Category Archives: Communication

334. Making video lectures

Universities around the world have moved to online teaching in response to Covid-19. Many university teachers who have done little or no online teaching are having to upskill rapidly. Here, I share my three top tips for making effective video lectures. 

Pre-recording lectures is not the only option for online teaching, but it’s a good option in some cases. My first major experience of this was making a MOOC (a free online course on Agriculture, Economics and Nature) back in 2015. I read a lot at the time about how to make a good online course, and it paid off as we’ve had around 20,000 people enrol in the course, with overwhelmingly positive feeback.

After that, with my co-teacher Ben White, we decided to convert the lectures for our first-year environmental economics course to pre-recorded videos. We found that the great majority of students were not attending lectures anyway, just watching the videos of the slides (plus audio) that were are recorded automatically. We were sure we could produce videos that would be far better for the students than those lecture-capture videos.

It was quite a bit of work, but I feel it has been worth it. The student-survey scores for the online version of our course have consistently been high.

So what would I advise to somebody who is now getting into pre-recording their lectures?

1. Break the lecture into multiple short videos

This is so important that I was tempted to do the cliched thing and include it as my tip 1, tip 2 and tip 3. The capacity to break the lectures into multiple mini lectures that the students can watch at the speed they choose is a big advantage over a traditional stand-and-deliver lecture. It would seem quite odd to stop a 45-minute face-to-face lecture 5 or 6 times to re-boot the audience’s attention, but it is highly acceptable in a pre-recorded video format.

I include a little piece of music at the start of each lecture part, which provides an additional signal to students that they need to re-engage their attention. At the end of each part I also ask a question to get them to think about what they’ve just heard.

When I’ve asked students how they watch the videos in our unit, most of them say they watch all the videos for one lecture topic one after another, but they still are very positive about the way it is broken into mini-lectures. The fact that there is a question, then a new video starts, then there is music, helps them to keep engaged for longer.

My feeling is that this is likely to be exceptionally important in the current situation, where students are getting all their lectures by staring at a screen. If we just present them with a series of normal-length lectures, it’s soon going to be incredibly difficult for the students to stay awake.

 

2. Use an external microphone

If you use the built-in microphone in your computer to record your lecture, it will probably sound boomy, echo-y and hollow. In bad cases, it may even be difficult for the students to understand you. Using an external microphone that is located close to your mouth can make a huge difference to the listening experience of your students. It doesn’t even have to be a great quality microphone to make a difference. Even a pretty cheap headset with a microphone will probably be much better than the computer’s microphone. But there are lots of better quality USB microphones available if you are keen. Personally, I use this.

The other thing you can do to further improve sound quality is to record in a room without too many hard surfaces. Carpet, curtains, soft furniture, table cloths, wall hangings, etc. can all help.

3. Moderate your pace, explain well, give examples and tell stories

Cheating a bit here: four tips in one. A disadvantage of pre-recording lectures is that you can’t see the faces of your students, so you may fail to realise that you are moving through material too quickly, you are not explaining it well enough, or you are getting too conceptual and failing to give examples. Given that a video is less personal than a face-to-face lecture, it may pay to make it more personal by including more stories and anecdotes.

The other thing I’ve usually done to make it personal is video myself speaking to the camera (which is just my iPhone) as I record the lecture. The video of me speaking is then displayed in the bottom right corner of the slide, and occupies about one-sixth of the screen space. I’m sure this makes a difference to the student experience, but it is somewhat more time consuming to create the videos, and if you are rushing to get prepared, it might be something you choose to explore later.

In case you are interested, I use Camtasia for all my recording of slides and my video editing. It’s a fantastic program.

I upload all my all my lecture videos onto YouTube as unlisted videos (so nobody can find them if I don’t provide the link) and I organise all the mini-lectures into the right sequence using the Playlist facility in YouTube.

p.s. Here is a new free book that many people might find useful: Take Control of Working from Home Temporarily

330. Adoption of agricultural innovations Special Issue

I’m the guest editor for a new Special Issue of the journal Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy. The theme of the issue is “Adoption of Agricultural Innovations” and it includes 11 papers by some of the world’s leading researchers on this topic.

