3 ms·

> Teachers who don't engage students -- and lecturing will rarely engage anyone -- are the problem ... If you didn't engage the students, no amount of banning t

by iak8god 12y ago

> Teachers who don't engage students -- and lecturing will rarely engage anyone -- are the problem ... If you didn't engage the students, no amount of banning things they care about more than you droning on in front of them will make them care. University students who have no interest in a course's material have no business being enrolled in that course. These are adults who are there voluntarily, and should be expected to participate in their own education without instructors jumping through hoops to engage them. A lecture is an opportunity for students to hear from an expert about a topic that should be of interest to them. Of course teachers should strive to present information in a way that's accessible and captivating, but even the driest lecture is no excuse to space out. It is not really feasible to compete for students' attention with the information equivalent of junk food while presenting and explaining serious, in-depth material.

xemoka 12y ago
I entirely disagree. You cannot put all the onus on the students when departments and degrees require classes that hold no interest to the pupil. Sure, I'll give you that this may apply for 4th (and perhaps 3rd) year classes and post grads. However, most entry level courses are mindless drivel and a complete waste of both the student's and instructor's time (English 100 anyone?), although are 'required' to continue on (or get that degree). Academia doesn't fit happily into your little box. The dryest lecture may not be an excuse to space out, but good luck. You may be the perfect pupil, attentive to every single word a lecturer says for 3 hours—most people though can't even listen and process past 45 minutes. I personally can listen for a while, but get bored... lectures rarely move fast enough for me and can rarely keep my attention unless actually stimulating. Academics is a two way street, both the pupil and instructor must participate in order for a successful transfer of knowledge. How many instructors have you had that teach their course right from a textbook without anything added? Lazy instructors create lazy and bored students.

by iak8god 12y ago

xemoka 12y ago

I entirely disagree. You cannot put all the onus on the students when departments and degrees require classes that hold no interest to the pupil. Sure, I'll give you that this may apply for 4th (and perhaps 3rd) year classes and post grads. However, most entry level courses are mindless drivel and a complete waste of both the student's and instructor's time (English 100 anyone?), although are 'required' to continue on (or get that degree). Academia doesn't fit happily into your little box. The dryest lecture may not be an excuse to space out, but good luck. You may be the perfect pupil, attentive to every single word a lecturer says for 3 hours—most people though can't even listen and process past 45 minutes. I personally can listen for a while, but get bored... lectures rarely move fast enough for me and can rarely keep my attention unless actually stimulating. Academics is a two way street, both the pupil and instructor must participate in order for a successful transfer of knowledge. How many instructors have you had that teach their course right from a textbook without anything added? Lazy instructors create lazy and bored students.