctrine. As such the faculty member is in violation of the student’s copyright ownership of the paper. A simple solution to this scenario is for the faculty to ask the student’s permission to include their paper in the online journal of good papers to be viewed by future classes. I have done this many times, and I have never had a student not give their permission, and in fact, they are often honored by the recognition of their work.
References
Hoon, P. E., Davis, C.L. (2006). Fair use and licensing. In K.M. Bonner, The Center for Intellectual Property Handbook. New York: Neal Schuman Publishers, Inc.
Kelley, K. B., Bonner, K.M. (2006). Copyright basics. In K.M. Bonner, The Center for Intellectual Property Handbook. New York: Neal Schuman Publishers, Inc.
Lehman, B.A (1998). The Conference on Fair Use: Final report to the commissioner on the conclusion of the Conference on Fair use: Retrieved July 26th 2009 from http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/dcom/olia/confu/confurep.pdf
UMUC Policy 190.00. (2002). Intellectual Property. Retrieved June 24th 2009 from http://www.umuc.edu/policy/research/research19000.shtml
U.S. Copyright Law. (2007). Limitations of exclusive rights: Fair use. Retrieved July 26th 2009 from http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.pdf
This paper analyzes two educational case scenarios to determine if they conform to copyright regulations. A key consideration in both of these scenarios is whether or not they adhere to the fair use doctrine which was included in the Copyright Act of 1976. This doctrine was introduced in order to balance the rights of the copyright holder with the benefits to society through the advancement of the arts and sciences. “Fair use enables the use of the copyright owner’s exclusive rights for activities that serve the common good and foster debate, criticism, education, and scholarship” (Kelley & Bonner, 2006, p.9). The Copyright Act provides four factors to be used in determining whether or not a particular case is fair use:
“(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copy-righted work as a whole;
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copy-righted work.” (U.S. Copyright Law, 2007, p.19).
The two educational scenarios will be assessed against these four factors.
Case Scenario 1: An instructor scans an entire book he has authored onto a password protected website for students within his class even though the publisher holds the copy right.
Copyright Ownership
The first interesting thing about this case is that the instructor is the author of the book. The fact that the publisher is the copyright holder, and not the author, would indicate that there must have been an agreement in which the author relinquished his or her rights of ownership to the publisher for either a financial benefit or to gain access to their publication services. As part of these negotiations the author could have gained an agreement with the publisher that (s)he would have free use of the entire text of the book within a protected website for the purposes of personal teaching. If this agreement was obtained then this scenario conforms to the agreement, and thus conforms to the copyright regulations. However if this agreement was not obtained, the fact that the instructor is the author is irrelevant; and the question becomes whether or not the instructor’s actions conforms to the fair use doctrine.
Fair Use Analysis
Analyzing the instructions against the four factors in the fair use doctrine:
(1) the purpose and character of the use: the purpose in this case is for educational purposes which meets the fair use doctrine.
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work: the scenario does not provide details on whether or not the copyrighted work is factual or fictional, or even whether or not the book has been published at this time. According to Hoon & Davis (2006), “it is easier to assert fair use in factual works than creative ones” and that “works that have been published are more easily subjected to fair use than unpublished works” (p.41-42). However, one can make the assumption that the book has an educational purpose since it is being used in an educational setting. Secondly that as publisher is the copyright holder, and the text is complete, that even if the book was not published at the time of the posting, the publication was imminent. As such one can reasonably assume that this scenario meets the fair use doctrine on this count.
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copy-righted work as a whole: The fact that the instructor scanned the entire text is a major issue under the fair use doctrine. The 1976 Copyright Act does not specify how much of a work can be used under the fair use doctrine; the general consensus is that the smaller the portion of the work is used the greater likelihood of it being considered fair use. A guideline was established by a working group of academic, government and other copyright interest groups in the Conference on Fair Use (CONFU). This guideline suggested that “up to 10% or 1000 words, whichever is less, in the aggregate of a copyrighted work consisting of text material may be reproduced or otherwise incorporated as part of a multimedia project created under Section 2 [Educational use] of these guidelines” (Lehman, 1998, p.53).
