New bill stirs up debate over classroom lecture recording

The bill would override a UM System executive order established last month.

By Sam Rourke

Published Jan. 24, 2012

Last month, students at MU received an email with an executive order outlining new rules regarding the recording of classroom lectures. The executive order may be short-lived if a new bill, sponsored by Rep. Paul Curtman, R-Pacific, is approved.

The executive order from interim UM System President Steve Owens stated that students are only allowed to share audio or video recordings of a class with fellow classmates. Any outside sharing currently requires permission from the faculty member and any students recorded.

The executive order was enacted by the UM System in response to edited lecture videos by students at UM-Kansas City and UM-St. Louis to make it look like the instructors were advocating violence, according to the Columbia Daily Tribune. The instructors were later cleared of wrongdoing.

Curtman said some students in his district from the UMSL were concerned with the restrictions and brought the issue to his attention. He agreed to sponsor a bill that would allow students to record lectures and share them freely.

“It’s my understanding this new policy the school has instituted, students can’t record at all,” Curtman said. “This bill is to permit the rights of students to record for their lectures and classes, so they can use those recordings to study for their personal use.”

MU associate journalism professor Charles Davis said he supports the new bill. He said the executive order was a response that far outweighs the problem.

“I think this will return us back to the status quo, in which a student who is paying tuition to attend a taxpayer-funded institution of higher learning is free to videotape anything that takes place in their own classroom and use it any way they see fit, provided they’re not building a business,” Davis said.

Davis said when newsworthy events happen in a classroom, such as allegations of unprofessional conduct during a heated political debate, that information should be distributed.

“I think there is more benefit in that being captured and recorded and passed around in a news ecosystem than there is in forbidding it from being recorded in the first place,” Davis said.

The bill would not override policies protecting copyright or trademark laws, according to the bill.

“There shouldn’t be any problem with the violation of intellectual property rights or copyright laws or anything of that nature,” Curtman said.

Freshman Erin Burris said she agrees with the current policy that students should only be allowed to share recorded info with classmates.

“You’re paying for the class,” Burris said. “If the school looks at it from a business standpoint, you shouldn’t be able to share with someone not enrolled in the class.”

Curtman said you can already copy down class information through note taking, but that recording is just another tool for students.

“Being able to have the ability to record so you can go back and look at the material the professor is talking about, there can be a lot of value in that,” Curtman said. “Personally, I don’t think that it is probably in the best interest of the students to prohibit them from using tools that will help them study.”

Davis said the current executive order also presents some First Amendment issues.

He said the courts have repeatedly been clear that you have a right, as long as you are not breaking laws in obtaining information, to freely use that information any way you see fit.

Curtman said the bill isn’t one of his top priorities, but he said as a representative he felt the concern of his constituents was worth backing.

A representative from the UM System could not be reached for comment on this story.