Anyone else surprised by the amount of lecturing in humanities classes at T10 universities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've never heard a smart person say they like lectures. There is a mismatch between the academic quality of the students at T10 schools and the methods used to educate them.

Disagree.

[Anonymous]

This thread is why my kids will not be attending US universities. I told them they can only attend a US school if they get a full scholarship. Otherwise it’s a European university because the quality is much better. Also as EU citizens, the cost is much better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The amount of lecturing at these schools in the humanities seems quite bad though I realize that this has been known for a while. There are a few bright spots. I will, for example, give Duke some credit for offering a surprising number of seminar courses to even freshman, including, surprisingly, in their lit department, which is perennially filled with celebrity hotshot professors. Columbia has their core curriculum, which I believe is delivered in seminar format. But overall, the situation is far from ideal. Harvard has always been known for having this problem, but I was surprised by the extent to which Yale seems intent on delivering humanities classes in the form of an old professor droning on and on (perhaps with a weekly section led by a TF). Is this a recent development or was this always the case?

Shocking ageism….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think methods of teaching and learning in K-12 have changed significantly over the last 50 years to being all about student engagement, short attention spans, immediate gratification, pats on the back, active learning, everyone's a winner etc.

However many in post secondary feel that the current style of post secondary better prepares students for life after school and they aren't keen to move to the student led K-12 system. Many feel that lectures have worked well at preparing students for decades and that they don't want to change what isn't broken.

Does anyone actually believe that "lectures have worked well at preparing students for decades"?

That's precisely why everyone wanted and still wants to go the Oxbridge. The cost of admission gave the student access to the best lecturers in the world.

Ah yes, Oxbridge—you know, the schools with the famed 2-student tutorial system. I'm sure it's the lecture part that attracts people.

They do have lectures, which are optional. I attended some incredible lectures by famous professors and dons during my time at Oxford.

[Anonymous]

Lecturing in high school is the kiss of death during surprise or planned teacher evaluations.
This is all thanks to the university professors who work in education. They need to prove their pay is well deserved so they are constantly coming up with new gimmicks for teaching youngsters that they market to gullible state education departments. Nevermind that most of these college professors haven’t set foot in a public high school in 30 years and are completely out of touch

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is why my kids will not be attending US universities. I told them they can only attend a US school if they get a full scholarship. Otherwise it’s a European university because the quality is much better. Also as EU citizens, the cost is much better.

Speaking on behalf of almost all US universities and colleges (for which I am not authorized), we are fine with your decision. We respect the freedom to choose as well as the freedom to criticize and to engage in disagreement.

On what do you base your assessment that European universities are better than American universities ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've never heard a smart person say they like lectures. There is a mismatch between the academic quality of the students at T10 schools and the methods used to educate them.

I've never heard a smart person say they dislike lectures.

FTFY.

[Anonymous]

And yet we all love watching TED talks which are one long lecture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is why my kids will not be attending US universities. I told them they can only attend a US school if they get a full scholarship. Otherwise it’s a European university because the quality is much better. Also as EU citizens, the cost is much better.

Speaking on behalf of almost all US universities and colleges (for which I am not authorized), we are fine with your decision. We respect the freedom to choose as well as the freedom to criticize and to engage in disagreement.

On what do you base your assessment that European universities are better than American universities ?

Experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think methods of teaching and learning in K-12 have changed significantly over the last 50 years to being all about student engagement, short attention spans, immediate gratification, pats on the back, active learning, everyone's a winner etc.

However many in post secondary feel that the current style of post secondary better prepares students for life after school and they aren't keen to move to the student led K-12 system. Many feel that lectures have worked well at preparing students for decades and that they don't want to change what isn't broken.

Does anyone actually believe that "lectures have worked well at preparing students for decades"?

That's precisely why everyone wanted and still wants to go the Oxbridge. The cost of admission gave the student access to the best lecturers in the world.

