3 ms·
This is certainly in line with everything that's come out of physics education research over the past few decades. (I'm a physics prof, and I try to pay attenti
by Steuard 11y ago
This is certainly in line with everything that's come out of physics education research over the past few decades. (I'm a physics prof, and I try to pay attention to this stuff.) Passively sitting back and listening to lectures can actively hurt student learning (if you ask students how confident they are in their knowledge of physics right before a lecture-style class and then again immediately after, it gets worse). In a head-to-head comparison of exam results between one section of a class taught by an award-winning lecturer and another taught by two first-year grad student TAs trained in active learning techniques, the active learning students won by a mile.
- kuschku 11y agoIt’s even worse in high school and middle school, because students creativity, interest, and ability to understand are severely hurt from just sitting back 7 hours a day and memorizing everything they hear. In university, we always have for each course each a lecture (which is pure "listen and learn") and a lab (where we have to do things ourselves in groups, show the others our results, solve things together, etc.). A lab and lecture for each course, 4 courses per semester. And it’s a pretty good combination, we get experience with practical stuff, and can learn better, but we also get to hear specific details in the lecture we might have missed if we had only done the lab stuff. As far as I know, this education is standard here in northern Europe, and has been for as far as I can remember – but then again, I’m only 19 :D