4 ms·

"traditional lectures work poorly, even when they are well done and well liked" Just reflect for a moment on this general statement. You are saying traditional

"traditional lectures work poorly, even when they are well done and well liked" Just reflect for a moment on this general statement. You are saying traditional lectures -- a format used for millennia in education of every professional and technical class of society across multiple continents -- "work poorly". And, we are meant to believe that "active learning" -- a new teaching style that throws away the lecture entirely and replaces it with group participation from students -- is, on the average, better. Now imagine if I said this... "deep reading of books written by leaders in their field/discipline, even when those books are well-liked, work poorly." How credible a claim could someone then make that "active reading" -- a new teaching style where we eschew books altogether and instead write and read material generated by students themselves -- is, on the average, better? Especially if in the classrooms where my hypothetical "active reading" is deployed, the students secretly buy well-written books, read them, and pass the tests just as well?

yorwba 9y ago
Why are you assuming that today's traditional lectures are exactly like the lectures that have been held thousands of years ago? Most disciplines have never needed lots of theoretical preparation before someone could be put to work, so lectures weren't even necessary. The master could just show the apprentice how his apprentice how he does something, and then let him practice for a few hours. The more theoretical fields probably started with small groups of wealthy people, which allowed much more direct interaction with the teacher. And what I have read from ancient Greek philosophers almost always involves some kind of dialogue between teacher and students. I can't really imagine aristocrats quietly listening to a lecturer anyway. The first lectures to a large audience in an amphitheater were probably public dissections, and even there the medical students had plenty of opportunity to do the cutting themselves, under the direction of the lecturer. The current "traditional" style of non-interactive lectures is probably actually very recent; together with the emergence of mass-education. Your "active reading" sounds very much like the descriptions I have read of writing circles in creative writing, where students read each other's work and discuss how to improve it. It seems to work fairly well for them. Of course everyone still reads other books, but that they can do alone, while "active reading" can only be done together. What this means for active learning is that when classroom presence is used for interaction with other students and the teacher, while students who need lectures watch them on their own, this is no indication of failure, but the system working as intended. (Except having to pay for lecture videos. Those should be free.) The whole point of being in the same room is the possibility of interaction. If the lecturer is just going to rattle off their script while flipping through the slides, I would rather watch that on video where I can set 2x speed until the hard part starts.
- timthorn 9y ago
  Cambridge and oxford use a mix of lectures and supervision/tutorials - it's not a new thing: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutorial_system https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutorial_system
jacobolus 9y ago
> format used for millennia in education of every professional and technical class of society across multiple continents This is a very misleading summary. The most dominant format for millennia across continents etc. is apprenticeship and direct tutorial (sometimes called “coaching” or the like). Even today serious high-level professional training is done by such means. Lecture is a low-quality substitute which people turn to when the number of students vastly outstrips the number of teachers, and the teachers can’t afford the time and attention to work directly with the students in small groups. In universities, early introductory courses get stuck with lectures so that scholars can focus their direct instruction time on graduate students who are serious about becoming scholars themselves.
tgb 9y ago
This is not a reflection of how the term "active learning" is used at my university. The students don't like it, but it's the following: the students watch videos of lectures, then during "lecture" time, they work on worksheets and problems provided by the instructors while the instructor and the TAs walk around and assist them. It's not students lecturing to each other. Maybe there are places where that happens and is called "active learning", but I don't think it's the standard.

yorwba 9y ago

Why are you assuming that today's traditional lectures are exactly like the lectures that have been held thousands of years ago? Most disciplines have never needed lots of theoretical preparation before someone could be put to work, so lectures weren't even necessary. The master could just show the apprentice how his apprentice how he does something, and then let him practice for a few hours. The more theoretical fields probably started with small groups of wealthy people, which allowed much more direct interaction with the teacher. And what I have read from ancient Greek philosophers almost always involves some kind of dialogue between teacher and students. I can't really imagine aristocrats quietly listening to a lecturer anyway. The first lectures to a large audience in an amphitheater were probably public dissections, and even there the medical students had plenty of opportunity to do the cutting themselves, under the direction of the lecturer. The current "traditional" style of non-interactive lectures is probably actually very recent; together with the emergence of mass-education. Your "active reading" sounds very much like the descriptions I have read of writing circles in creative writing, where students read each other's work and discuss how to improve it. It seems to work fairly well for them. Of course everyone still reads other books, but that they can do alone, while "active reading" can only be done together. What this means for active learning is that when classroom presence is used for interaction with other students and the teacher, while students who need lectures watch them on their own, this is no indication of failure, but the system working as intended. (Except having to pay for lecture videos. Those should be free.) The whole point of being in the same room is the possibility of interaction. If the lecturer is just going to rattle off their script while flipping through the slides, I would rather watch that on video where I can set 2x speed until the hard part starts.

timthorn 9y ago
Cambridge and oxford use a mix of lectures and supervision/tutorials - it's not a new thing: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutorial_system https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutorial_system

jacobolus 9y ago

> format used for millennia in education of every professional and technical class of society across multiple continents This is a very misleading summary. The most dominant format for millennia across continents etc. is apprenticeship and direct tutorial (sometimes called “coaching” or the like). Even today serious high-level professional training is done by such means. Lecture is a low-quality substitute which people turn to when the number of students vastly outstrips the number of teachers, and the teachers can’t afford the time and attention to work directly with the students in small groups. In universities, early introductory courses get stuck with lectures so that scholars can focus their direct instruction time on graduate students who are serious about becoming scholars themselves.

tgb 9y ago

This is not a reflection of how the term "active learning" is used at my university. The students don't like it, but it's the following: the students watch videos of lectures, then during "lecture" time, they work on worksheets and problems provided by the instructors while the instructor and the TAs walk around and assist them. It's not students lecturing to each other. Maybe there are places where that happens and is called "active learning", but I don't think it's the standard.