Just looking at the top ranked video in the first result set you provide
below - the 'No Paradise without Banks' one - and using it as a test
case... searching Google for
University of Warwick No Paradise without Banks
(see
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=University+of+Warwick+No+Paradise+w
ithout+Banks&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi= )
Shows search results for the video as hosted in iTunes U (4th result)
but not for the version provided direct from the Warwick website (as far
as I can tell):
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/newsandevents/audio/video/?podcastItem=santand
erlecture.mp4
That might be because the metadata on that page is rather generic - or
perhaps Google is blocked from indexing that page? (Or perhaps I'm
missing something?).
Whatever... it does mean that you are (implicitly) encouraging use of
the iTunes U version (and therefore use of iTunes) rather than the
lighter-weight 'web' version.
I can understand that use of iTunes U encourages use and awareness of
resources by a new audience - which is a good thing. But I also wonder
if there are some potential downsides?
In general, surfacing stuff at multiple places on the Web (or in this
case at one place on the Web and one place half-off the Web) dilutes
some of the natural behaviour associated with the Web architecture,
people citing (or linking to) stuff consistently for example. So, do
people bookmark stuff consistently (in del.icio.us) given that multiple
versions are available? (I note that the "https://deimos.apple.com/..."
does seem to be bookmarkable though I'm not sure how intuitive it is to
use?). Syndicated solutions are indeed great, but they are better if
they don't end up assigning multiple URIs to the same thing.
I wonder if there are also be softer issues?
How consistently do lectures cite material for their students? Are
students getting different messages from different staff? Do lecturers
provide students with an iTunes U URL (e.g. in the VLE)? Do they have
to describe the process of going to iTunes U and searching for a
particular video? Do they have to cite everything twice? Do they, in
practice, only ever talk about the iTunes version? Does a consistency
of approach matter in this context?
Like Les, I must confess to being slightly sceptical about the growing
use of iTunes U, not because of the use of a 'commercial' provider
(though I think that is an issue, especially given Apple's generally
proprietorial attitude) but because the solution seems so anti-Web.
On the other hand, I suppose Apple have kinda won the 'ipod' war so
maybe it is acceptable to align the university so closely with one
particular platform?
If these issues seem somewhat iTunes U-specific and are therefore
perhaps not appropriate for this list I apologise? I raise them only
because it seems to me that some of them might also apply to other
'external' providers.
(Oh, and, yes... I own an iPhone :-) ).
Andy
________________________________
Andy Powell
Research Programme Director
Eduserv
[log in to unmask]
01225 474319 / 07989 476710
www.eduserv.org.uk
efoundations.typepad.com
twitter.com/andypowe11
-----Original Message-----
From: Repositories discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Davies
Sent: 05 August 2009 11:43
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Web 2.0 vs iTunes U ?
Just to underline what Jenny has already said from Warwick's
perspective, we don't see
iTunesU as an either/or choice, it's complementary to our own web
publishing strategy.
For example we have a companion site to our iTunesU site where you can
pick our all our
content via other routes:
http://itunes.warwick.ac.uk/
Apple does not require exclusivity when publishing content, and as other
posters have
pointed out the content is hosted on your own servers anyway. Having
content on iTunesU
allows us to reach audiences that we might not otherwise reach. And
there are plenty of
links back to our own web site, so iTunesU drives traffic to us. What
benefit that brings
remains to be seen, but raising our institution's profile
internationally, and publishing
great content are a couple of obvious benefits right now.
A disadvantage right now is the limited number of file types it
supports, essentially MP3,
MP4 and PDF. So lots of learning resources are out of scope.
By the way, content on iTunesU is discoverable via Google e.g:
http://snipurl.com/warwickitunesu
http://snipurl.com/abrahamsitunesu
Such Google searches don't display content in Google's video search for
example because
the file at the end of the link isn't a video, it's a link to a iTunesU
page, which is itself just
an RSS feed page. But the pages, it's content and metadata are all
discoverable by
Google. Think of iTunesU as just a smart RSS aggregator for these file
types. One of
many ways of aggregating resources. That's the great thing about
syndicating content.
Cheers,
David.
|