Ah yes, Oxbridge—you know, the schools with the famed 2-student tutorial system. I'm sure it's the lecture part that attracts people.

Well, obviously Oxbridge should switch to an entirely lecture-based system since, as we've learned in this thread, lectures are clearly pedagogically superior and preferred by most students.

Aren’t Oxbridge tutors basically like adjuncts or grad students? They’re not the big-name profs. Then I think you still go to big lectures? Seems like they actually have the best of both worlds there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've never heard a smart person say they like lectures. There is a mismatch between the academic quality of the students at T10 schools and the methods used to educate them.

Huh? I’m a smart person and I like lectures. You go in prepared and having done the reading then you get an expert to walk you through it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lecturing in high school is the kiss of death during surprise or planned teacher evaluations.
This is all thanks to the university professors who work in education. They need to prove their pay is well deserved so they are constantly coming up with new gimmicks for teaching youngsters that they market to gullible state education departments. Nevermind that most of these college professors haven’t set foot in a public high school in 30 years and are completely out of touch

Oh this is a good point. “Direct instruction” is considered verboten in K-12 now. It’s crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think methods of teaching and learning in K-12 have changed significantly over the last 50 years to being all about student engagement, short attention spans, immediate gratification, pats on the back, active learning, everyone's a winner etc.

However many in post secondary feel that the current style of post secondary better prepares students for life after school and they aren't keen to move to the student led K-12 system. Many feel that lectures have worked well at preparing students for decades and that they don't want to change what isn't broken.

Does anyone actually believe that "lectures have worked well at preparing students for decades"?

That's precisely why everyone wanted and still wants to go the Oxbridge. The cost of admission gave the student access to the best lecturers in the world.

Ah yes, Oxbridge—you know, the schools with the famed 2-student tutorial system. I'm sure it's the lecture part that attracts people.

Well, obviously Oxbridge should switch to an entirely lecture-based system since, as we've learned in this thread, lectures are clearly pedagogically superior and preferred by most students.

Aren’t Oxbridge tutors basically like adjuncts or grad students? They’re not the big-name profs. Then I think you still go to big lectures? Seems like they actually have the best of both worlds there.

you mean like TA lead discussion groups and office hours? I wish US universities would jump on those ideas

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is why my kids will not be attending US universities. I told them they can only attend a US school if they get a full scholarship. Otherwise it’s a European university because the quality is much better. Also as EU citizens, the cost is much better.

Speaking on behalf of almost all US universities and colleges (for which I am not authorized), we are fine with your decision. We respect the freedom to choose as well as the freedom to criticize and to engage in disagreement.

On what do you base your assessment that European universities are better than American universities ?

Experience.

i.e. no data at all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think methods of teaching and learning in K-12 have changed significantly over the last 50 years to being all about student engagement, short attention spans, immediate gratification, pats on the back, active learning, everyone's a winner etc.

However many in post secondary feel that the current style of post secondary better prepares students for life after school and they aren't keen to move to the student led K-12 system. Many feel that lectures have worked well at preparing students for decades and that they don't want to change what isn't broken.

Does anyone actually believe that "lectures have worked well at preparing students for decades"?

That's precisely why everyone wanted and still wants to go the Oxbridge. The cost of admission gave the student access to the best lecturers in the world.

Ah yes, Oxbridge—you know, the schools with the famed 2-student tutorial system. I'm sure it's the lecture part that attracts people.

Well, obviously Oxbridge should switch to an entirely lecture-based system since, as we've learned in this thread, lectures are clearly pedagogically superior and preferred by most students.

Aren’t Oxbridge tutors basically like adjuncts or grad students? They’re not the big-name profs. Then I think you still go to big lectures? Seems like they actually have the best of both worlds there.

you mean like TA lead discussion groups and office hours? I wish US universities would jump on those ideas

I think at Oxbridge the tutors are more qualified and better supported than TAs in the US and they work 1:1 or in very small groups.