De Minimis
  • Home
  • ABOUT US
  • Podcast
  • Your Learned Friend
  • Anonymous Feedback
  • Art
  • Get published!
  • Constitution
  • Archive
    • 2018
    • 2017
    • 2017 >
      • Semester 2 (Volume 12) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (election issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
    • 2016 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 9) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 10) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (Election Issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
        • Issue 13 (test)
    • 2015 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 7) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
      • Semester 2 (Volume 8) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
    • 2014 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 5) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
      • Semester 2 (Volume 6) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 12
    • 2013 >
      • Issue 1
      • Issue 2
      • Issue 3
      • Issue 4
      • Issue 5
      • Issue 6
    • 2012 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 1) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 2) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12

Position Statement – UMSU Supports Lecture Recordings for Law

21/8/2018

 
Issue 5, Semester 2

Toby Silcock, Desiree Cai, and Cameron Doig

All lectures at Melbourne University should be recorded. This has been Academic Board policy since 2013, after consistent pressure from our predecessors at the University of Melbourne Student Union (UMSU). The policy is overwhelmingly popular, and means that barriers to attendance don’t become barriers to education.
​We believe Melbourne Law School’s (MLS) current class recording policy breaches University policy. We believe MLS should:
  1. Recognise that almost all JD classes are taught, as lectures, not “seminars”;
  2. Make recordings of these lectures available to all enrolled students, as is University policy, except where specifically exempted; and
  3. In the interim, release the recordings that are already being made.
This has been an issue for years. There is no reason for delay. This is a matter of basic equity and accessibility.
The “seminars” in the bulk of core subjects are actually lectures. The School cannot redefine the word to avoid the policy when it suits its interests. Indeed, the School has used the words “lecture” and “lecturers” frequently in discussions and in writing.
For most core subjects, teachers spend the bulk of class time speaking about areas of law with the support of slides, to a group of students organised in rows before them. Slides are made available on LMS. Students use them to make study and exam notes. They spend most of class time making these notes. Questions or discussions are usually taken or led by teachers. Spontaneous questions from students usually clarify issues. This is a lecture.
Class sizes are too large and the content too dense for classes to be genuinely discussion-led. It’s an open secret that students are usually significantly behind in readings. Most class time is spent going over substantive content. The “seminar” myth says that learning is through discussion. This is not the practice – this would require half as many students in class, with twice as much study time. These classes are lectures.
Existing University policy notes how important lecture recordings are for equity. It recognises that the student body is diverse. Students must work to survive. They have different English abilities, travel commitments, carer responsibilities, and ongoing mental and physical barriers to continuous attendance. MLS has argued that such considerations are the exception to the norm, and its policy reflects this. MLS appears to assume the JD cohort is not diverse. If it is diverse, then release the recordings. If it isn’t, then let’s work on that, and  release the recordings in the meantime.
The University explicitly states that concerns about attendance are not valid reasons for denying access to recordings. The University’s own research indicates that the relationship between recordings and attendance is ambiguous. If MLS wishes to ensure students attend, it should ensure lectures are engaging, relevant, and useful. It should ensure students get continuous feedback on their work. It should take practical steps to understand and accommodate students’ external work, family, and personal commitments. It should lobby for housing close to University. It should not deny access to learning resources based on false assumptions of students’ motivations.
Juris Doctor students are postgraduates. The program is meant to assume maturity and experience. They can expect to be treated as autonomous learners, who make considered decisions about how they study. They are entitled to expect access to appropriate learning resources. The Student Charter gives students such an entitlement. MLS is denying JD students this entitlement by denying access to recordings that are already being made.
This issue has been ongoing for years. The Faculty has made many other arguments against releasing the recordings. UMSU does not accept any of these arguments, most of which attack the general concept of universal recording. We do not have the space to address them here, but will address them as this campaign develops.
UMSU intends to make lecture recordings for law students happen. We will be working with the GSA in the coming weeks, and   encouraging students to get involved, so we can bring the Law School with us. Stay tuned.
There is no reason for delay. This is already University policy. JD students deserve to be treated respectfully, and with understanding and compassion. They deserve access to their course content. They deserve equal treatment.
About the Authors:
  • Toby Silcock is one of UMSU’s Education (Academic) Officers, and a recent JD graduate
  • Desiree Cai is the President of UMSU
  • Cameron Doig is UMSU’s Graduate Representative on Student’s Council, and a second-year JD student
FINALLY
21/8/2018 09:25:56 pm

So good to finally see someone call out MLS for this rather than praising the School for giving exemptions.

