Wow. I've known all the things he said for a long, long time, but he put them together in a way that showed me I didn't really know them. Fantastic work. I've been having conversations with uni...
Wow. I've known all the things he said for a long, long time, but he put them together in a way that showed me I didn't really know them. Fantastic work.
I've been having conversations with uni colleagues lately where they tell me youtube-and-co videos will be what replaces lectures (flipped classrooms are great, but only about 10% of students will do the prep work that it requires). I am getting less and less sceptical, while there are plenty of garbage commercialised piece of shit videos out there every so often someone links me something like this. Shame I don't teach physics, but I'm 100% stealing the methods!
I've been a self-learner a long time by now. It all started when I decided learning programming back in 2012. From my experience, I should say that it is never as effective as learning face to...
I've been a self-learner a long time by now. It all started when I decided learning programming back in 2012. From my experience, I should say that it is never as effective as learning face to face, especially when you're a beginner. The sheer amount of stuff out there trying to grab your attention means that lots of effort has to go to finding good sources, and it is very easy to lose focus.
Lectures will probably stay, but these sort of media is a good way to communicate some kinds of information. Less complex, or simplified knowledge. With an intention to get people interested in things. But as it gets denser, it becomes less effective than text-and-figures. A good university lecture is more about the lecturer and the audience discussing anyways, and while there are comments, they are not live, and live chat is not good enough... (or maybe not there yet?)
Lectures are the poorest form of teaching (there are MANY other means of face to face communication that are better) - they are going, one way or another, the question is what will replace them.
Lectures are the poorest form of teaching (there are MANY other means of face to face communication that are better) - they are going, one way or another, the question is what will replace them.
When you learn face to face and let another person be the source of information, you are able to ask the "source" questions. And the "source" will be able to adapt to the needs of the one trying...
When you learn face to face and let another person be the source of information, you are able to ask the "source" questions. And the "source" will be able to adapt to the needs of the one trying to learn. The person/teacher is trained to relay the information, like an adaptable filter or something.
We don´t have enough of people acting as sources of information though, and we end up with lectures, which in term might erase some of the benefits like the ones i mentioned.
Your first paragraph is true, but the end of your second paragraph is more true. Lectures are HORRIBLE for adaptive learning, and the quality of their delivery is worse than a video, so you end up...
Your first paragraph is true, but the end of your second paragraph is more true. Lectures are HORRIBLE for adaptive learning, and the quality of their delivery is worse than a video, so you end up with the worst of both worlds.
Funny part is that's actually a big part of my job :-) My own work has my name on it (which is going nowhere near my Vakieh handle) but there's plenty of research that shows lectures only show...
Funny part is that's actually a big part of my job :-)
My own work has my name on it (which is going nowhere near my Vakieh handle) but there's plenty of research that shows lectures only show good results for the sorts of people who were going to get those results through self study anyway, which means the lecture itself is rather useless.
Face to face tutorial sessions, active, authentic, and problem-based learning are light years ahead of lectures, pretty much any method you could pick beats the lecture. I would suggest starting with Biggs as a jumping point through the sources included.
There must be a few other factors present during a lecture though, no? One i am thinking of right of the bat for example is inspiration. A good lecturer should be able to inspire imo.
There must be a few other factors present during a lecture though, no? One i am thinking of right of the bat for example is inspiration. A good lecturer should be able to inspire imo.
There's some research cited in the book I linked about lecturers being 'entertainers' - and how that improves students' immediate outcomes, but doesn't have that much of a long term effect, and is...
There's some research cited in the book I linked about lecturers being 'entertainers' - and how that improves students' immediate outcomes, but doesn't have that much of a long term effect, and is both exceedingly rare and usually involves burnout on the part of the lecturer. Mentoring is much more potent for that effect.
I guess we're diverging on the meaning of lecture here: you take it in its narrow meaning, i.e. smart guy telling pupils stuff and leaving, but I take it in a more broader sense and use it to mean...
Face to face tutorial sessions, active, authentic, and problem-based learning are light years ahead of lectures, pretty much any method you could pick beats the lecture
I guess we're diverging on the meaning of lecture here: you take it in its narrow meaning, i.e. smart guy telling pupils stuff and leaving, but I take it in a more broader sense and use it to mean something that includes what you write in the part I quoted. It may be that I misuse the word there to mean "lesson", English is not my native tongue. For me the ideal lecture/lesson is more like a public forum where the discussion is guided by an expert.
I'll take a note of that link for when I'll have access to a university library, thanks!
Wow. I've known all the things he said for a long, long time, but he put them together in a way that showed me I didn't really know them. Fantastic work.
I've been having conversations with uni colleagues lately where they tell me youtube-and-co videos will be what replaces lectures (flipped classrooms are great, but only about 10% of students will do the prep work that it requires). I am getting less and less sceptical, while there are plenty of garbage commercialised piece of shit videos out there every so often someone links me something like this. Shame I don't teach physics, but I'm 100% stealing the methods!
I've been a self-learner a long time by now. It all started when I decided learning programming back in 2012. From my experience, I should say that it is never as effective as learning face to face, especially when you're a beginner. The sheer amount of stuff out there trying to grab your attention means that lots of effort has to go to finding good sources, and it is very easy to lose focus.
Lectures will probably stay, but these sort of media is a good way to communicate some kinds of information. Less complex, or simplified knowledge. With an intention to get people interested in things. But as it gets denser, it becomes less effective than text-and-figures. A good university lecture is more about the lecturer and the audience discussing anyways, and while there are comments, they are not live, and live chat is not good enough... (or maybe not there yet?)
Lectures are the poorest form of teaching (there are MANY other means of face to face communication that are better) - they are going, one way or another, the question is what will replace them.
When you learn face to face and let another person be the source of information, you are able to ask the "source" questions. And the "source" will be able to adapt to the needs of the one trying to learn. The person/teacher is trained to relay the information, like an adaptable filter or something.
We don´t have enough of people acting as sources of information though, and we end up with lectures, which in term might erase some of the benefits like the ones i mentioned.
Is this what you mean?
i dunno, i never went to uni...
Your first paragraph is true, but the end of your second paragraph is more true. Lectures are HORRIBLE for adaptive learning, and the quality of their delivery is worse than a video, so you end up with the worst of both worlds.
I think you should prove that.
Funny part is that's actually a big part of my job :-)
My own work has my name on it (which is going nowhere near my Vakieh handle) but there's plenty of research that shows lectures only show good results for the sorts of people who were going to get those results through self study anyway, which means the lecture itself is rather useless.
Face to face tutorial sessions, active, authentic, and problem-based learning are light years ahead of lectures, pretty much any method you could pick beats the lecture. I would suggest starting with Biggs as a jumping point through the sources included.
There must be a few other factors present during a lecture though, no? One i am thinking of right of the bat for example is inspiration. A good lecturer should be able to inspire imo.
There's some research cited in the book I linked about lecturers being 'entertainers' - and how that improves students' immediate outcomes, but doesn't have that much of a long term effect, and is both exceedingly rare and usually involves burnout on the part of the lecturer. Mentoring is much more potent for that effect.
I guess we're diverging on the meaning of lecture here: you take it in its narrow meaning, i.e. smart guy telling pupils stuff and leaving, but I take it in a more broader sense and use it to mean something that includes what you write in the part I quoted. It may be that I misuse the word there to mean "lesson", English is not my native tongue. For me the ideal lecture/lesson is more like a public forum where the discussion is guided by an expert.
I'll take a note of that link for when I'll have access to a university library, thanks!
I would highly recommend checking out the rest of his channel. He makes excellent quality content.