HEA/JISC Open Educational Resources case study: pedagogical development from OER practice

Transcription

1 HEA/JISC Open Educational Resources case study: pedagogical development from OER practice OER and public engagement: a case study Marianne Talbot University of Oxford 1

2 Outline In January 2009 I was about to give my first lecture series of the year when OpenSpires asked me if they could podcast my lectures. I didn t really know what that meant but said yes anyway. As I gave my lectures I was recorded, in both audio and video. The result was released as an Open Educational Resource on Oxford s site on itunes U: Eight months later I was delighted to be told that A Romp Through the History of Philosophy, (RTHP) had made global number one. I asked how many people that represented, thinking 100 a week would be brilliant. It was actually 18,000 a week! RTHP has now been downloaded nearly a million times. I have since made several more podcasts, achieving a second global number one in 2010 with The Nature of Argument, now downloaded nearly three million times. On 3 May 2011, Critical Reasoning for Beginners (CRB) the series of which The Nature of Argument was the first, held every single one of the top ten positions on the itunes U downloads chart. I have no formal method for evaluating the success of the podcasts. The number of downloads I know only through Oxford University Computing Service, who get the numbers from Apple. I have, however, kept all the fan s I have received since July There are 177 of them, just over one per week. The analysis of these s forms the core of this case study. I have used them to try to determine who listens to the podcasts, how and where they listen, and how their lives/actions change as a result. I have learned there is a HUGE worldwide appetite for philosophy among people of all ages, even those without a philosophical background. I have also learned that my lecturing style appeals to such people. This is a great thing to learn having lectured for 25 years. I have also learned to be more organised in my approach to responding to s, the better to ensure that I, my Department and my University, derive maximum benefit from the podcasts. Finally I have learned that I must take care in preparing my lectures. I do not like my mistakes to be broadcast globally! I have occasionally cringed in embarrassment when listening to myself make a slip of the tongue, or worse, during one of my podcasts. So why are my podcasts so successful? I believe it is down to (i) the popularity of philosophy itself, (ii) the lure of the University of Oxford and its reputation for excellence, (iii) the use of Romp in the first podcast, which makes the podcast sound fun (I hope it is fun!), and (iv) the interactive nature of my lectures, which gets the audience actively engaged. It must also have helped that Apple promoted RTHP very heavily in its early days, partly because it was introductory and partly because of its title. The third part of my explanation does not apply, of course, to CRB. I think that critical reasoning itself is of huge interest to people, not least to people who might take the SAT and GSAT tests in the US. Perhaps, also, people who enjoyed RTHP went to CRB because I made them? I am tickled by the thought that my lectures are helping to generate a love of philosophy among people who might not otherwise have heard of philosophy. I also love the fact that academics in the developing world are using my work to help their students acquire a love of philosophy. I think it is amazing that my lectures are now available in China because a listener (an Oxford alumnus), believing they should be, freely undertook to translate them and put them on the internet in China. I now recommend to everyone that they podcast their lectures as Open Educational Resources in the hope that they achieve the sort of success I have enjoyed. 2