There is an audio interview with me about the Special Issue available here.

The papers are intended to provide reviews or syntheses of key issues related to farmers’ adoption of new practices and technologies. Each paper focuses on a particular aspect of the literature, and the collection as a whole provides an excellent introduction to this enormous body of research.

A particularly nice feature is that all the papers in the issue are open access, meaning that anybody can read them without needing a subscription to the journal. You can access the issue here.

You can hear a brief interview with me providing background and an overview of the Special Issue. The interview is available as an episode of the AEPP Podcast.

Another one of the podcast episodes is another interview related to the Special Issue. In that one I interview Leah Palm-Forster about one of the papers that she and I helped to co-author, called “Agricultural Adoption and Behavioral Economics: Bridging the Gap”. In that paper we talk about the similarities and differences between those two related bodies of research literature, and about possible connections that could be made between them.

Further reading

Here’s a list of all the articles in the issue.

Pannell, D.J. and Zilberman, D. 2020. Understanding adoption of innovations and behavior change to improve agricultural policy. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 42(1), 3-7.

Norton, G.W. and J. Alwang. 2020. Changes in Agricultural Extension and Implications for Farmer Adoption of New Practices. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 42(1), 8-20.

Heiman, A., Ferguson, J. and D. Zilberman. 2020. Marketing and Technology Adoption. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 42(1), 21-30.

Pannell, D.J. and R. Claassen. 2020. The Roles of Adoption and Behavior Change in Agricultural Policy. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 42(1), 31-41.

Chavas, J.-P. and C. Nauges. 2020. Uncertainty, Learning and Technology Adoption in Agriculture. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 42(1), 42-53.

Streletskaya, N.A., S.D. Bell, M. Kecinski, T. Li, S. Banerjee, L.H. Palm-Forster, and D.J. Pannell. 2020. Agriculture Adoption and Behavioral Economics: Bridging the Gap. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 42(1), 54-66.

Weersink, A. and M. Fulton. 2020. Limits to Profit Maximization as a Guide to Behavior Change. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 42(1), 67-79.

Montes de Oca Munguia, O. and Llewellyn, R. 2020. The Adopters Versus The Technology: Which Matters More When Predicting or Explaining Adoption? Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 42(1), 80-91.

Huffman, W.E. 2020. Human Capital and Adoption of Innovations: Policy Implications. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 42(1), 92-99.

Llewellyn, R. and B. Brown. 2020. Predicting adoption of innovations by farmers: how is it different in smallholder agriculture? Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 42(1), 100-112.

Rola-Rubzen, F., T.R. Paris, J. Hawkins and B. Sapkota. 2020. Improving Gender Participation in Agricultural Technology Adoption in Asia: From Rhetoric to Practical Action. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 42(1), 113-125.

326. 60-second videos about our research

My School at the University of Western Australia is having a competition amongst staff and students to produce a 60-second video that says something interesting and engaging about our research.

I’ve put in two entries. The first one, about farmer adaptation to climate change, is the fun one.

The second one, about water pollution, is more traditional, but I hope it’s still interesting.

I’m also included in a third really creative entry that was put together by Maksym Polyakov.

Wish us luck. The winner will be announced in December.

Further reading

Thamo, T., Addai, D., Kragt, M.E., Kingwell, R., Pannell, D.J., and Robertson, M.J. (2019). Climate change reduces the mitigation obtainable from sequestration in an Australian farming system, Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics (forthcoming). Journal web site

Thamo, T., Addai, D., Pannell, D.J., Robertson, M.J., Thomas, D.T. & Young, J.M. (2017). Climate change impacts and farm-level adaptation: Economic analysis of a mixed cropping–livestock system, Agricultural Systems 150, 99-108. Journal web page * IDEAS page

Pannell, D.J. (2017). Economic perspectives on nitrogen in farming systems: managing trade-offs between production, risk and the environment, Soil Research 55, 473-478. Journal web site

Rogers, A.A., Burton, M.P., Cleland, J.A., Rolfe, J., Meeuwig, J.J. & Pannell, D.J. (2017). Expert judgements and public values: preference heterogeneity for protecting ecology in the Swan River, Western Australia, Working Papers 254025, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics. IDEAS page

321 – Communicating economics to policy makers

When it comes to communicating research results to policy makers, economists have some advantages over other disciplines. But economists commonly make a range of mistakes when trying to communicate to policy makers.