In this scenario, the use of the entire text clearly violates this guideline, and as such violates the fair use doctrine.
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copy-righted work: In the Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc v. National Enters (1985) case, the “Supreme Court said that the effect of the use of the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work is the single most important element of fair use” (Hoon & Davis, 2006, p. 44). In this scenario, one can make the assumption that if the students did not have access to the scanned version of entire book within the protected website then they would have to purchase the book from the publisher. As such the action of the instructor scanning the entire book in the course website has a negative impact on the potential market of the copyrighted work, and would contravene fair use.
Summary
The analysis of this scenario finds that the instructor’s actions violates the third and forth factors of the fair use doctrine, and as such would not be considered fair use under the Copyright Act of 1997. The only possible scenario in which the instructor’s actions could be appropriate is if s(he), as the author, gained agreement from the publisher as part of the initial copyright ownership negotiations
Case Scenario 2: A faculty member takes the best student papers each semester and creates an online journal that makes available to students in subsequent semesters to show them examples of good papers.
Copyright Ownership
The first question is who is the copyright owner? Is it the student who wrote the paper, or is it the educational institution since the paper was written as part of the coursework at that institution? One of the guiding principles in copyright legislation is that the author of the work has guiding control over the public use of their work (Kelley & Bonner, 2006). This principle holds unless there is a different agreement between the author and another person or institution on the ownership rights. In an educational environment, most institutions have developed an Intellectual Policy which covers copyright ownership. For example, University of Maryland University College (UMUC)’s policy on copyright ownership states that“students shall have all rights in copyright of all intellectual property created without the use of Unusual University Resources” UMUC Policy 190.00, 2002, p.3). Under this interpretation, students have the copyright ownership of their papers unless they received significant help from university support groups (faculty, writing center, librarian etc). In this scenario, it is thus a good assumption that student are the copyright holders of their papers.
Fair Use Analysis
Analyzing the instructions against the four factors in the fair use doctrine:
(1) the purpose and character of the use: the purpose in this case is for educational purposes which meets the fair use doctrine.
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work: in this scenario, one can reasonable assume that the nature of the student work is educational (although it could be factual or creative), and the work is unpublished. The fact the work is unpublished is a concern under fair use doctrine, “since the right of a creator to decide when to publish work is highly valued in copyright law” (Hoon & Davis, 2006, p.42). While the probability of a student publishing his or her paper may be low, the faculty member’s action in posting the paper does contravenes this factor of the fair use doctrine.
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copy-righted work as a whole: the entire student’s paper was used which as discussed in the previous scenario violates the fair use doctrine for this factor.
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copy-righted work: in reality the use of the student’s paper probably has negligible impact on the potential market for or value of the copy-righted work. However, it does in a small way expose the student’s unpublished work to a broader audience and in doing so may impact the potential market for the paper.
Summary
While the faculty’s actions may appear to be relatively harmless, and in fact be based upon a genuine desire to help and encourage future students to produce a higher standard of work, the analysis of the fair use factors finds that it does contravene the second, third and forth factors in the fair use doctrine. As such the faculty member is in violation of the student’s copyright ownership of the paper. A simple solution to this scenario is for the faculty to ask the student’s permission to include their paper in the online journal of good papers to be viewed by future classes. I have done this many times, and I have never had a student not give their permission, and in fact, they are often honored by the recognition of their work.
References
Hoon, P. E., Davis, C.L. (2006). Fair use and licensing. In K.M. Bonner, The Center for Intellectual Property Handbook. New York: Neal Schuman Publishers, Inc.
Kelley, K. B., Bonner, K.M. (2006). Copyright basics. In K.M. Bonner, The Center for Intellectual Property Handbook. New York: Neal Schuman Publishers, Inc.