3 Case study In the first term of every year I give six public lectures as part of my job as Director of Studies in Philosophy at the University of Oxford s Department for Continuing Education. In 2009 the lectures were entitled A Romp Through the History of Philosophy. These were podcast under the OpenSpires project, funded by JISC and led by Learning Technologies Group, Oxford University Computing Service. It was the first time I had ever had a podcast made of my lectures. Since then five series of podcasts have been made of lectures of mine. All of them have gone onto Oxford s site on itunes U. Two of them have made global number one. The podcasts are all available here: marianne-talbot. For easy reference here is a list (with figures up to January 2012): 1 A Romp Through the History of Philosophy (RTHP): 950,000 downloads since June 2009, approx. 2,500 per week. Went up to 25,000 per week for a four-week period when promoted in January Critical Reasoning for Beginners (CRB): 2,700,000 downloads since February 2010, approx. 6,000 per week. 3 The God Delusion (GD): 70,000 downloads since May 2010, approx. 300 per week. 4 A Romp Through Ethics for Beginners (RTEB): 130,000 downloads since May 2011, approx per week. 5 A Romp Through the Philosophy of Mind (RTPM) (This one is too new for data to be available.) I agreed to make the first podcast when OpenSpires explained to me that (a) it wouldn t interfere with my lecturing, and (b) I would sign a Creative Commons licence so the podcast would become an Open Educational Resource, available for use as an educational tool to anyone who cared to use it, but that if it were used commercially I could benefit. I found, and continue to find, the podcasting process unobtrusive. I need only wear a small microphone, everything else is done by OUCS. The agreement of members of the audience is secured before recording starts. They are told their questions will be heard, but only the backs of their heads seen. Participants seem to enjoy the presence of the cameraman. I don t get the impression that he either interferes with, or encourages, their willingness to ask questions. When the lectures have finished it takes OUCS about four to six weeks to prepare the recordings, the slide presentation and the reading lists for release on the Oxford site of itunes U. Once I have given the lectures, provided the slides and reading lists, and signed the CCL I don t have to do anything else, (apart from answer fan mail!). The first podcast (RTHP) had been released for some time before I signed a Creative Commons licence. When first asked to podcast I had never heard of Open Educational Resources or Creative Commons licences. However, widening participation has always been my thing, and I have also always been an early adopter of new technology, but without being in the slightest bit technical myself (the Oxford University Computing Service people have always advised and helped me). I initially found the Creative Commons licence a bit daunting, but it suits the purpose well. Under this licence anyone, anywhere, can use the podcasts for educational purposes, so long as they give me credit. For commercial purposes, my permission must be sought and I can charge a fee. Although people needn t approach me for permission to use the podcasts for educational purposes, nine people have done so, and so I have some idea of who is using the podcasts and how. Someone has used the RTHP as inspiration for a play that will be shown at the Edinburgh Festival in 2012, that a teacher in Australia is using RTHP and CRB to help students think more clearly, that RTEB is being featured on the educational channel of a local cable television system in North Carolina, that CRB has formed the basis of a course for students at a free school in Africa and has helped an Indian pastor to preach sermons that are argumentative and meaningful. I was particularly touched to hear that A fellow from one of the most violent, gang ridden areas of LA said he got a lot out of listening to your lectures. These are besides the Chinese alumnus who translated CRB. People intending to use the podcasts for commercial purposes do need to approach me. This has happened three times. I was excited to get an from a recruiter for one of the American non-credit education people. We arranged to meet, but he cancelled, promising to rearrange. I never heard from him again. I should have followed it up but forgot. I was also approached by Oxford University Press to do a 20-minute lecture for a series on Teaching English as a Foreign Language and by a Japanese literary agent, asking me to sell the rights to a Japanese translation of the CRB podcasts to a Japanese publisher. This seems to be proceeding successfully, though I have yet to receive the cheque! 3

