podcasting lectures for uni students ... will it really work?

I was reading with interest the BBC article based on Dr Bill Ashraf, who is podcasting lectures for uni students http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_yorkshire/5013194.stm

It is where a lecturer replaces lectures with podcasts and more small(er) group sessions. This is an idea that I’ve discussed with people at Bristol. I think it is worth unpackaging this a little further just to see if this approach might work. The lecture is to 250 students, so it is argued that it is simply a didactic delivery mechanism. This would play to the strengths of podcasting, especially enhanced podcasts, where you can include the slides.

However, a few questions spring to mind;

Firstly, will this release time for more interactive smaller groups? For instance, how big will the smaller groups be, does the 250 breakdown to 50, 25, 10? If the groups are too large then we are simply be creating another didactic delivery mechanism, as the group will not encourage interaction.

Secondly, this seems to be driven as a way of delivering standardised content to those who haven’t attended, or find it difficult to attend at the appropriate lecture times. This isn’t an issue, however, is podcasting the best solution? I’d have thought given technology ownership patterns, then making the files available as downloads would be more suitable. In other words, where does the podcasting add value over a traditional download route? Especially given the content, duration, target audience and learning objectives.

So, I’m wondering if this approach (given that students might prefer a lecture compared to a download), adds anything to the learning experience?

In response the article starts to get interesting and highlights how the learning experience can be enhanced through making the lecture material more interactive. However, is this easier to manage from the lecturers perspective?

What I think is really interesting is … he tries to increase student interaction (and replicate the opportunity to answer questions) by enabling them to SMS questions which he then answers on his blog. The educational impact could be increased further by placing these questions, and other questions for those who wish to use a web option, on a discussion board. Then you could encourage students to answer the questions themselves, and it allows the discussion to become more student centred as they add threads etc., The problem with the blog is that it is still controlled by Bill Ashraf, and as a technology it is very difficult to have threaded discussions.

The second method used by Bill (I’m getting very familiar now) is online appointment times for face to face visits. I’d have thought that this becomes quite difficult to manage because of the numbers on the course (250 students) So, we could improve the efficiency, and encourage a shifting of the locus of control towards the student, through the use of online surgeries (instant messenger, virtual classrooms) which students can set up, and they don’t have to include Bill.

Overall, I wonder the educational impact, and required resources for this change in approach. It does indicate the need to embed learning technologies with other learning technologies, i.e., a one tool option is not enough. If this is implemented correctly and inline with the specific needs of Bill Ashraf and his students then it will add value. However, poorly implemented it simply increases the workload with little extra benefit interms of the learning experience. Still, a good pilot, I look forward to seeing the evaluation.