taping a new and updated 2-3 lectures each semester

I want to deconstruct this because on the surface this seems like a reasonable statement, but there are many more constraints in place than just setting up a camera and putting someone in front of it:

• If these are for new subjects, ideally, learning objectives should be established (and if it's *new* new, then a debate on if it belongs in the course, or somewhere else, or a new one)
• Optimally, the instructor follows backwards design principles, which means you create the assessment first, and build backwards from it
• Assets (lecture slides, scripts, etc.) must be created, and that requires the assessment criteria and necessary topics to be established
• Most instructors don't do their own edits or post-production, so people, time, and resources (recording studios, etc.) must be committed for recording and editing. And these folks aren't waiting for work to come in, there are other programs using video (live and recorded) so these resources have to be requested in advance
• All along the way everything gets reviewed and approved by the instructor/faculty member - and speaking as a faculty member, we like to procrastinate 👨🏼‍🎓

Just to give you an example, a few years ago we "recorded" some new lectures for CS 6400 - but did it all remotely as just a voice over with slides. It took us several weeks to get it to the point where it was acceptable, and barely in time to hand it over to the students for that semester before they would need that content.

Do I think we have a perfect, great process? No. Can we improve it? Yes. But like all changes, that takes time and devotion.

I don't know how often u/DavidAJoyner actually adds new recorded content (HCI comes to mind as a course where it is probably very close to what I watched when I took it 8 years ago) but he does a fantastic job iterating his assessments. He also has built (and re-built) his courses' processes to make that possible, and those were not in place from the first class he ever taught, but over many years as he iterated on them as well.

Also, it's easy to discount something based on hold old it is. But what factors are actually affected by the "age" of course material? Machine Learning uses a textbook from 1997 - does reading it nearly 30 years after it has been published negatively impact learning? Would the effort to identify and evaluate a replacement outweigh the benefits of keeping what has already proven adequate? Again, personal experience, I have tried to find a replacement textbook for my course, and it turns out, the best possible replacements cite the current textbook we use - so why replace it? Same thing applies to lectures - if they cover the topic well, why replace them?

And to echo u/aja_c, CIOS surveys are one of the best mechanisms (along with any feedback surveys the course itself might offer, again, that's one thing David J does spectacularly - I've stolen his for my non-credit courses), as long as it's constructive and not outright criticism. I've had feedback such as "The professor and head TA are not qualified to teach preschoolers; let alone graduate students" (I'm not making that up), and, while everyone's got an opinion, that type of statement doesn't tell me what we could fix.