4 There has been a steady trickle of fan since July As I started to write this case study I had received 177 s altogether. This case study consists in a classification of these s together with a commentary. In the 177 I have not counted more than once the many people who ed more than once: each of the 177 is a unique er. Before I start here is a small, anonymised, selection of the s in full to give a flavour of them. A Scot writes: Marianne, I am at present listening to a podcast A romp through the history of Philosophy. I have had no education with regards to Philosophy what so ever and have found listening to the podcast that I am hooked, I ask myself questions like ive heard on the podcast and i find this very exciting. I m not looking to take any courses at present but I would really appreciate some advice on where to start. If you could recommend any books or further beginners or podcasts for absolute beginners like myself that would be greatly appreciated. I have really enjoyed your podcast. Thanks!! A fan from Norway writes: Thank you for the wonderfull initiative of having your philosophy colleges online for download on ipod. I am livong in Norway and it wouldn t be possible to hear this wise lectures without this initiative. Now i can drive my car while listening to your philosophy course and leave my car a bit wiser then when I entered it.keep up the good work! Best regards from a Norwegian fan, A Commuter writes: Dear Ms Talbot I have downloaded and am listening to your series of lectures on philosophy. I play them in the car as I drive too and from work and as a result of your lectures, my journey takes a lot longer as I slow right down to make the journey last a lot longer. I have the audio version, so there are gaps as you demonstrate things, but when I get home I can check the video version on line. Can I just say how utterly engrossing they are - and how completely stimulating. I completed my undergraduate studies a great number of years ago, but listening to you lecture makes me yearn for study. Please keep doing them, and encourage your university to put as many of its lectures as possible up on line (I access it through the itunesu). It is a fantastic resource - and the kind of thing that would be completely unavailable to all but a handful of people were it not for the internet. Thank you so much for doing it. A husband writes: My wife and I recently watched your online video podcast series, An Introduction to Critical Reasoning. So much did we enjoy it, that I felt moved to send you a quick to say thank you. I have studied philosophy as an undergraduate, my wife has not. We both found the series accessible yet not simplistic, interesting and engaging (indeed, so engaging that the discussions resulted in several late nights and one missed meeting!). We just signed up for an online course (it was the next one to start). We can t wait! Thank you so much for pointing us in this direction. A student from Australia writes: Hello Ms Talbot, I am just writing to thank you for your Philosophy for Beginners lectures on itunes-u. I have recently enrolled in a Open Universities in Australia with the plan to complete a BA in Philosophy, but the first unit I have had to complete is a Study Skills unit which has been so boring and mundane I have been questioning whether to continue or not. Your enthusiasm for philosophy is infectious and put me back on course to continue my studies. Thanks again. A French commuter writes: I recently came across of your course on critical reasoning online for adults which I found brilliant. In the space of one week I have listened to all six podcasts and needless to say I am hungry for more so would you know where I can get more of this type of courses online or something close to it. I must say that critical reasoning has been a week spot in my life and I intend to remedy that. Thanks again for your help from xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Paris, France Until April 2011 my address was available only through the Philosophy Faculty of the University of Oxford. In April 2011 I started my own website ( Facebook page (Marianne Talbot Philosophy) and Twitter feed (@OxPhil_Marianne). I now have 520 followers on Twitter, 207 likes on Facebook, and on the website approximately 250 unique visitors a week from 65 different countries (largely the US and the UK). I try to tweet regularly, and this puts a message onto my Facebook page (through Tweetdeck) and on my website. I try regularly to update my webpage, but find it difficult to do this consistently with the other calls on my time. Since I started 4

5 the website, many s come from the Marianne facility on the website. s still come through the Faculty but not so many. The Facebook page attracts comments, but I rarely go there, so haven t exploited this much. One problem I have had with classifying the s was that people did not always say which podcasts had triggered the . Sometimes it was clear they had listened to more than one. A couple said they had listened to them all. The podcasts mentioned most often were the two global number ones (RTHP and CRB), but as these two are also the oldest that doesn t necessarily mean anything. Classifying the s was not an easy task, but it was enjoyable: most s were hugely complimentary, about philosophy, about the podcasts, and about me. Not one has been hostile. These are the classifications I have considered with, in brackets, the number of s that gave me the information in question: how they listened (11/177 correspondent mentioned this); the age of the correspondent (19/177 told me, or indicated their age); the sex of the correspondents (judged by their names); what correspondents do (70/177); where the s come from (88/177 told me this); why people ed (177/177); whether they intended to pursue their interest in philosophy (44/177). I shall consider each classification in the order given. How people listened to the podcasts Most people who gave me this information listened on the move. Most as they commuted, mainly by car (4), but also on the bus (1) and the train into Paris (1). Others listened while running in LA (1), walking on Exmoor (1), pedaling on my stationary bike (1) or trudging the sidewalks of New Zealand (1). One listener, however, preferred to lie on my bed staring at the ceiling (1). Only 11 correspondents out of 177 (about 6%) told me how they had listened so it would be unwise to draw any conclusions even though ten out of the 11 listened on the move. The age of correspondents Twenty people told me, or gave some indication of, their age. The youngest listener was 15, the oldest 71, though one said he was 70+ so might have been older. The breakdown of ages is as follows: Teens: 5, 6 if we count the one who described himself as a schoolboy. Twenties: 5 Thirties: 2 Forties: 2 Sixties: 1 Seventies: 2, 4 if the ageing scholar and the very mature student were also in their seventies As only about 11% of ers gave any indication of their age, it would again be unwise to draw any conclusion. However, the spread of ages is interesting. The people I usually teach are in their sixties and I expected more from this age group. Perhaps this age group is not given to writing fan mail? Perhaps my expectations are skewed by my job? The sex of correspondents For this I had to go on the names of the people who ed me. This didn t always work. Is a Chris a Christine or a Christopher? Is a Sam a Samuel or a Samantha? It was clear that I needed a category of unsure. On that basis the breakdown is: Male: 148 Female: 20 Unsure: 9 Maybe a female lecturer gets more fan mail from males than from females, but the same sex bias towards males is visible in every lecture I give and has been present throughout my career as a teacher of Philosophy. It is also visible, I understand, among graduate students in Philosophy faculties around the world (I am not sure about undergraduates). 5

