Is it ethical to share the knowledge for free that I've learned at the university?

Question

I can see an enormous amount of videos on Youtube about helping to learn high-level knowledge that is usually taught at universities. Even though I'm only at the beginning of the time I'm going to take at the university before graduating, I have a desire to teach what I've learnt to others - for free, through the internet.

I believe that knowledge is global and free; however, I think sharing my knowledge wouldn't be fair for my teachers, or any other university teachers and professors.

Is sharing this knowledge fair - or ethical?

Answer 1

I do not see that sharing your knowledge would in any way be a problem per se. What could become a problem is if you also share copyright-protected materials. It is virtually impossible to list what might or might not be such materials but to take other persons presentations, images, data and then sharing it would be clearly illegal (and unethical) unless they are provided with a "license" stating they are free. If you take the knowledge you gather and then put it together somehow (including making your own presentations on your own material), it should not be such a problem. In any circumstance where you want to use other peoples materials, it is always best to ask for permission. Not only does it save you possible future problems, you may find friends in the process. Watch out for materials published by commercial interests and use open source material (but do give credit to those who made it - attribution is required by licenses like CC-BY-SA and it is also a nice gesture to acknowledge the work and time by the original authors). Much material is given out for public (but not commercial) use.

A final advise, attach an open source license to your materials. I am not fully aware what licenses may apply but am sure many has good suggestions for you (check Academia.sx or ask another question on that).

So to sum up. I think it is a nice idea and perfectly fine, but be aware that you must be 100% sure you do not publish materials so that you break copyrights or abuse licenses (protect the open source practises).

Answer 2

I believe that knowledge is global and free

That is essentially academia in a nutshell. ;-)

I believe – strongly – that anything that runs counter this freedom also fundamentally runs counter academia, and humanity’s best interest (or, economically, the country’s best interest).

From a more legal perspective, (University) teachers are paid for teaching, not for the knowledge they posses. So you are fine, as long as you don’t disseminate copyrighted material.

This used to be different, when much knowledge was coveted, closely guarded and only handed down from teachers to their apprentices, under an agreement of privacy (see for instance the Hippocratic Oath, which regulates this, among other things).

Nowadays, knowledge cannot generally be privatised. Instead, we have the concepts of copyright and patents, but neither prevents the dissemination of knowledge. Exceptions only exist in certain circumstances, e.g. for a method that is currently being developed, where you may be asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement; for classified governmental documents, dissemination of which may make you liable to prosecution, and the publication of know-how that falls under weapons regulations.

Answer 3

I think I understand the point: you spent $50,000 (or whatever) on college, and you worry that if you teach others for free, you are depriving someone else of income.

Simply put, it doesn't matter. People don't go to college to learn things. They go to college to get a piece of paper that says they learned things so that they can get a job in their chosen career.

Anyone can learn libraries, the Internet, and their own research. When I went to college to get my Computer Science degree, a good 90% of what I was taught was stuff I already knew. So why did I go to college? To get the paper that says I know how to do what I already knew how to do.

Yes, it's true that people actually do learn things in college. However, people pay for college because a degree makes them more employable. That's not something you can deliver through YouTube, and so your free education efforts will not replace the college system and will not put college professors out of work.

Answer 4

You are paying the university for instruction and access to materials and facilities not available to the general public, not knowledge. As long as you are not violating any confidentiality agreements, copyrights, etc., you are not doing anything wrong from a legal standpoint. From an ethical standpoint, I think you would better support an educational institution's mission to make the world better by sharing your knowledge than by keeping it to yourself.

Answer 5

I'm a university professor who puts lots and lots of time into developing course materials and trying to figure out better ways to explain ideas to my students. Other answers seem to cover the point that you should be careful about redistributing the materials from a course.

I would like to recommend that you contact the professor who taught you the course and tell him/her of your plans. I would be very glad to hear that my course motivated one of my students to want to teach the material to others. In fact, if the student does a very good job, I might want to see about using the videos/explanations/examples in my own course or at least pointing future students towards the videos.

Answer 6

What you have learned in the Academia is your knowledge, and you can do whatever is pleases you.

The material that you had access in the academia is copyright of the producer, except for those that were blessed with some form of copyleft. So, unless you have some authorization, you cannot use it, in some countries. (For example, in some countries you can reproduce part of some material, for learning purposes, given that all credits are given to the proper authors, and so on. Example: reproduce some piece of some article to analyze it and study it with some students).

In some countries it's possible to have a patent on a idea, and so some ideas might be patented, and that patent might or might not be valid in your country.

And, finally, it's possible that you signed some non-disclosure agreement, and then what you learned that's covered by that contract might not be transmissible to someone else.

Answer 7

I disagree with some of the answers, only when asserting that you are primarily paying for instruction and materials. Typically, you are paying for a document that states you understand a specific subject, often with the intent of proving to a future employer that you understand said subject. Your school is responsible for helping you to pass the required exams to demonstrate this understanding, which in part involves access to instructors and materials to help you learn. A school that consistently fails to produce document holding students will not be a strong school for long.

Watching YouTube videos will not give you a document, so while you may have gained the instruction and materials for free, you still lack the main reason people attend higher education -- paperwork. Producing a list of your recently watched videos will also do little to entice future employers.

Unless you're directly releasing information that was obtained as part of a research project through the facility itself or (as stated previously) copyright materials, without permission, it's doubtful you are conflicting with the interests of the school. In fact you may encourage people who get interested in a subject to sign up at your institution, and be good for business. (MIT did quite a bit online for free)

When in doubt, get permission. This IS your future at stake.

Not to discount self learning, you could learn the equivalent of a doctor as far as I'm concerned, if you were driven enough, and bright enough, by simply reading publicly available information. However I won't know if you were driven or bright enough, so I'll stick to people that proved it on an exam -- for now.