Simon Frankland
21/8/2018 10:04:33 pm

I broke my leg last year and didn't even miss a class because the pain of attending lectures with a messed up leg was still less than I knew the pain of getting approval to access lecture recordings would inevitably be...

Luddite pride world wide
21/8/2018 10:11:48 pm

I still say that if you don’t have the time to make it to classes in person then you don’t have the time to do a law degree. In fact perhaps you don’t have the time to be doing any sort of degree at all.

Obviously unexpected events occur which cause people to miss a class every so often, but the general push for recorded lectures always seems to be more about people just not wanting to bother to turn up to classes, or who elect to overcommit with other activities.

And?
21/8/2018 11:07:53 pm

Let’s say that is the case, so what? Lectures will be recorded, some people won’t attend and maybe due to this some of them will fail. How it influences anyone outside of the individual is beyond me.

Record them at let the students make that decision for themselves.

Strawman
22/8/2018 01:04:10 am

Why this “seems” to you to be about laziness is strange, considering UMSU’s first and main point in this article has nothing to do with students’ motives or reasons. The point is that it’s *already* university policy for lecture recordings to be made available to students, and the Law School is sidestepping that policy by mislabelling lectures. Argue to change the policy if you wish, but the exploitation of loopholes to avoid these sorts of university-wide rules is not something we should be permitting, especially from the Law School of all places.

Iron Man
22/8/2018 10:44:31 am

That’s funny, the university policy library doesn’t actually say anything about recorded lectures and any such policy hasn’t been identified in the Article or in your post. Perhaps you can help me out and point to where there is binding policy regarding recorded lectures.


If something isn’t strictly university policy, it isn’t binding and MLS can do whatever they want.

Strawman
22/8/2018 12:17:28 pm

@Iron Man

The reason it's not in the policy library is because it was a decision of the Academic Board: https://lecture.unimelb.edu.au/opt-out

Iron Man
22/8/2018 02:26:25 pm

It was a decision of the academic board to automatically record lectures and then provide an opt out option. It is not a University ‘policy’ that lectures ‘should be recorded’and the authors of this article and it’s fellow travelers should stop referring to it as such, it is misleading at best.

The acceptable criteria for an opt outclearly states that it includes “A class is being conducted as an active learning session, which makes substantial use of a question and answer format, break‐out discussions, or similar.” Clearly MLS classes are designed to do such things, so your only legitimate quibble is over whether or not they are “substantial”. Seeing there is no guidance on that word, it basically comes down to whether or not the assistant dean of the faculty, to whom opt out applications are made buys it or not.

tl;dr crying about MLS being in breach of ‘university policy’ is a non starter.

Strawman
22/8/2018 06:00:41 pm

'Policy' or not, It's a rule that every other faculty of the university follows and MLS is avoiding it completely.

"Clearly MLS classes are designed to do such things"
Except it's not clear – that's the entire point. If you've ever sat in a classroom of a JD core subject you'd know that that is absolutely not how most classes are run. They're no different to other university classes that people have no problem calling lectures.

JJJ
22/8/2018 11:02:54 am

Can you please link us to the peer reviewed study which confirms that the push for recordings is made by lazy people who don't want to attend "seminars"?

JJJ
22/8/2018 10:59:28 am

Other universities allow their law lectures to be recorded and distributed to the student body. MLS boasts being Australia's best law school but lacks the ability to give equal access. There are people who must work to live, have children, get sick etc..so 100% attendance is impossible. I understand where MLS comes from though, they want to allow the lecturer who are lawyers to speak openly about sensitive legal issues without repurcussion but it really disadvantages the more vulnerable students.

Important issue
19/9/2018 03:18:17 pm

Thank you for this Toby, Cam and Desire. I am glad Stand Up was re-elected and UMSU is taking this matter seriously.

I call on the LSS, GSA, and faculty to do the same.

Keep this up in De Minimis.


Comments are closed.
    Picture

    Archives

    October 2022
    September 2022
    December 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
  • Home
  • ABOUT US
  • Podcast
  • Your Learned Friend
  • Anonymous Feedback
  • Art
  • Get published!
  • Constitution
  • Archive
    • 2018
    • 2017
    • 2017 >
      • Semester 2 (Volume 12) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (election issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
    • 2016 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 9) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 10) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (Election Issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
        • Issue 13 (test)
    • 2015 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 7) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
      • Semester 2 (Volume 8) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
    • 2014 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 5) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
      • Semester 2 (Volume 6) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 12
    • 2013 >
      • Issue 1
      • Issue 2
      • Issue 3
      • Issue 4
      • Issue 5
      • Issue 6
    • 2012 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 1) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 2) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12