6 I have often wondered whether embarking on Philosophy often held up as a difficult discipline requires the sort of belief in one s intellectual faculties that females often lack? Or whether the emphasis on logic puts women off. This is pure speculation. Correspondents employment Seventy of those who ed (about 40%) gave some indication of the work they did; their employment varied hugely. The largest category was that of student. Twenty-five claimed to be in this category, studying subjects that varied from Philosophy, to Mechanical Engineering, to Architecture. The second largest category was that of medical or care professional, of whom there were seven; two GPs, one orthopaedic surgeon, one dentist, one care assistant, a consultant and a nurse-lecturer. Five people worked in publishing in some form (journalist, literary agent, writer, music publisher, playwright), while four correspondents said they were teachers, again with a variation of subjects from Maths and IT, to Macroeconomics. Another four were bankers, three people said they were administrators, and there were two each of architects, lawyers and Associate Professors. Finally, there was one each of the following: web developer, logistician, microwave payload engineer, managing director, tax accountant, industrialist, director of web marketing, mathematician, university president, aerospace engineer, pastor, computer scientist, engineer, naval lieutenant, school psychologist, manager of e-learning, psychologist. Interestingly these occupations supported the impression I have long had: those attracted to philosophy tend to come from the sciences rather than the arts. Where the s came from The s came from all over the world. Approximate half the ers (87/176) mentioned their location. Of those 54 were from English-speaking countries. The others occasionally said they had started to listen to the lectures in the attempt to improve their English. English-speaking world: US 31 UK 10 Australia 8 New Zealand 3 Ireland 1 Canada 1 Total: 54 Non-English-speaking world: Brazil 5 France 5 India 4 China 4 Mexico 3 Netherlands 3 Norway 2 Denmark 1 Sweden 1 Portugal 1 Italy 1 Algeria 1 Europe 1 Turks & Caicos 1 Total: 33 6