Lehman, B.A (1998). The Conference on Fair Use: Final report to the commissioner on the conclusion of the Conference on Fair use: Retrieved July 26th 2009 from http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/dcom/olia/confu/confurep.pdf
UMUC Policy 190.00. (2002). Intellectual Property. Retrieved June 24th 2009 from http://www.umuc.edu/policy/research/research19000.shtml
U.S. Copyright Law. (2007). Limitations of exclusive rights: Fair use. Retrieved July 26th 2009 from http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.pdf
Faculty Podcasting in a Distance Education Environment August 14th 2009
Introduction
Multimedia technologies are designed to incorporate different learning styles and allow learners to explore new domains of knowledge by following their own learning paths and style. This process leads to effective knowledge retention and understanding (Bates & Poole, 2003) as the integration of knowledge from different mediums is more effective than the sum of the individual channels. The advent of audio podcasting in 2004 offers faculty with a simple, and easy to use, communication medium in which to complement and enhance the effectiveness of their distance education classes. This paper discusses a proposed learning module on podcasting for faculty, and reviews the current literature and other web-based learning modules on podcasting.
Podcasting Learning Module
Overview
The faculty podcasting in a distance education environment learning module consists of a Power Point presentation with an accompanying audio podcast.
Learning Module Description
The proposed learning module provides faculty with a holistic understanding of podcasting: 1) what is podcasting; 2) podcasting benefits; 3) how to record a podcast; 4) tips on effective podcasting.
What is podcasting? – The module provides a definition of podcasting, and its application to the distance education environment.
Podcasting Benefits – The module discuss the key benefits of podcasting within a distance education environment: 1) enhances student learning through providing a powerful tool to complement traditional teaching resources (Fernandez et al.,2009; Berk et al., 2007); 2) the technology is increasingly pervasive, especially for university students (Madden , 2008); 3) users can listen to podcasts any time, any where, which is a highly valued commodity for today’s highly mobile, multi-tasking student (White, 2009; Windham, 2007); 4) podcasting increases the feeling of interaction between faculty and students (Fernandez et al., 2009); 5) provides as an additional student motivation tool in staying connected to the courseware; 6) services a broader range of student learning styles within the course.
How to record a podcast – The module provides faculty with the hardware and software requirements and step-by-step instruction in how to record and save a podcast file.
Tips on effective podcasting – The module provides faculty with the key tips from the literature on developing a learning effective podcasting. These include being: 1) prepared; 2) relevant; 3) concise; 4) energetic and positive; and 5) offering something more.
Contribution to teaching and learning
The use of multimedia technologies to enhance student learning and to accommodate different learning styles have been well documented in educational research literature However to date, distance education technologies have been largely text-based: books, articles, and conference blogs within a learning management system. The propose podcasting module is designed to provide faculty with a holistic understanding of audio podcasting, and to encourage faculty to use podcasting in their distance education classrooms.
Literature Review
Fernandez, V., Simo, P., Sallan, J.M. (2009). Podcasting: A new technological tool to facilitate good practice in higher education. Computers & Education, 53 (2), p. 385-392. Retrieved August 7th 2009 from Science Direct database
The paper provides the results of an analysis on whether podcasting could promote good practices in higher education. The analysis is based on a qualitative and qualitative study of the creation and broadcast of thirteen podcasts in an undergraduate degree course in Information Systems Management. The research found that podcasting increased “the feeling of permanent contact between students and teachers, increasing student motivation; and the use of podcasting allows us to respect diverse talents and students’ ways of learning” (p.391). The authors’ findings confirmed earlier research that the combination of different types of teaching mediums enhances the student’s learning process.
Hew, K. (2009). Use of audio podcast in K-12 and higher education: a review of research topics and methodologies. Educational Technology Research & Development, 57 (3), p.333-357. Retrieved August 7th 2009 from Academic Search Complete database.
This paper is a mega-review of the literature on podcasting in the K-12 and higher education setting. The authors findings are that faculty currently uses podcasts as a means of distributing recordings of their lectures, or to supply supplementary material for students to review in their own time. The review also found that students generally enjoyed using podcasts as it allowed them to re-review material multiple times at their leisure. In addition the study alleviated a concern of face-to-face faculty that the availability of podcasts does not appear to encourage students to skip class.
