Trial Date Set for High-Stakes Copyright Case Involving Georgia State U.

March 31, 2011, 12:08 pm

On May 16, the trial phase is scheduled to begin in a copyright-infringement case brought by publishers against Georgia State University, involving faculty use of copyrighted material in their courses. Publishers Weekly reports that the judge supervising the case dismissed several claims brought by the publishers’ group but allowed one count to stand.

Although the recently derailed Google Books settlement has dominated the news, the Georgia case, Cambridge University Press et al. v. Patton et al., may have a profound effect on how much previously published material professors can safely use.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

E-mail

mbelvadi

Thank you to the lawyers at Georgia State (and the taxpayers that support them) for being willing to break new ground in establishing much needed court precedent around the application of “fair use” in the academic context, rather than just settling the case. The lack of such precedent has for decades left risk-averse institutions unable to exercise their legal “fair use” rights for lack of knowing clearly what the boundaries of them are. I hope this case’s ruling reaches beyond the jurisdictional issues and contributes some clarity regarding those boundaries.
raza_khan

Seriously, very interesting case!

Raza
_______________________
Raza Khan, Ph.D.
sand6432

Georgia state officials are, among other things, trying to absolve themselves of any responsibility by pinning all blame for any infringing activity on faculty members. They already abandoned the previous policy, which is what the publishers sued about, because it was simply indefensible, and they knew it. In its place, they substituted a policy developed by Kenneth Crews first for Indiana University and then for Columbia. They also hired Crews as an expert witness. Whatever the merits of the arguments about “fair use,” their tactics have hardly been anything worthy of emulation.—Sandy Thatcher
cwinton

What a mess. I can’t say any of the involved parties deserve much sympathy. The student can’t pass a mandatory exam, the university can’t seem to come up with a reasonable accommodation short of awarding what appears to be an unearned degree, and Mr. Lukacs seeks to be a self-appointed guardian of the institution’s integrity. The only one who has gotten anything right is the judge. The University’s feeble attempt to justify its behavior by hiding behind being “legally required” to act as it did is particularly troubling. I hope there is a governing board that is willing to take steps to restore some semblance of academic integrity to the school.
vatican

I agree, what a mess! It is interesting that the judge has ruled that Gabor Lukács “lacked “both private- and public-interest standing” in the proceeding”. I don’t know the facts of the matter. Since I like to play the Devil’s Advocate and occasionally the Devil’s Devil’s Advocate, wouldn’t Lukács’ objection be of a public interest in this case given that this newly minted PhD will be in the marketplace – whether Dr. “I’ve got an exam anxiety” ends up in the private or public sector.

Waiving an exam after two apparent accommodations seem out of the ordinary too. I don’t know what type of policies Manitoba has but at my institution the diversity and equity office normally tells us the conditions for accommodation and emphasizes that academic quality should NOT be compromised.
22067030

Once upon a time, in the crafts, when a journeyman wanted to be promoted to being a Master, that journeyman would produce a Masterpiece. If the Masterpiece was deemed worthy, the journeyman would be promoted.

We still have something left of that system. A Doctorate of Philosophy requires a dissertation that is deemed worthy. In mathematics, as my advisor put it, if you prove a big enough theorem, you get a doctorate.

There was a hazing ceremony, called the Oral Exam, which famous mathematicians had famous problems with. But as for these comprehensive exams, well…

They were introduced as a cost-saving device, although they are widely admired by people who don’t know any better. Confucian bureaucratic claptrap, grumbled the Taoists, but the Imperial Government needed some filtering device to deal with the vast numbers of candidates. Hence the alphabet soup of SATs, IQs, GREs, all designed to screen out those people who are (as a statistical phenomenon) unlikely to successfully complete the course of study. Or so say the Measurement experts, whose track record on such issues is not so hot.

But the alternative is to face a flood. So we have these filtering exams. But since you get a mathematics PhD for proving a big theorem, the filtering exam is merely a labor-saving device. If it is found to be malfunctioning in some identifiable way, then an institution is not out of bounds having a policy for offering an opportunity for someone with an exam problem but who still might prove a theorem.