7 Why people ed The s range from the very brief ( you are BRILL! ) to the invitation to comment on three pages of philosophical thought. Many of them are hugely complimentary, either about me: you are evidence that God exists. You changed my life. What a great thinker you are. I am a BIG FAN! or about the lectures: fascinating and thought-provoking. engrossing and stimulating. It is clear that people find listening to a lecturer, as opposed to reading a lecture, a better way of learning: Listening to a friendly voice explain these difficult concepts is much better than trying to study a stern and intimidating textbook. Absolute bliss. It makes everything so much clearer to have someone speaking into your ear. In attempting to categorise people s reasons for ing, the problem was that a lot of people had more than one, and often several, reasons for ing. They wanted to say they had enjoyed the podcasts, to thank me or to tell me they intended to do more philosophy. Many wanted to ask questions, about the content of the podcasts, about some philosophical issue, or about me. Some wanted to share their philosophical thoughts, others to ask my advice. A few wanted me to sort out technical issues; many wanted the reading lists for particular lectures or for further study. One sent me a poem, and one asked me out! I have, therefore, (with one exception mentioned below) classified s according to what I saw as the main reason the person had ed. If a thank you seemed more salient than the claim to have enjoyed the podcasts, I counted it as a thank you, if enjoyment was the main thrust, I counted it as an enjoy. On this basis the breakdown is as follows: To say thank you: 46 To say they enjoyed the podcasts: 41 To ask a question: 24 To ask for the reading lists: 16 To ask for advice: 13 To ask for further reading: 12 To share philosophical thoughts: 10 To inform about use: 9 To ask for technical help: 3 To ask about commercial use: 3 The exception I mentioned is when people said they intended in some way to continue with Philosophy as a result of the podcasts. These I counted separately. There were 44 of them. I shall discuss these after I have discussed the other reasons for ing. To say thank you: 46 Most people were keen to thank me for the podcasts. They mentioned their surprise that such a wonderful resource was free, and wanted to thank me, the University of Oxford and itunes. I would like to thank you for being such a great teacher. You really are. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU! I want to express my appreciation and gratitude for your lectures posted at Oxford University s website on critical reasoning. This is just to say THANK YOU for sharing knowledge and fostering the love of philosophy the way you do. 7

8 Such s were welcome recognition that I had made the right decision in making the podcasts (though it was hardly a decision!). It is an extraordinary thing that a lecture, given to the public in a lecture theatre in Oxford, can end up being listened to by people in Stockholm, Rome, Beijing and Texas, who are cycling to work, hoping to improve their metaphysics, catch up on something they missed at university, or just for interest. To say they enjoyed them: 41 Again most correspondents wanted to tell me they had enjoyed the podcasts. For 41 of them this seemed to be their main reason for ing. You inspired my enjoyment of logic and philosophy. I have to work hard every day to bring money to my family, but people like you make my evenings useful and open my mind after a day at work. Your passion for clarity of thought is simply wonderful and resonates very strongly with me. Getting these s can be the high spot of my day, especially given that people must go to some trouble to me. To ask a question: 24 Quite a few correspondents wanted to ask a question. These questions were not always about philosophy, or even about teaching Philosophy, but often about me personally. I m stuck on a question regarding the deductive argument you presented and hope you can spare a moment to understand what I have missed. I wonder if you would share with me your opinion on the teaching and learning of philosophy in primary and secondary schools? What if it only starts to snow as the mail is about to be posted or the mailman takes into account the snow and starts earlier? What forced me to write to you was what you said about being thrown out of school for truancy. Were you then able to return to your studies and be successful? I was just wondering what you studied at the OU? The question-askers were often young (8/24 were certainly under 30, two more sounded to me as if they were). Are they more used to asking questions after lectures? Were they hoping to impress me? To ask for the reading lists: 16 The reading lists for all the lectures were put up with the lectures. However, people seemed to have trouble finding them. I am often asked to send reading lists. I am sometimes asked for the PowerPoint presentations, and transcripts. Do you have a reading list and handouts associated with the lectures please? If possible could I have the names of the recommended text books? Is there a curriculum/syllabus for the course, or any recommended reading? I should perhaps have asked the technicians to make the reading lists, and related material, more visible. To ask for advice: 13 For 13 correspondents the main reason for writing seemed to be to ask for my advice: Where s the best place 2 start if I hope 2 end up in ur level? I wonder if you could suggest how to grow in the knowledge of philosophy with work and family and still advance on the field? 8