Berk, J., Olsen, S., Atkinson, J.,Comerford, J. (2007). Innovation in a podshell: bringing information literacy into the world of podcasting. The Electronic Library. Vol. 25, No 4, pp 409-419. Retrieved August 5th 2009 from the Emerald database.
This paper provides a comprehensive overview of how to create a podcasting series for information literacy in an academic library environment, and discusses their experiences in doing so at the Curtin University of Technology in Australia. The author’s key findings were that podcasting offers libraries a new method of delivering information library to clients with minimal expense and using a simple production methodology. The resultant podcast series was highly popular with downloads increasing throughout the academic year.
Windham, C. (2007). Confessions of a podcast junkie. EDUCASE Review. Vol. 42 (3), p. 51-65. Retrieved August 8th 2009 from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI8005C.pdf
This paper provides personal observations and reflections of a graduate student’s experiences of podcasting. Windham argues that all students identify with the same benefits to podcasting technology: ability to access course content on a 24 hour basis; mobile leaning; ease of access; creativity factor. The resultant impact is that students are: able to get intimate with course material; expand the reach of the material to their friends and family; learn new technical skills; and have an opportunity to review the material at pertinent moments in the semester. The author also gives some concrete advice to faculty on how to produce effective podcasts: don’t assume students are podcast savvy; keep it simple; quality counts; make it relevant; offer something more; don’t limit imagination; and encourage exploration.
Critique and Analysis of Podcasting Learning Modules
University of Arizona. Faculty Podcasting Tip Sheet. Retrieved August 11th 2009 from http://podcasting.arizona.edu/facultytipsheet
This learning module provides University of Arizona (UA) faculty with some helpful advice on how to enhance their student’s learning experiences through podcasting. The “tip sheet” includes discussion on 1) Why faculty should use podcasts; 2) Recording podcasts as: (i) a lecture; (ii) break-out sections; (iii) complements to the class; 3) Content tips; (4) hardware & software requirements plus configuration; 5) a link to ten tips on improving podcasts. In addition to this faculty learning module the UA podcasting website provides a student resources podcasting link, and a discussion on the use of podcasting within each department. Overall the UA website on podcasting is useful and comprehensive, leaving the impression to the reader that UA is committed to the use of podcasting throughout the university.
Curtin University of Technology, Perth Australia. Research Skills podcasts. Retrieved August 10th 2009 from
http://library.curtin.edu.au/research_and_information_skills/online_tutorials/podcasts/index.html
Curtin University library provides students with a series of podcasts (forty one in total) on different aspects of library skills. Each podcast comes with a text script, thus students can select how they want to learn the material based upon their particular learning style.
The podcast are effective in that they are short (ranging from 3 to 6 minutes long), clear and well prepared. The deficiency is that podcasts are simply somebody reading the text with a dull, uninspiring tonality and resulting in a boring presentation.
Curtin also offers two other podcasting series - book reviews, and professors talks on topics of their interest - these podcasts are much more lively and interesting.
Draper, S. (2008). Podcasting and podlearning site. University of Glasgow. Retrieved August 11th 2009 from http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/ipod/
The podcasting and podlearning site at the University of Glasgow is supported by a research assistant whose role is to identify and demonstrate novel applications of podcasting that benefit any aspect of the university. The site offers: (1) a general overview of podcasting; (2) some key podcasting benefits; (3) links to podcasting articles; (4) links to University of Glasgow courses that use podcasting; (5) links to other university’s podcast information. This site does provide some useful information on podcasting however it is poorly structured (adhoc not professional) and badly maintained.
McElhearn, K. (2005). Beginner’s Guide to Podcast Creation. iLounge, Apple Corporation. Retrieved August 10th 2009 from http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/articles/comments/beginners-guide-to-podcast-creation
Although this link is not scholarly and is geared to Apple’s products, it does provide a useful overview of the hardware and software required, and the process of recording a podcast. In addition, the website provides seven tips rules in effective podcasting; 1) have something to say (don’t ramble); 2) be prepared; 3) be short and simple; 4) be clear; 5) be yourself; 6) be unique; 7) provide detailed program notes.
However, as the link is geared for a general audience, it is does not provide faculty with the value that podcasting offers in an academic environment.
