The University last week released an article in UVA Today hyping its offerings on Coursera, a company that hosts free online courses. The piece spotlighted Physics Prof. Lou Bloomfield, who is broadcasting his popular “How Things Work” course to roughly 5,000 students around the globe.
Bloomfield is a University legend for many undergraduates. His class on the fundamentals of physics, punctuated by lively hands-on experiments — falling balls and ramps and seesaws — has the visual flair to succeed as a MOOC. And judging from student feedback, his course has fared well. Though only about 10 percent of the students who initially enrolled in the class are still participating, this figure is typical for MOOCs.
Given Bloomfield’s popularity and his apparent interest in digital-learning platforms, it is fitting that the University, in seeking to highlight its forays into MOOC-world, would center its coverage on him. But in demonstrating Bloomfield’s prowess as a teacher, the University’s article raises some concerns about how labor-intensive teaching an online course might be.
Bloomfield has to work 100 hours to produce one hour of video, the piece reported. By the semester’s end, he will have invested more than 1,000 hours in the course. By contrast, if Bloomfield were to invest 20 hours a week into teaching his on-Grounds “How Things Work” course, after 15 weeks his total investment would be 300 hours — a fraction of what his MOOC demands.
In addition to arranging and presenting the course content, Bloomfield is also responsible for shooting and editing his own video. This iteration of the “How Things Work” MOOC contains just six episodes, but Bloomfield plans to add more in future versions.
The University’s report of this daunting workload is likely meant to provoke esteem. And it should. Bloomfield’s staunch work ethic is undeniably impressive. (He also finds time to manage Lou’s List, which allows students and faculty to navigate course schedules without venturing into SIS.) But the sheer number of hours Bloomfield is putting into his MOOC is intimidating.
The University’s party line on Coursera is that the online venture is an experiment. Bloomfield, an established faculty member, has the flexibility and freedom to engage in such experiments without serious risk to his professional stature. His grueling undertaking, however, should not set a precedent for what the University may rightfully expect from other faculty members who take on MOOCs.
First is the matter of workload. While we commend Bloomfield for his work weeks that likely extend into triple digits, we wish them on no one. In the event that more and more professors begin teaching MOOCs, the University must remain conscious of what it may fairly demand from its employees.
Second is the matter of technical support. Bloomfield is shooting and editing his own video, but most professors would require technical assistance to ensure a high-quality product free of glitches. Such assistance would also maximize faculty members’ teaching and research time. For professors to both teach and produce their MOOCs is an unrealistic expectation.
Bloomfield’s taxing schedule may be energizing for him. For other faculty members — especially those who cannot afford to take a full semester off other research and teaching obligations — such a workload could be debilitating. Bloomfield is an exceptional professor. We hope the University recognizes this fact — and in terms of what the school demands from its faculty teaching MOOCs, a Bloomfield-esque workload should be just that: an exception.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Reckon consistently with our history
By Editorial Board | November 19, 2024Until these bureaucracies have proven willing to commit to change outright, it is up to us, students and Charlottesville residents, to continue pushing for that change.
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating TikTok will not ensure data security
By Editorial Board | August 24, 2023It isn’t bad enough that Gov. Youngkin is crafting meaningless mandates, he is also forcing the University to act as the enforcement arm of his intrusive, big-government regime.
EDITORIAL: In defense of DEI
By Editorial Board | May 28, 2023Instead of mincing words, we should be taking action.