9 I m hoping you might peruse my pearltree and perhaps recommend some things I may be ignoring or have missed entirely. I distinguished the asking for advice category, from the asking for further reading category, by dint of whether or not reading was actually mentioned. To ask for further reading: 12 People often wanted me to recommend further reading, either about a topic that had triggered their interest, or about the subject of the podcasts. Some wanted reading suitable for their age, or their background. Could you direct me to a text(s) about Folk Psychology? Would you be able to suggest the best philosophy books for a younger audience on a basic level? I d be thrilled if you could name a couple of books you feel would suit a newcomer. When people asked for extra reading I always provided it, if possible online. I found the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy invaluable for this. To share philosophical thoughts: 10 Some correspondents wanted to share with me their philosophical thoughts: As for rationalism and empiricism, I have to side with empiricism which seems to me the most rational. In a world where liberty is the principle value, each man and woman would possess an inalienable property in themselves. It is the observation of the fact that brings it into existence, until you actually search and find it, it exists only as a potentiality. The Aristotelian account of happiness will not apply according to the theory of internalism, for if the existence of the whole world is based on my mind (or some evil demon telling me what s what), then my personal experience of happiness doesn t need to hold any exterior truth. These s tended to be the longest. The record is the one that went on for three pages. Some of these s were interesting, surprisingly, perhaps, only one was a rant (though a nice one!). A couple suggested to me that the er was someone who should study Philosophy further (including one from a banker who was fascinated by possible worlds). In responding to these s I usually encouraged the correspondent to consider a course in Philosophy, perhaps one of Oxford s short online courses. To inform about use: 8 Users of the podcasts do not have to tell me that they are using the podcasts, unless it is for commercial purposes. Nevertheless people did write to tell me that, and how, they were using them. We (at Wingate University) have an educational channel on our local cable television system. I am requesting your permission to download and show on our channel the episodes of Romp with Ethics. Recently I have translated and introduced your Critical Reasoning for Beginners onto China s internet. It is extremely popular. Is it alright to do this, if there are copyright issues please let me know. We are planning to use your Critical Reasoning Course as an intro for our students. I am using your podcasts to put together training for my employees to improve the quality of their arguments. Some of these s were very moving. I have already mentioned the Chinese translator, but I am touched to know that teachers in the developing world are using my podcasts to help their students. I am also interested in the rather unexpected uses of the podcasts, such as for inspiration for a play! 9

10 To ask for technical help: 3 Some people asked me to ask the technicians to do something: Would you please check with the technical team to confirm there are no issues with the video? These were straightforward, and I would send them straight to the Computing Service, who efficiently dealt with them. To ask about commercial use: 3 One of my client publishers would like to publish the above lectures in Japanese translation in book form. After nearly two successful decades in the US we recently launched in the UK and seek to broaden our roster of great teachers. I cannot claim to have made a lot of money out of these podcasts. I sometimes wish I had 1p for every download! To send me a poem: 1 This was from someone who says that, with dyslexia and without qualifications, he can t get into university, so he doesn t have anyone to talk to about philosophy. Thank you, thank you, here s a poem. I responded by mentioning the excellent work that many universities have done to help people with dyslexia and urged him to try again. Continuing with Philosophy: 44 I find these s particularly gratifying. My key aim as a teacher, after all, is to turn people onto my subject and these s suggest I am doing exactly that, not just in lecturing, which is what I have done all my adult life, but in releasing the lectures through Oxford s site on itunes U. Forty-four people said in their that as a result of listening to, or watching, the podcasts they hoped to pursue philosophical studies in some form. These intentions ranged from thinking about doing a formal degree course: I am now thinking of pursuing a degree in philosophy. Since watching your lectures I have signed up to do an Open University course in philosophy. I now know I want to read philosophy at university. You inspired my keen enjoyment of logic and philosophy and played a major part in making me a philosophy major. I have fallen hopelessly in love with philosophy. It has changed my life. I have just registered with the Open University. to intending to sign up to a formal course short of a degree: We have just signed up to the philosophy of religion online course. I shall be enrolling in one of Oxford s online courses. I shall be taking the online Theory of Knowledge. to the intention simply to do more: You have sparked my interest in causality and I intend to find out more. Your podcast has contributed considerably to the direction of my learning. 10