References
Bates, A.W. & Poole, G. (2003). Effective teaching with technology in higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Berk, J., Olsen, S., Atkinson, J.,Comerford, J. (2007). Innovation in a podshell: bringing information literacy into the world of podcasting. The Electronic Library. Vol. 25, No 4, pp 409-419. Retrieved August 5th 2009 from the Emerald database.
Fernandez, V., Simo, P., Sallan, J.M. (2009). Podcasting: A new technological tool to facilitate good practice in higher education. Computers & Education, 53 (2), p. 385-392. Retrieved August 7th 2009 from Science Direct database.
Hew, K. (2009). Use of audio podcast in K-12 and higher education: a review of research topics and methodologies. Educational Technology Research & Development, 57 (3) p333-357. Retrieved August 7th 2009 from Academic Search Complete
Madden, M. (2008). Podcast Downloading . Pew Internet & American Life Project Retrieved August 8th 2009 from:
http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2008/PIP_Podcast_2008_Memo.pdf.pdf
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
White, B.T. (2009). Analysis of Students' Downloading of Online Audio Lecture Recordings in a Large Biology Lecture Course. p23-27 Retrieved August 7th from Academic Search Complete Journal of College Science Teaching. Vol. 38 (3)
Windham, C. (2007). Confessions of a podcast junkie. EDUCASE Review Vol. 42 (3), p. 51-65. Retrieved August 8th 2009 from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI8005C.pdf
Websites
University of Arizona. Faculty Podcasting Tip Sheet. Retrieved August 11th 2009 from http://podcasting.arizona.edu/facultytipsheet
Curtin University of Technology, Perth Australia. Research Skills podcasts. Retrieved August 10th 2009 from
http://library.curtin.edu.au/research_and_information_skills/online_tutorials/podcasts/index.html
Draper, S. (2008). Podcasting and podlearning site. University of Glasgow. Retrieved August 11th 2009 from http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/ipod/
McElhearn, K. (2005). Beginner’s Guide to Podcast Creation. iLounge, Apple Corporation. Retrieved August 10th 2009 from http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/articles/comments/beginners-guide-to-podcast-creation
Multimedia technologies are designed to incorporate different learning styles and allow learners to explore new domains of knowledge by following their own learning paths and style. This process leads to effective knowledge retention and understanding (Bates & Poole, 2003) as the integration of knowledge from different mediums is more effective than the sum of the individual channels. The advent of audio podcasting in 2004 offers faculty with a simple, and easy to use, communication medium in which to complement and enhance the effectiveness of their distance education classes. This paper discusses a proposed learning module on podcasting for faculty, and reviews the current literature and other web-based learning modules on podcasting.
Podcasting Learning Module
Overview
The faculty podcasting in a distance education environment learning module consists of a Power Point presentation with an accompanying audio podcast.
Learning Module Description
The proposed learning module provides faculty with a holistic understanding of podcasting: 1) what is podcasting; 2) podcasting benefits; 3) how to record a podcast; 4) tips on effective podcasting.
What is podcasting? – The module provides a definition of podcasting, and its application to the distance education environment.
Podcasting Benefits – The module discuss the key benefits of podcasting within a distance education environment: 1) enhances student learning through providing a powerful tool to complement traditional teaching resources (Fernandez et al.,2009; Berk et al., 2007); 2) the technology is increasingly pervasive, especially for university students (Madden , 2008); 3) users can listen to podcasts any time, any where, which is a highly valued commodity for today’s highly mobile, multi-tasking student (White, 2009; Windham, 2007); 4) podcasting increases the feeling of interaction between faculty and students (Fernandez et al., 2009); 5) provides as an additional student motivation tool in staying connected to the courseware; 6) services a broader range of student learning styles within the course.
How to record a podcast – The module provides faculty with the hardware and software requirements and step-by-step instruction in how to record and save a podcast file.
Tips on effective podcasting – The module provides faculty with the key tips from the literature on developing a learning effective podcasting. These include being: 1) prepared; 2) relevant; 3) concise; 4) energetic and positive; and 5) offering something more.
