Invitation to a podcast on podcasts

Recently, I read an article by Ian Lamont about podcasting. Written for a business journal, the author questioned whether podcasting had actually lived up to the hype that had been generated a few years before. He looked at the value in monetary terms with podcasting and asked whether the technology was actually paying off. Essentially, he was asking “How many people are listening?”

Of course, loyal readers of this blog are well aware that I hate when education is compared to business, and I also don’t like people saying that we should do something in education because the “real world” wants us too. (Like education is not part of the real world.)

But pod casting is something that has rapidly matured as a technology, of course inside and outside of education. So, perhaps it isn’t untimely to ask now, whether or not pod casting has lived up to the hype in the education community.

So, I can’t answer this alone. I will need your help.

On Tuesday April 22, 2008, at 4:00 PM Mountain Daylight Time, I will be hosting a one hour Skype chat to discuss the topic: Has Podcasting in Education Lived Up to the Hype?

If you wish to join in on the audio Skypecast, please send Tim Holt in El Paso Texas a buddy invitation so I can add you to list of participants.

It would be very neat to hear from people all over the world on whether or not Podcasting is working as promised, what is being done with podcasting, and whether or not the technology needs to improve.

Let me know if you are in!

0 members like this

Comment by Michael McVey on April 15, 2008 at 5:54pm: In the final paragraph, the author writes, “ Compared to radio programming, most podcasts sound amateurish and slow-paced, and the ability to find interesting programs is severely limited by the directories, rating systems, and search functions found on iTunes and other podcatchers and podcast-oriented sites. No wonder relatively few people have tried downloading podcasts, and fewer still listen to them on a regular basis."

This is true to some extent. Without training in how to adjust sound levels, improving the pace of discussion, and helping the listener with verbal cues there is no doubt that these amateur podcasts are make for some hard listening.

I once listened to a language training podcast to buff up my French. Every time the speaker spoke a word that began with a "p" my eardrum popped. I gave up after podcast 3. I picked it up again at podcast 10 and the quality of the sound and even the delivery had improved vastly. It takes time to learn those lessons.

Read Anderson and Armbruster's groundbreaking work on "considerate text" (1984) and you have the groundwork for a paper I am writing called "The Considerate Podcast" that explores issues related to quality, construction, and organization of decent podcasts.

One last point, I grew up watching American Bandstand. I saw it evolve over the years into Soul Train then MTV and it reached its apex (arguably) with some brilliant (and expensive) music videos. Heck, the latest Stones film is the latest example of what money and professionalism can get you in the world of commercial productions.

Nevertheless, at the same time, amateurs are creating some of the most humorous, provocative, interesting, touching, inspiring, and beautiful videos with a minimum of equipment and posting them on YouTube.

So I would recommend not comparing Steve Hargadan’s podcasts with Steven Colbert’s television show. They are different creatures and deserve different treatment and different respect.

Comment by nlowell on April 15, 2008 at 7:12pm: Amusing article but clearly out of touch with what *I* think of as podcasting.

Television isn't a failure because public access channels are filled with amateurish and boring programming. Radio is a whole 'other' issue at the moment because the programming on the airwaves is so uniformly pointless -- even if it's produced in exquisite quality, for the most part.

Lamont's assessment of the field based on his rather small numbers is anecdotal and not truly representative of the field. My novels get 5,000 downloads a week and I'm a small player. Mur Lafferty gets 10-15,000 or more. Scott Sigler and JC Hutchins regularly pull 30,000 or 40,000 downloads a week. I don't even want to think what an Adam Curry or Dawn-and-Drew pull. It has to be in the hundreds of thousands.

The main problem in this analysis is that it's taking one point -- the numbers represented by a very esoteric niche subject -- and projecting them onto a larger population without considering the applicability of that generalization. Lamont further compounds his errors in analysis by finding the worst examples and hold them up as typical. Yes, there are a lot of people who need to learn what a pop-filter does. Yes, there are a ton of giggly, drunken podcasts. Yes, separating the wheat from the chaff is often difficult. Turn on your 187 channels of tv and perform the same task.

But here's the point of podcasting. It's a long-tail, power-curve phenomenon when examined as a whole. With low barriers to entry, anybody with an idea can put out an audio program to serve a particular niche. Fans of canceled tv shows. Poetry writers. Garage bands. Any subject you can think of - just like the web itself made it possible for anybody with a connection to publish text and pictures to the world - podcasting has made it possible to publish audio, video, text and more. Anybody with an interest and a dream can use podcasting to form connections into communities and lead more interesting, fulfilling lives. This idea -- the interest and the dream -- is important for educational use of podcasting but we haven't begun to even think about it yet.

The thing that makes podcasts special is the use of RSS to deliver the payload, and the ability of the specialized RSS aggregators to time shift network bandwidth demands to non-peak hours. You don't need to have broadband access to use these tools. You can tell Juice to download at 10pm and it'll keep the connection going until it's done while you sleep.

Audio programming is important as "radio replacement" content because you can put the MP3 files on cheap devices that require no connection to the web and take it with you in the car, on the bus, on your train. You can take it to the gym, or for a morning constitutional around the park. Places where the mind needs stimulation but where eyes are occupied elsewhere. Audio is important for it's ability to engage the listener -- to paint the sound scape -- and to invoke affective responses based on timing and inflection of performance.

Streaming may well supercede RSS delivery eventually, but always on is a lot further away for vast areas of this country, let alone the globe, than I think Lamont credits.

And it's not about "monetization" in the classic sense. I give my books away. Go download them. Enjoy them. Tell your friends. Give them away. All I ask is that you don't claim them as yours, that you don't change them, and that you don't sell them. The classic economic models are not going away but they ARE shifting. These kinds of efforts are just the tip of the iceberg.