11 I now wish to learn more about philosophy. I have decided to learn more and to apply critical thinking to my daily life. or a description of themselves as having been hooked and intending simply to do something about it: I am now hooked on philosophy. I now yearn to study philosophy. I now see the inevitability of philosophy. I am hungry for more philosophy. You have me hooked on Critical Thinking. Studying philosophy makes me feel I am walking on air. You have opened the philosophy door in my mind. I am intoxicated with philosophy. I have been delighted to be the instrument of so many people getting the philosophy bug. For this reason I would recommend the production of podcasts as OER to anyone who loves their subject and cares that it should be disseminated as widely as possible. Learning from OER Writing this case study makes me realise I have learned quite a lot from podcasting. I have broken down my areas of learning into five: rewards for teaching; not encouraging lengthy correspondence; using the podcasts for promotion; the global exposure of error; possibilities. Rewards for teaching In doing the podcasts I have learned, to my delight, that people enjoy my lectures, and that what I say, and the way I say it, can help people to become hooked on philosophy. As someone who thinks of herself as a teacher above all, this is wonderful. It is amazing how, throughout one s life as a teacher, one is so very rarely given any sort of accolade. After a lecture is over people just file out. Clapping is not common, except perhaps, in Departments of Continuing Education where I now work. However, I have spent far longer lecturing undergraduates who tend to give feedback only when asked. Such feedback can often be negative because people think they are being asked how someone could improve their style, so they look for something that they think can be improved. It can be disheartening. Through the responses to my podcasts I have again and again been positively reinforced for my lecturing and it is very nice indeed! Not encouraging lengthy correspondence I have responded to every single one of the s I have received. In doing so, however, I have learned some important lessons. One is not to get drawn into a discussion unless that is what I really want. Sometimes people will send a short , then if you reply, a longer one, and so on, until you have to almost cut them off (and feel rather rude in doing so). 11

12 My responses are now warm (I hope), they answer the questions asked, but they do not invite the er to again. The exception to this is when someone has said they would like to take, or will be taking, a course in Philosophy. In such cases I do ask them to let me know how they get on. I do this in the hope of encouraging them to act on their intention. A couple have got back to me on that basis and I have been very happy for them to do so. Using the podcasts for promotion I started quite early encouraging people to have a look at Oxford s online short courses in Philosophy. We have ten such courses (Introduction to Philosophy, The Philosophy Gym, Ethics (MT), Bioethics (MT), Introductions to the Philosophy of Mind (MT), Religion, Science, Politics, The Theory of Knowledge and Metaphysics: the ones with MT after them were written by me). These courses are accessible to anyone with internet access wherever in the world they might be. They are ideal for anyone who has the time and the money to do them, and therefore potentially ideal as the next step for anyone who has enjoyed the podcasts. Each of them is only ten weeks long. I didn t properly think through the possibilities, however, writing each on an ad hoc basis. Each time I had to look up the rather complicated URL ( and this meant that replying to s took much longer than it needed to. What I should have done was prepared a short with all the relevant information and used that each time, topping and tailing it for particular er. I blush to admit I still haven t done this, and wonder how many potential customers we have lost because I was in a rush and decided not to bother mentioning the courses. The podcasts, although they don t make any money in themselves, are extremely valuable for the purposes of promotion. They could be used to promote not just the online courses, but also the department, the OUDCE Philosophical Society, the University of Oxford and of course myself. I have been slow to realise this, and still haven t exploited it to the full. Recently, though, I have made sure the final slide of each podcast has been a slide telling people what to do next and mentioning not only our short courses but also our weekend schools, weekly classes, summer schools and the OUDCE Philosophical Society. I should have made sure that the earlier podcasts also had this slide. I should also have made sure that this slide was shown on the podcasts, I have been told that on some it had been cut off. For overseas listeners it is, of course, only the online courses, Summer schools and Philosophical Society that are of interest. Unfortunately I have no way of knowing how many people who watch/listen to the podcasts turn up, though I have had a few who, attending weekend classes, have made themselves known to me. I have also changed the questionnaire people are asked to complete so this information will be available in future. With respect to personal promotion I have been even slower. I am currently hoping to write a book on Critical Reasoning, but of course should have had this out two years ago to maximise the impact of the CRB podcast. Global exposure of error If I were to begin my podcasting career again I should take more care to avoid making mistakes in my lectures. It is uncomfortable to know that any mistakes you make are being broadcast across the world. This realisation, however, must be taken with care. I observe many lecturers in my daily work (part of which involves appointing tutors and overseeing their professional development). I have formed the opinion that the single thing that interferes most with the ability to teach effectively is the fear of getting something wrong. People will, for example, read lectures because they feel safe that what they have written is correct, so they don t dare deviate from it. Or perhaps people will check their papers every sentence so that they can be certain, again, that what they are about to say is what they should say. This can make lectures extremely tedious. Anyone who has seen my podcasts knows that this is not how I lecture. My main aim is to engage my audience and to that end I constantly ask them questions. Because I have no idea what the answers will be this means my lectures could go all over the place. I don t let them because I have in my mind a clear outline of what I want to say and why. However, that s the only thing I do have written down; everything else comes off the top of my head. This means that I must know my subject very well. It also mean that in the heat of the moment I sometimes find myself saying things I know to be false, or realise to be ambiguous, or misleading. I hope to catch myself in such mistakes as I make them, but of course do not always succeed. The first time I actually watched one of my podcasts I found myself blushing with shame at a couple of the errors I made. I found myself hoping that none of my colleagues would watch or listen to them, and I almost found myself vowing never to make another podcast. 12