Contribution to teaching and learning
The use of multimedia technologies to enhance student learning and to accommodate different learning styles have been well documented in educational research literature However to date, distance education technologies have been largely text-based: books, articles, and conference blogs within a learning management system. The propose podcasting module is designed to provide faculty with a holistic understanding of audio podcasting, and to encourage faculty to use podcasting in their distance education classrooms.
Literature Review
Fernandez, V., Simo, P., Sallan, J.M. (2009). Podcasting: A new technological tool to facilitate good practice in higher education. Computers & Education, 53 (2), p. 385-392. Retrieved August 7th 2009 from Science Direct database
The paper provides the results of an analysis on whether podcasting could promote good practices in higher education. The analysis is based on a qualitative and qualitative study of the creation and broadcast of thirteen podcasts in an undergraduate degree course in Information Systems Management. The research found that podcasting increased “the feeling of permanent contact between students and teachers, increasing student motivation; and the use of podcasting allows us to respect diverse talents and students’ ways of learning” (p.391). The authors’ findings confirmed earlier research that the combination of different types of teaching mediums enhances the student’s learning process.
Hew, K. (2009). Use of audio podcast in K-12 and higher education: a review of research topics and methodologies. Educational Technology Research & Development, 57 (3), p.333-357. Retrieved August 7th 2009 from Academic Search Complete database.
This paper is a mega-review of the literature on podcasting in the K-12 and higher education setting. The authors findings are that faculty currently uses podcasts as a means of distributing recordings of their lectures, or to supply supplementary material for students to review in their own time. The review also found that students generally enjoyed using podcasts as it allowed them to re-review material multiple times at their leisure. In addition the study alleviated a concern of face-to-face faculty that the availability of podcasts does not appear to encourage students to skip class.
Berk, J., Olsen, S., Atkinson, J.,Comerford, J. (2007). Innovation in a podshell: bringing information literacy into the world of podcasting. The Electronic Library. Vol. 25, No 4, pp 409-419. Retrieved August 5th 2009 from the Emerald database.
This paper provides a comprehensive overview of how to create a podcasting series for information literacy in an academic library environment, and discusses their experiences in doing so at the Curtin University of Technology in Australia. The author’s key findings were that podcasting offers libraries a new method of delivering information library to clients with minimal expense and using a simple production methodology. The resultant podcast series was highly popular with downloads increasing throughout the academic year.
Windham, C. (2007). Confessions of a podcast junkie. EDUCASE Review. Vol. 42 (3), p. 51-65. Retrieved August 8th 2009 from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI8005C.pdf
This paper provides personal observations and reflections of a graduate student’s experiences of podcasting. Windham argues that all students identify with the same benefits to podcasting technology: ability to access course content on a 24 hour basis; mobile leaning; ease of access; creativity factor. The resultant impact is that students are: able to get intimate with course material; expand the reach of the material to their friends and family; learn new technical skills; and have an opportunity to review the material at pertinent moments in the semester. The author also gives some concrete advice to faculty on how to produce effective podcasts: don’t assume students are podcast savvy; keep it simple; quality counts; make it relevant; offer something more; don’t limit imagination; and encourage exploration.
Critique and Analysis of Podcasting Learning Modules
University of Arizona. Faculty Podcasting Tip Sheet. Retrieved August 11th 2009 from http://podcasting.arizona.edu/facultytipsheet
This learning module provides University of Arizona (UA) faculty with some helpful advice on how to enhance their student’s learning experiences through podcasting. The “tip sheet” includes discussion on 1) Why faculty should use podcasts; 2) Recording podcasts as: (i) a lecture; (ii) break-out sections; (iii) complements to the class; 3) Content tips; (4) hardware & software requirements plus configuration; 5) a link to ten tips on improving podcasts. In addition to this faculty learning module the UA podcasting website provides a student resources podcasting link, and a discussion on the use of podcasting within each department. Overall the UA website on podcasting is useful and comprehensive, leaving the impression to the reader that UA is committed to the use of podcasting throughout the university.