The challenge for the classroom teacher is this:
"What's your idea? What's your dream?"

What kind of content can be encoded in -- say, audio -- that is engaging, informative, and entertaining? What's your subject area? How can you do it?

My advice is stop trying to figure out how to teach with it. Start trying to figure out how to learn with it. Once you have a feel for how the tools works, what it is, and what it might be capable of, you'll find ways to incorporate it into your art and practice.

Comment by Shawn Wheeler on April 15, 2008 at 7:20pm: Tim, I would love to join in on this. I think Phx time is one hour behind. GMT -7 I am not sure how to send a buddy invitation.

Shawn

Comment by Alan Dawson on April 16, 2008 at 12:36am: Wow what an interesting conversation is being had right here on your blog. I wont be able to join the conversation on the 22nd, but thanks for the invitation. I don't know whether I agree or disagree with the remarks made above for one I have a heavy cold at presetn (very heavy) and thinking isn't good at present. Whether the teachers I am working with are RSS feeding or working their way to this, I know that what we are working on is listening genres which is all about one aspect of literacy learning in the UK. I am encouraging teachers to share other listening genres with their primary pupils and having them prepare and make their own versions. I am having them allow children to analyse audio text and to make comments to the podcast on aspects of word level such as manipulative language. I couldn't care less if it is or is not a podcast in the pure sense as my teachers aren't teaching technology they are facilitating the exploration of language. AND can I say I have seen a change in pedagogical style in engagement of the students and an improvement in speaking and listening and writing for a purpose. BUT it all boils down to the teacher as to how good it is and that is down to whether they have clear focussed learning outcomes in mind. RSS feeds and a worldwide audience are all well and good but we want articulate children who will in all probability use the real thing in some near future to communicate their ideas out there.

Long live educational podcasting and everything in between that doesn't quite match up to some people's exacting standards. The somewhere that we want for all our students is the ability to articulate their ideas.

As I say I don't know whether this is in agreement with my friends article above and I am not writing to offend or be offensive but to add my little bit to what I think you wanted from your Skypecast. Good luck Tim, and enjoy.

Comment by Alan Dawson on April 16, 2008 at 12:44am: Just a further comment, I normally read through my comments, check for grammar and for clarity. I have just read that appalling piece of writing and I apologise. When I am well again I will do better! :-)

Comment by nlowell on April 16, 2008 at 3:57am: Excellent points, Alan.

From a pedagogical standpoint, what we call the source file is probably less important than the usefulness of the resource. It's hard to argue with the educational benefit of high-quality, high-relevance audio resources when applied appropriately to serve an instructional need.

For the purposes of *this* discussion, since the question revolves around the specific term - podcast - and since the original article that prompted Tim's response was specifically concerned with it, I think it's important that we are clear on what it is we're talking about before we begin a discussion of the relative merits or lack thereof. To be clear, the question is not about the utility of these resources when applied in an educational setting. It is about whether or not the distribution mechanism has "lived up to the hype."

That's another reason that Lamont's original article is flawed in it's logic, btw - and probably I didn't help that misconception by including the idea in my original response. Podcasting is not about the quality of the content. It's not about the content at all. It's about the delivery.

As example: suppose I acquire an audio-drama performance of Romeo and Juliet. One is a collection of CD's from the library. One is a digital download from Audible.com. One is a serialized delivery via RSS. The question of "podcast" is only relevant in the last case. In all three, the audio resource -- and related educational application -- is the same. Issues of copyright, acquisition cost, and media instantiation aside, the crux of this discussion which Tim proposes is whether or not the method of acquisition is significant. Rephrased, the question on the table is:

"Has the potential for RSS-delivered educational resources been realized?"

Given how few people even understand that question, I'd have to submit that we haven't even begun to consider it, let alone begun realizing it.

Get well soon, Alan, and thanks for a great contribution to the discussion.

Comment by nlowell on April 16, 2008 at 4:14am: This raises an interesting question in my mind about the subject of this post, actually.

Tim? You've invited people to attend a skype chat, presumably to acquire an audio resource. You've indicated that this is an "invitation to a podcast on podcasts." What's the address of the feed that you're planning to use for the resulting mp3? Is this part of a regular podcast which you produce? Or is it simply a one-off which you plan to make available - say - as a digital upload to this blog?

Comment by Alan Dawson on April 16, 2008 at 5:53am: Hello nlowell

Your cogent way of phrasing the question "Has the potential for RSS-delivered educational resources been realized?" is very clear but I can reinterpret Tim's question "whether or not pod casting has lived up to the hype in the education community" into something different.

Your question seems to be more the secondary school 'delivery of content', whereas my interpretation was using it as a collaboration tool for pupils to develop their literacy skills particularly in a primary setting. I don't know whether you agree with this interpretation or whether I am still in fuzzy thinking land!

Perhaps it is time for Tim to return to the blog and give us a clearer understanding of what he is seeking.

Comment by Alan Dawson on April 16, 2008 at 6:06am: I am going crazy. I have reread nlowells initial comments again and I don't recognise it! My apologies, my sentiments chime in very well with what you are saying. I think I need to go back to bed instead of writing applications for a new job! Goodness knows what I am saying to those poor potential employers!!

Comment by nlowell on April 16, 2008 at 6:23am: Oh, and a little simple investigation on my part reveals that Tim Holt hosts a podcast entitled "Intended Consequences" which I am embarrassed to admit I did not know existed.

Congrats on 100 episodes last March, Tim! I've added you to my 'gator

Comment