13 Then I came to my senses. In particular I reminded myself that my aim is not never to utter something false or foolish or to get my words in a muddle (no one would ever say anything on that basis). My aim is to instil in others my love for philosophy. My lecturing style seems to succeed in this aim. If, as I do this, I make mistakes it is not a disaster. Nevertheless I am much more careful, these days, with preparation. My advice to others would be to make sure you know your subject inside out before you make a podcast, but never hold back for fear of making mistakes. The possibilities In the 22 years from 1987 when I started lecturing to 2009 when I started podcasting, I reached, I estimate, about 5,000 people. Most of these people were undergraduates of the University of Oxford, though, since I have been DoS at Continuing Education, they have been more varied. Now I am podcasting I can reach 5,000 people a week. These are people from all over the world, of all ages and backgrounds. I find this humbling. A huge amount is owed to the technology (and technologists) that make this possible. Conclusions My general conclusion is that podcasting is a very good thing! I am extremely pleased to have found it, not only because it has been nice for me to have my teaching so rewarded with praise from all over the world, but also because I am delighted to have been able to reach so many people who might not otherwise have discovered philosophy. The only worry I have is how this might impact on content providers. Why, for example, might my University not say to me that as they have my podcasts they don t need me any more? Isn t there something wrong that someone whose work is SO popular makes so little from making that work more available? How is the thirst for OER going to impact on young lecturers who have not yet got secure jobs? These are interesting questions that will have to be addressed soon because Open Educational Resources are not going to go away. The future is OPEN! OER and public engagement: a case study by Marianne Talbot is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported Licence. 13

14 Contact us 14 The Higher Education Academy Innovation Way York Science Park Heslington York YO10 5BR +44 (0) ISBN The Higher Education Academy, 2012 The Higher Education Academy (HEA) is a national body for learning and teaching in higher education. We work with universities and other higher education providers to help bring about change in learning and teaching. We do this to improve the experience that students have while they are studying, and to support and develop those who teach them. Our activities focus on rewarding and recognising excellence in teaching, bringing together people and resources to research and share best practice, and by helping to influence, shape and implement policy - locally, nationally, and internationally. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any storage and retrieval system without the written permission of the Editor. Such permission will normally be granted for educational purposes provided that due acknowledgement is given. To request copies of this report in large print or in a different format, please contact the communications office at the Higher Education Academy: or pressoffice@heacademy.ac.uk