Should TED talks be teaching us something?

The nonprofit phenomenon “TED,” the brand name for the concepts of Technology Education and Design, was born in 1984. It launched into pop culture stardom in 2006 when the organization’s curators began offering short, free, unrestricted, and educational video segments. Known as “TEDTalks,” these informational segments are designed to be no longer than 18 minutes in length and provide succinct, targeted enlightenment on various topics or ideas that are deemed “worth spreading.” TED Talks, often delivered in sophisticated studios with trendy backdrops, follow a format that focuses learners on the presenter and limited, extremely purposeful visual aids. Topics range from global warming to running to the developing world. Popular TED Talks, such as Sir Ken Robinson’s “Schools Kill Creatively” or Dan Gilbert’s “Why Are We Happy?” can easily garner well over a million views. TED Talks are a curious phenomenon for educators to observe. They are in many ways the antithesis of traditional lectures, which are typically 60-120 minutes in length and delivered in cavernous halls by faculty members engaged in everyday academic lives. Perhaps the formality of the lecture is the biggest superficial difference in comparison to casual TEDTalks (Table 1). However, TED Talks are not as unstructured as they may appear. Presenters are well coached and instructed to follow a specific presentation formula, whichmaximizes storyboarding and highlights passion for the subject. While learning is not formally assessed, TED Talks do seem to accomplish their goals of spreading ideas while sparking curiosity within the learner. The fact that some presentations have been viewed more than 16 million times points to the effectiveness of the platform in at least reaching learners and stimulating a desire to click, listen, and learn.Moreover, the TEDTalks website is the fourth most popular technology website and the single most popular conference and events website in the world. The TED phenomenon may have both direct and subliminal messages for academia. Perhaps an initial question to ponder is whether the TED phenomenon is a logical grassroots educational evolution or a reaction to the digital generation and their preference for learning that occurs “wherever, whenever.” The diverse cross-section of TED devotees ranging in background and age would seem to provide evidence that the platform does not solely appeal to younger generations of learners. Instead, it suggests that adult learners are either more drawn to digital learning than they think they are or than they are likely to admit. The perceived efficacy of TED once again calls into question the continued reliance of academia on the lecture as the primary currency of learning. TED Talks do not convey large chunks of information but rather present grander ideas. Would TED-like educational modules or blocks of 18-20 minutes be more likely to pique student curiosity across a variety of pharmacy topics, maintain attention span, and improve retention? Many faculty members who are recognized as outstanding teachers or lecturers might confess that they already teach through a TED-like lens. Collaterally, TED Talks or TED-formatted learning experiences might be ideal springboards for incorporation into inverted or flipped classroom environments where information is gathered and learned at home, while ideas are analyzed, debated, and assimilated within the classroom. Unarguably, TED Talks have given scientists and other researchers a real-time, mass media driven opportunity to disseminate their research, ideas, and theories that might otherwise have gone unnoticed. Similar platforms or approaches may be able to provide opportunities for the academy to further transmit research to the general public. The TED approach to idea dissemination is not without its critics. Several authors have criticized TED for flattening or dumbing down ideas so they fit into a preconceived, convenient format that is primarily designed to entertain. Consequently, the oversimplified ideas and conceptsmay provoke little effort from the learner to analyze data, theory, or controversy. Some Corresponding Author: Frank Romanelli, PharmD, MPH, 789 South Limestone Road, University of Kentucky College of Pharmacy, Lexington, KY 40536.  78 (6) Article 113.