As I’ve been thinking about
learning of late and trying to define my thoughts, a quote I readrecentlyhas stuck
with me.“Learning
is not a spectator sport. (Meier, 2013)”
Potentially the old
fashioned lecture is on its way out.I
feel face to face lecturing is important, but by marrying it with the
constructivist pedagogical emphasis of active learning we can enhance its effectiveness. Utecht (2012 )presents interesting thoughts on lectures which I have to
agree.By using it less for content
delivery, and more to inspire and push ideas.He has suggestions on making students seek the content.Really he’s making ‘pre-reading’ active and
collaborative.
Image fromSoft Star Research Inc
I think the benefit we have now
is how we consolidate that lecture and have the students actively engage with
the content. The ability to open up discussion forums, wiki or google doc for
groups to discuss or debate main points, to see what other people took away
from the lecture and maybe through that collaboration gain greater depth of
content knowledge by actively questioning what was presented.Yes this is what tutorials have offered
face-to-face.But now as our student
cohort are more ‘digital natives’ we can offer them that option of mobile
learning and flexibility.
The lecture as we know it is
dead was the topic of this blog entry.Ultimately I don’t agree. I don’t think lectures as such are the
problem, I think bad lectures are.And
that’s not new thinking.Maybe they shouldbe presented as aTEDtalk…condensed to 20 minutes (the length
Byner suggests is as useful as a 50 minute lecture)? What do you think?
Byner, C. L. (1995). Learning as a function of lecture length. Family Medicine. 1995 27(6):379-82
Hi Jenni, A thought provoking discussion about the lecture. Perhaps there is a confusion between lecture as a room, lecture as a timetable label, or lecture as a teaching approach. I think the word has a history of meaning "to lecture at" someone, "to deliver a lecture" - both suggest that someone is telling someone and the other is listening. Do we need to change the word? Or, as you say, make the timetable slot labelled 'lecture' an interactive session designed to engage students in thinking critically, and damn the word!?
Hi Jenni, A thought provoking discussion about the lecture. Perhaps there is a confusion between lecture as a room, lecture as a timetable label, or lecture as a teaching approach. I think the word has a history of meaning "to lecture at" someone, "to deliver a lecture" - both suggest that someone is telling someone and the other is listening. Do we need to change the word? Or, as you say, make the timetable slot labelled 'lecture' an interactive session designed to engage students in thinking critically, and damn the word!?
Hi Jenni, A thought provoking discussion about the lecture. Perhaps there is a confusion between lecture as a room, lecture as a timetable label, or lecture as a teaching approach. I think the word has a history of meaning "to lecture at" someone, "to deliver a lecture" - both suggest that someone is telling someone and the other is listening. Do we need to change the word? Or, as you say, make the timetable slot labelled 'lecture' an interactive session designed to engage students in thinking critically, and damn the word!?
ReplyDeleteHi Jenni, A thought provoking discussion about the lecture. Perhaps there is a confusion between lecture as a room, lecture as a timetable label, or lecture as a teaching approach. I think the word has a history of meaning "to lecture at" someone, "to deliver a lecture" - both suggest that someone is telling someone and the other is listening. Do we need to change the word? Or, as you say, make the timetable slot labelled 'lecture' an interactive session designed to engage students in thinking critically, and damn the word!?
ReplyDelete