After all, no university wants to be the next institution to dump the next Galois…

GLMcColm
greilly

If the student suffers from exam anxiety, however did he manage to make it to the doctoral level? How was this “disability” accommodated in all the other courses he took? Surely he wasn’t just given a pass on all exams throughout his academic studies.
jbarman

David,

Good points, all. With that understood, I can’t imagine doing without a teaching demonstration. It’s not a perfect predictor of classroom success, but a lousy demonstration almost always raises red flags. After 25 years of requiring teaching demonstrations, I’ve gotten to the point that I can predict success after hearing only 1-5 minutes of a presentation.

I’m sure that there have been occasions during that time where I eliminated worthwhile candidates, but I’d rather some other institution provide them with an opportunity.
dianstin

I think the teaching demo often shows many things about a candidate–ability to present something logically, knowledge of basic material and what is important to stress, general presence. I think the key is to not put too much importance on this short demo, rather to seek the information that it provides and value appropriately. I’ve seen some awful presentations that told me a lot about the candidate and their thought process. I’ve seen many wonderful teachers present as “okay” during presentation but it was the rest of the interview that brought them to campus. I guess I see it as a way to find out about any red flags. I think your final paragraph captures what they offer: a brief view of potential hire but should be used with caution.
ksledge

I could also imagine a horrible teacher doing well for a demonstration if they are coached, using someone else’s lesson plan / lecture, etc. Or if they are good at lecturing but bad at taking time for students, which is obviously an important part of teaching. I think that teaching-oriented schools (i.e. not R1s) should definitely still have teaching demonstrations as part of the interview, but as the author said they should be taken with a grain of salt.
dqualters

Part of the problem isn’t so much the demonstration but rather the lens through which people watch a teacher. One of the challenges in any form of teaching feedback is knowing what to look for, how to view it and how to evaluate it. Departments should agree on what characteristics they are look for in a prospective candidate, convey those to the candidate and then use those as a touchstone to judge. If a department values something other than knowledge transmission then they would look for the types of questions asked, the quality of the interactive exercises and so forth. While a demo is high pressure and often like dropping in from Mars, you can still judge pretty quickly a person’s approach to their teaching and if the watchers are on the same page it’s a much more reliable way to judge.
eckerd

     The teaching demo does give students and a search committee a sense of the candidate’s logic, organizational ability, pace, in-class responsiveness, and “presence.” However, in isolation, it can be unfair–at least for candidates little familiarity with an institution and its students.
      However, when paired with teaching evaluations (including student evaluations) from places where the candidate has taught before–especially if these are contexts similar to the hiring institution (small liberal arts college, large state institution, etc.), they can provide one more important piece of information for the search committee. In addition, we always review syllabi. And I always pose post-teaching demo questions to each candidate: Given that teaching in an unfamiliar context is an artificial situation, how did your “class” compare to what you usually do when you teach? Why did you make the decisions you did for this “class”? and Now that your “class” is over, what (if anything) might you have done differently, knowing what you now know about our students?
     Answers to questions like these usually allow a candidate to repair the possible damage of a naive choice for the “class”, and can give the committee a sense of how thoughtful he or she is about teaching. After all, good teachers–even the veterans–are always thoughtfully adjusting to make learning experiences better.
http://profile.yahoo.com/MSZTSUIJB55NTQF4LXQCH5NM2Y JAL

The worst teaching demos are those in front of only faculty. You have 3 or 4 faculty and nothing else. That is nothing like a class. Difficult to get class interaction and you dealing with an audience which has more knowledge than a student class but you have no idea what their areas of knowledge is.
robjenkins

http://chronicle.com/article/Demonstration-or-Demolition-/44842/
slchew455

I agree that the sample lecture is a flawed piece of information for hiring, but it is still a useful source of information. It is certainly more useful for teaching intensive institutions than a research presentation which tells you nothing about the candidates approach to teaching. I actually don’t expect the teaching demo to be that good; developing good teaching simply isn’t the main thrust of the vast majority of grad programs. It does tell me how they approach teaching, however. I also make a point to discuss the demo with them afterward and give them feedback about it. It becomes a learning experience for them, and it also tells me about their openess to feedback and their interest in teaching. What I’m looking for is someone who has good teaching “instincts”; are they committed to student learning and do they understand how challenging it is to teach well? Is this someone I can help to develop into a good teacher? So I think you have to look beyond the demo itself to see what it says about the candidate.
v8573254