Curtin University of Technology, Perth Australia. Research Skills podcasts. Retrieved August 10th 2009 from
http://library.curtin.edu.au/research_and_information_skills/online_tutorials/podcasts/index.html
Curtin University library provides students with a series of podcasts (forty one in total) on different aspects of library skills. Each podcast comes with a text script, thus students can select how they want to learn the material based upon their particular learning style.
The podcast are effective in that they are short (ranging from 3 to 6 minutes long), clear and well prepared. The deficiency is that podcasts are simply somebody reading the text with a dull, uninspiring tonality and resulting in a boring presentation.
Curtin also offers two other podcasting series - book reviews, and professors talks on topics of their interest - these podcasts are much more lively and interesting.
Draper, S. (2008). Podcasting and podlearning site. University of Glasgow. Retrieved August 11th 2009 from http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/ipod/
The podcasting and podlearning site at the University of Glasgow is supported by a research assistant whose role is to identify and demonstrate novel applications of podcasting that benefit any aspect of the university. The site offers: (1) a general overview of podcasting; (2) some key podcasting benefits; (3) links to podcasting articles; (4) links to University of Glasgow courses that use podcasting; (5) links to other university’s podcast information. This site does provide some useful information on podcasting however it is poorly structured (adhoc not professional) and badly maintained.
McElhearn, K. (2005). Beginner’s Guide to Podcast Creation. iLounge, Apple Corporation. Retrieved August 10th 2009 from http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/articles/comments/beginners-guide-to-podcast-creation
Although this link is not scholarly and is geared to Apple’s products, it does provide a useful overview of the hardware and software required, and the process of recording a podcast. In addition, the website provides seven tips rules in effective podcasting; 1) have something to say (don’t ramble); 2) be prepared; 3) be short and simple; 4) be clear; 5) be yourself; 6) be unique; 7) provide detailed program notes.
However, as the link is geared for a general audience, it is does not provide faculty with the value that podcasting offers in an academic environment.
References
Bates, A.W. & Poole, G. (2003). Effective teaching with technology in higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Berk, J., Olsen, S., Atkinson, J.,Comerford, J. (2007). Innovation in a podshell: bringing information literacy into the world of podcasting. The Electronic Library. Vol. 25, No 4, pp 409-419. Retrieved August 5th 2009 from the Emerald database.
Fernandez, V., Simo, P., Sallan, J.M. (2009). Podcasting: A new technological tool to facilitate good practice in higher education. Computers & Education, 53 (2), p. 385-392. Retrieved August 7th 2009 from Science Direct database.
Hew, K. (2009). Use of audio podcast in K-12 and higher education: a review of research topics and methodologies. Educational Technology Research & Development, 57 (3) p333-357. Retrieved August 7th 2009 from Academic Search Complete
Madden, M. (2008). Podcast Downloading . Pew Internet & American Life Project Retrieved August 8th 2009 from:
http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2008/PIP_Podcast_2008_Memo.pdf.pdf
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
White, B.T. (2009). Analysis of Students' Downloading of Online Audio Lecture Recordings in a Large Biology Lecture Course. p23-27 Retrieved August 7th from Academic Search Complete Journal of College Science Teaching. Vol. 38 (3)
Windham, C. (2007). Confessions of a podcast junkie. EDUCASE Review Vol. 42 (3), p. 51-65. Retrieved August 8th 2009 from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI8005C.pdf
Websites
University of Arizona. Faculty Podcasting Tip Sheet. Retrieved August 11th 2009 from http://podcasting.arizona.edu/facultytipsheet
Curtin University of Technology, Perth Australia. Research Skills podcasts. Retrieved August 10th 2009 from
http://library.curtin.edu.au/research_and_information_skills/online_tutorials/podcasts/index.html
Draper, S. (2008). Podcasting and podlearning site. University of Glasgow. Retrieved August 11th 2009 from http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/ipod/
McElhearn, K. (2005). Beginner’s Guide to Podcast Creation. iLounge, Apple Corporation. Retrieved August 10th 2009 from http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/articles/comments/beginners-guide-to-podcast-creation
