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:
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:
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.
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.
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.
Strawman
22/8/2018 12:17:28 pm
@Iron Man
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.
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.
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. Comments are closed.
|
Archives
December 2021
|