Five years ago when a few savvy instructors rushed to integrate the Web into their teaching and put their syllabi online the idea exchange so crucial to academia was alive and well in the teaching realm of our work. A few years later, witness how various password-protected courseware adopted by so many campuses is making it increasingly impossible to see others’ teaching materials. Sure, some people may not want to share their syllabi, but I suspect many wouldn’t mind. Regardless, the increasing proliferation of these services makes the teaching side of our work less and less visible to a wider audience. So while blogs may be opening some aspects of teaching, courseware is closing others.
In the summer of 1999 I gave a talk on a panel at the American Sociological Association meetings about the use of the Web in teaching. I was reporting on my experiences having built an extensive Web site for a class on the Sociology of Latin America: Mexico and Cuba. (Don’t laugh, if you take a look. That wasn’t so bad for a 1998 Web site.) One of my advisors had hired me on a special grant to build a Web site that was especially elaborate with lots of resources. I included numerous links to relevant materials including lots of images. We even tried out having a weekly quiz based on online content. Reactions from students were quite positive, on the whole.
One of the people in the audience of the panel at the ASA meetings inquired how people would be able to do create such Web sites if they didn’t have special grants to hire grad students for compiling them. I replied that the nice thing about the Web is that one could share the wealth. Once posted by someone the site would be available for others to use as well.
Flash forward less than five years and this is increasingly rare. Courseware at most schools is password-protected. At my university, I can’t even look at the course Web sites of other faculty in my own school. (This is based on local decisions though as at my previous univ I could log onto any course’s site.)
There are some exceptions. MIT’s OpenCourseWare makes many of their course materials public. But this seems increasingly uncommon. The Resource Center for Cyberculture Studies has a long list of online syllabi. But notice that the number of course links seems to be decreasing. There could be numerous reasons for this, of course, but part of it may have to do with syllabi disappearing behind members-only systems.
Although I may adopt our courseware for teaching because it does offer some helpful features (e.g. automatic class list for easily communicating with all enrolled students), I plan to post copies of my syllabi on the open Web as well in case anyone may be curious. Here’s the course I just compiled on the Social Implications of Communication and Information Technologies. Since it’s a course I had never taken myself, I was very interested in finding related syllabi out there.. but unfortunately bumped into a few password-protected sites along the way.
I’ve noticed this too, and have been quite disappointed. The whole promise of the web in academia, I thought, was that it promoted greater transparency and readier sharing in all things — from the quotidian (LaTeX header files, useful links &c) to the rarified and refined (syllabi, collated references &c).
Oh well. Maybe the pendulum will swing back the other way…
I’ll throw this link out: Open-Education.org. I’m in the planning stages of moving my own courses off the college’s deployment of Blackboard and onto an OS platform (specifically, Drupal). I’m hoping that I can make course materials (and, ultimately, student writing) freely available while using the pw-protected areas to protect students’ identities effectively.
Not only is courseware typically password protected, but the authors of this stuff seem to insist on devising their own clunky ways of managing pages. I can’t stand the stuff.
I currently only use courseware for student grades, which is one place where privacy is important.
I’ve had pages up since about 1996-7 (maybe even the year before that) and I think all of the units taught in my department are freely available. One colleague once raised IP issues but generally no-one has been worried about that.
I can see it coming in British universities, though, as a by-product of efforts to give a uniform “corporate” look and feel to pages rather than as a thought-through view about IP, sharing etc. Once universities start to enforce common standards for web-presentation of material and to centralize the process by which stuff gets managed, a restrictive IP policy may well get treated — by senior management — as the default that people have to argue against rather than as something that has to be argued for.
Three cheers for more openly available course materials (especially since I recently had less than a day of warning time before a phone interview in which I had to talk about my ideas for a couple of courses outside my primary area of experise—not that I just copied others ideas, but seeing what was out there was a big help). But student writing? Unless it’s on a very narrow and specific topic, isn’t this just an invitation to plagiarism?
The UA has a system called POLIS (a tortured acronym for something I have long since forgotten) which is wide open to the public, although it has password-protected areas such as electronic reserves sections. It does have plenty of flaws: As pz myers notes, many courseware packages are home-brewed, and ours is no different. The university also offers access to (I think) WebCT, but I don’t know anybody who has ever actually used it. Our system is ugly, but it’s functional and easy-to-access, at least for now.
I say: go MIT. Open access is absolutely the MIT ethos.
Hi!
Not only that, but online education in general — at leat at my school (University of Phoenix Online) — is becoming less of a convenience than it has been touted as. Yes, I can log on at any point in a 24-hour cycle, but I must log in at least 5 days a week, and make at least two substantive comments each day, not to mention that a whole semester’s worth of work is to be covered in a five-week period.
Additionally, there is no break in price for not having to attend a physical class (undergrad tuition just went up again, to almost $1,400/course). Further, if I am on financial aid, I cannot take two courses at once (which I wanted to do when I got downsized, so as to accomplish more work and get done more quickly).
