#digped Storify Pt. 1: We Interrupt This Broadcast . . .

This is the first installment of the Storify of the Hybrid Pedagogy #digped Twitter discussion for Friday, August 3, 2012: "Broadcast Learning." This installment covers the parts of the conversation regarding the use and abuse of the video lecture and broadcast education model.


  1. In his article, "Broadcast Education: A Response to Coursera," Sean asks us to consider, "If online education has made so much progress, why isn’t it more obvious? Why are the good folks at Coursera (who are actually just now catching up to those of us who’ve been doing this for a decade) getting all the attention, while also not putting the best face of online education forward?" He ends the piece with a call for pedagogues "to innovate, to experiment, to play and be played with," and cautions against oversimplification of online learning and MOOCs, of both the forms they take and the issues at stake when we are debating their merits and demerits. In an effort to engage some of the more productive discursive strands weaving in and out of the recent media "MOOCopalypse", we decided to focus last week's #digped discussion on the broader question of broadcast learning, which is the model (as Sean points out, sometimes erroneously) most frequently associated with MOOCs and other, more traditional (did I just write that?) online courses.
  2. Perhaps because we were fortunate to have David Stavens of Udacity join the discussion, we attracted the attention of a rather adorable predator.
  3. MOOC MOOC continued to stalk us throughout the discussion, sending us down some difficult but promising avenues. Thanks to MOOC MOOC's loving [and drooling] attention and David's participation, we had what is probably the largest turn out ever for a #digped discussion. When all was (almost) said and done, the stream included approximately 500 tweets, from more than 25 distinct Twitter accounts. Of those tweets, about 18% were retweets (my stats are courtesy of The Archivist, a really useful tool).
  4. Putting together a single Storify that adequately represents the breadth of subject matter covered and participation while still remaining relatively readable proved to be an impossible task. Consequently, I've put together two installments. Deferring until the next installment Sean's question about the use of video lectures and broadcast education in MOOCs, I would like to focus here on those contributions related to the other questions Sean's #digped post raises:

    ***What do you see as the difference between content-delivery and learning? Is there a use for content-delivery in a static classroom environment, or is this a misuse of educational technology?

    ***What is the implicit pedagogical stance behind “canned” lecture? How does this stance differ depending on the use of that lecture -- in flipped classrooms, MOOCs [shh, not now!], hybrid learning environments, etc.?

    ***Imagine you were to create a video lecture yourself, one that would be broadcast in a learning environment to an unknown number of students. What considerations would play a part in the creation of that video? How would you make your video lecture engaging?

    ***We’ve mentioned Udacity and RSA Animate’s video work; but what examples of this technology have you seen, good and bad?
    What do you see as the threats video lectures -- and other forms of content-delivery pedagogy -- pose; likewise, what do you see as their advantages and their potential?

    We began the discussion by asking participants to describe and try to explain their visceral reactions to the video lecture as an educational medium. As might be expected in a crowd of critical pedagogues, doubts about the form quickly rose to the surface.
  5. Also not surprising though, given that many of us are also hybrid pedagogues, several participants were equally quick to respond with enthusiasm about the transformative/deformative/disruptive potential of the video lecture.