David – I am not going to approach your question specifically — my guess is that the demonstration class is mostly okay — but I appreciate so much your generosity in sharing your experience, misgivings and vulnerability for us to approve, attack and ambivolate. (If that’s not a word, maybe it should be; especially, when one works for “a” words in a series.)
tjbloom

The start of every semester has us in front of a group of new students, not knowing the students individually or as a group. While I have a certain level of confidence after having taught for a number of years that helps me get my relationship with the class started reasonably quickly, I still have to establish the rapport in the first few days of class. A demo lecture can show what steps a candidate takes to get to know students as well as to let them know her. The search committee may not get to see the flawless interaction of a teacher and a class with a well-established relationship in the middle of a semester, but they do get to see what the candidate thinks is the way to begin that relationship.
cmcclain

One solution would be for interviewer(s) to travel to the candidate’s institution and watch them teach their own class midsemester. Of course, this costs more travel money, and is not applicable if the applicant is not currently teaching.

Another solution is to allow the applicant to submit a digital video of a class session with their other application materials. A creative individual will find ways for filming to capture other activity besides lecture. Then the video submission can be considered along side the on campus teaching demo.

Perhaps a good start is to merely circulate this idea among readers/applicants so that they can prepare in advance and suggest it to their interviewers. If you, as an employer, received a note from an applicant that said, “I am happy to give a teaching demonstration, but may I also submit a digital video of a previously recorded class session?” would you decline?
ikd82

I’ve had two problems with teaching demonstrations:

1. My feeling was the demonstration was slanted toward a lecture. Considering some in the audience had few common touchstones (no reading, no homework) and some faculty members in the audience were from other departments, so I couldn’t assume common knowledge. The short time-limit often means it’s difficult to do an activity or give group-work. This means the demonstration favors dynamic lecturers more than good teachers.

2. Sometimes faculty take the time to gab, resist participation, or grade/text. I understand the “force the candidate to deal with a difficult student” philosophy, but this doesn’t work in an interview context. For all I know, faculty might not be misbehaving for the purposes of my interview and are rude. If they are, an interview is so nerve-wracking that adding even more stress isn’t helpful.
baatap

I can remember painfully my second teaching demo. I was told before the demo that the institution only brings in one candidate at a time; in other words, the job was mine to lose. The interviews went great. Chit-chat at breakfast was fine. I smiled a lot. They found me witty and charming. Then, as we got up to exit the breakfast table to make our way to the demo, someone turned and asked, “So, what will you be teaching us about _The Sound and the Fury_ today?” I snickered at the joke, for I had been told to prepare a lecture on _As I Lay Dying_. Needless to say, it was a 40-minute nosedive. (I still refer to it as the _As I Died Teachng_ demo.) I did not get the job. Utter humiliation. It shook my confidence to the foundations, and I still think there must be a better way to evaluate a teacher’s abilities. I have gone on to some success as a teacher, and I never doubted that it was my (one) talent. But even with the misunderstanding made known, the method of choosing a new faculty member required that I not get the job. So, all this to say, I have a hard time accepting the conclusion that “a wonderful teacher will find a way to shine, and someone who really doesn’t have the knack will almost certainly be exposed.”
meldenius

The teaching demo should only be used as corroboration of existing course evaluations if there is already a teaching record. For rookies, the demo is probably unfairly weighted, but there probably isn’t a way around it. That said, the demo was an invaluable tool in my first year to show me, as a candidate, that I needed some training in pedagogy. Some institutions tend to develop a sense of what they are looking for and are not always unduly swayed by either a stellar performance or a particularly nervous one.
vlghess

At a smaller teaching institution, your longevity also gives you a reputation. You’re not starting from Ground 0, even with first year students. Yes, you still have to build relationship, but students have some idea of what to expect. And you have an idea of the general student culture, the types of students likely to take a particular class in your discipline, etc.