And, let’s not even discuss textbooks. If you don;t buy the new, special UoP editions, you risk not having all the material for a course. If you do, you are paying way ridiculous prices (my Statistics text [listed in the catalogue as one text, but actually a text, a study guide, a workbook, and a CD-ROM] cost $166, plus shipping). Several people who bought used texts did not know that there were actually four pieces, and ended up having to buy the new texts anyway. And in the thirteen courses I have taken, only one of those had the textbook online (only had to pay $40 to access it for the period of the class, which was a bargain, trust me).
Yeah, UoP is fully accredited; and when I started there, they were actually respected in the field I’m working toward; but now, seven courses away from completion, trying to deal with tuition that rises - on average - twice a year is becoming burdensome. And when I lost my job and required help to get more financial aid, I was put off until it became clear that I was running out of funds.
I still think online learning is a Good Thing, but am getting very scared about how it is starting to price itself out of reach of those of us who would be most likely to use, and benefit from, it.
I would suggest that the primary reason students plagiarize (and get away with it) is poor assignment design. If the assignment is designed properly (IMO), students have neither the incentive nor the means to plagiarize.
All in all, I would like to see (and am working toward) ways in which academic work by both the professoriate and students is “open-sourced” to the greatest extent possible: when you see work that someone else has done and made available, that work can be hacked and reformulated (giving due credit, perhaps under the Creative Commons license or a facsimile thereof).
If the point is to enrich the academic commons, and if contributors were willing, what’s to keep institutions from saying nay?
I think all of these comments are quite accurate, but they leave out the two main reasons why people use courseware, IMO. First, most courseware softwares have some kind of nice features difficult to manage by the non-computer geek: testing, quiz scores, mailing lists, chat spaces, etc.
Second, while courseware clunky and annoying in many ways, especially to those of us who have been putting stuff up on the web for a while, it is much easier to manage and use than it is to develop your own web site or even your own blog. This is most certainly the case for folks who don’t know even the basics of html, let alone all of the slightly more advanced stuff.
Personally, I haven’t used much courseware yet for too long because it hasn’t been supported well where I teach. That is supposed to change in next term. So while I will certainly continue to maintain class web sites, I might also start experimenting with courseware, using what I like and posting the rest of it to the web.
Steven, I think it’s great that programs exist to facilitate people’s use of the Web in teaching. My concern is that the way these services have been implemented, they have created gated communities. And that’s very unfortunate.
I’m sorry, I know this is a bit off-topic, but I just had to respond. Chris, “the primary reason students plagiarize…is poor assignment design”?! That may or may not be an enabling factor, as you suggest, in getting away with it, but you’ll have to work long and hard to convince me that any student sits down and says, “hmm…this is a poorly designed assignment. That means I should cheat on it.” What’s the logic? That the assignment is so poor that a student can’t complete it honestly? That the student is so offended by the instructor’s slipshod assignment design that s/he refuses, on principle, to abide by the terms of academic honesty?
Students plagiarize because they have writer’s block; because they haven’t left themselves enough time to complete an assignment; because they can’t think of anything to say; because they want a better grade; because they don’t want to work; becuase they’re afraid of failing; because they’re not interested enough in the assignment to bother; sometimes, even, because they aren’t actually sure what plagiarism is. Although nowhere near as often as they’d like to make us believe.
I’ve had students try to shift the responsibility of their plagiarizing on me, and I’ve had colleagues do it as well, and I don’t buy either. Designing assignments so that students can’t cheat on them simply isn’t synonymous with giving them good assignments.
For example, I give my students open-ended writing topics because I fervently believe the best chance of their writing something good, and learning from the experience, comes from them writing about something that interests them. This obviously makes it easier for them to go the the Web and copy someone else’s paper, but does it give them a REASON to do so? If so, how?
(For the record, I’m an English professor; I give lots of suggestions to students who aren’t sure what they’re interested in writing about; and I end up having to do a lot more work, due to my open-ended assignments, chasing down plagiarized papers. Oh — and all my syllabi are on-line, at smcm.edu/users/rpfeingold).
Apologies to Ruth. I was sloppy with my diction.
I’m speaking from my own teaching here, and that of colleagues, friends, and, indeed, teachers I’ve had as a student in the past. I also give open-ended writing assignments to my students, and for the same reasons Ruth cites. The unstated premise of my enthymeme is that “traditional, teacher-directed ‘research’ assignments don’t take into account students’ own interests, proficiencies, and purposes for writing, positing instead a Procrustean Bed of what a research assignment looks like as a product.”
Assignments that, on the other hand, are designed to make the student the guiding ethos of the work, help to remove the “I don’t have anything to say on this” plagiarism vector, and the rest “I don’t want to work,” etc., isn’t really my problem (or Ruth’s, or any other writing teacher’s). What I’m clumsily getting at is not that assignments should be designed so students can’t plagiarize, but ought to be designed to remove as many of the incentives to do so as possible.
Sounds good to me, Chris!
Now, if I could only figure out some way to plagiarize while grading, to ease my workload. Recycle comments from last year’s papers? Just might work…
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review