I learned yesterday that the university administration has somehow blocked UM Learn (the learning management system, or LMS) access to materials pertaining to many UMFA-led courses. As of this morning, for some reason, I still have access and I presume my students do as well, but that could change at the press of a few buttons. Apparently.
This highlights one of the many non-salary issues
that are on the table during this bargaining: Who owns course content?
For years, we were encouraged to develop courses and content
that could be delivered remotely, through Distance (continuing) Education. Most of us have resisted because a) it’s a
lot of work, b) it’s not our job, and c) it isn’t clear who owns that
content. In many universities, the administration
tries to retain ownership of the material, meaning they can offer the course
without having to pay a person to actually teach it. Imagine developing a
course, something moderately popular, and then getting fired because now that
the university has all your materials they don’t need you anymore. And there
aren’t any residuals packages or anything to keep generating money for anyone
except the university.
With the pandemic, of course, many of us were forced into
developing material like that, or at least recording lectures and so on, that
could be used later, by ourselves or by someone else. One of the issues that wasn’t clear at the
time, and isn’t now, is who owns those materials and what can they be used for.
Many of my colleagues see this access issue during the strike
as a signal that the university intends to own and control our content. It’s
difficult to see what other benefit, to themselves, they could be trying to
produce. The students are angry, we’re angry, and they’re sitting on our
copyright material.
You’d think that preventing us (striking UMFA members) from
accessing our course materials, like our offices and so on, would be a
reasonable way to punish us for being on strike. Many of us took down our own
materials ahead of the strike to avoid exactly this situation.
The only ones being punished by this are the students. One
can’t see this being a great PR move on their part, especially with many of us
having decided to leave what’s in the LMS up for students.
So to be clear, if your course has disappeared from the LMS,
it’s because the administration has blocked your access, not your
UMFA-represented instructor. (The most we can do is remove or make invisible
the material. We can’t actually block
the course.) Hopefully this is just some
kind of glitch, but it’s timing is awfully suspicious.
3 comments:
In response to your comment on the earlier blog, I can confirm that it did in fact make it impossible for us TAs to get some of our work done. It also meant that some students had no clue what was going on in the course because they couldn't see updates on UM Learn and weren't in the class Discord server. TAs who used UM Learn to mass email their tutorial groups would also be unable to do so in that way, instead having to do something more cumbersome.
The copyright stuff confuses me as well. I don't know anything about copyright, but the fact that this was very different from 2016's precedent without any indication that it would happen (and I mean before the outage, not being told that it would happen after it actually happened) is very fishy to me. I wonder what type of ownership they can claim on content made by TAs... Can they claim YouTube videos? Google Docs stuff? Voice recordings? And does this ownership depend on whether or not it was posted on UM Learn? If so, can professors avoid giving out content directly on UM Learn in order to avoid giving up ownership? What a mess...
there's someone on twitter claiming the same thing happened in 2016 but that it's just that courses weren't solely online then, so nobody (but they) noticed. Or something. I can't confirm or deny that, but i'm wondering if that's true or not. I haven't heard that from anyone else at all.
Looking back, that was a brief but telling episode. I would guess that Admin assumed that students would blame UMFA for the loss of access to UM Learn, but it seems like the word got around quickly and effectively as to who was behind it.
The larger points you raise remind me of the news item from early this year about a deceased professor who continued to be listed as an instructor for a course at Concordia using videos of his lectures.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-tech-rights-analysis-trfn-idUSKBN2A521B
One of the issues our bargaining team has come to focus on late in the strike is that we shouldn't be compelled to teach on line. This kind of thing is one reason why.
Post a Comment