Included amongst the advantages that economists have are that economics can be used to clarify the pro’s and cons of different decision options, and this is exactly what policy makers need in many cases.

Secondly, a good economic analysis is holistic, bringing together all, or at least most, of the relevant elements, including social, biological, physical, financial, behavioural elements, accounting for risk and uncertainty.

Thirdly, economics tries to assess outcomes from the perspective of society as a whole, rather than a particular interest group, so it can be seen as more balanced and independent than some other disciplines.

On the other hand, economists often squander these advantages by making basic communication mistakes. Too often they fail to cut out the technical jargon that is meaningless and perhaps annoying to their audience. They focus too much on abstruse technical details of their analysis, rather than focusing on why it is important and what the results mean. They explain things in abstract, conceptual terms, rather than giving examples and telling stories to make things tangible and real. In short, they are often not tuned into, or don’t understand, the perceptions and needs of their policy-maker audience.

In July I attended the annual meeting of the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, in Atlanta, Georgia. One of the highlights for me was the presidential address by new president Keith Coble from Mississippi State University. His address was on “Relevant and/or Elegant Economics”, but mainly on making sure economics is relevant. I got a nice surprise when, about half way through the talk, he started talking positively about an old paper of mine on communicating economics to policy makers (Pannell 2004).

In that paper, I reported results from a small survey, including responses from economists who work in the policy world, senior bureaucrats, past or present politicians and a former ministerial adviser.

The most strongly emphasised advice provided by these people was to understand the policy maker’s situation and perspective.

Other messages included to be practical and pragmatic, to be persistent, to understand the importance of timing, to establish networks in order to build support, to not tell your target audience that they are wrong, and to keep your communication brief and clear.

There are many other useful pieces of advice in the Pannell (2004) paper, so have a read.

Further reading

Pannell, D.J. (2004). Effectively communicating economics to policy makers. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 48(3), 535-555. AgEcon SearchJournal web page * IDEAS page

Gibson, F.L., Rogers, A.A., Smith, A.D.M., Roberts, A., Possingham, H., McCarthy, M. and Pannell, D.J., (2017). Factors influencing the use of decision support tools in the development and design of conservation policy, Environmental Science and Policy 70(1): 1-8. Journal web page * Pre-publication version * IDEAS page

313 – Joining the dots versus growing the blobs

For the recent AARES conference in Adelaide, Maksym Polyakov did a wonderfully creative poster presenting our research on optimal targeting of ecological restoration.

There is a small image of the poster below, but if you want to see the details, go here. (Scroll down when you get there to see the poster.)

Not surprisingly, it won the prize for the best poster at the conference.

Abstract

The primary causes of biodiversity decline worldwide are habitat destruction, alteration and fragmentation resulting from human economic activities such as agriculture or property development. Public- and private-sector organizations allocate considerable resources to slow down biodiversity decline by developing conservation networks that preserve the remaining habitat. In this study we use simulation to compare several strategies to spatially target ecological restoration effort to create conservation networks, on private lands in a fragmented agricultural landscape. The evaluated targeting strategies are aggregation, connectivity and representativeness. The effectiveness of these targeting strategies is compared to the effectiveness of ecological restoration without targeting. We allow for heterogeneity of landowners’ willingness to participate in restoration projects and explicitly assume that that not all parcels within target areas will be restored. We model the probability of participation in restoration projects as a function of the private benefits of ecological restoration captured by the landowner. The results of the simulation are analyzed using regression analysis. Our results suggest that effectiveness of the targeting strategies depends on landscape characteristics (level of fragmentation) and species characteristics (habitat requirements and area of home range). On average, when uncertainty about whether landowners will participate is considered, for most analyzed species, the aggregation strategy outperforms the connectivity strategy with the representativeness strategy performing worst. This is contrary to the findings of previous studies and Government policy, that connectivity is the most effective strategy in fragmented landscapes. Accounting for the landowners’ behavior through a private benefits function improves the biodiversity outcome for most species.