Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I think the reason that DCUM parents are so pro-lecture is because DCUM parents aren't generally smart. They're just very rich and somewhat above average in term of intelligence. Their children are the finance bro type not the scholar type, and these types generally prefer lectures and don't like the idea of a professor-led discussion (or preparing for one).

However, these types also don't have self-awareness. A prep school parent once told me that they were convinced that Duke rejects DC-area prep schoolers because Duke has an irrational bias against area prep schools. It don't occur to them that these schools are actually filled with mediocrities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times have changed. Smartphones have decimated people’s attention span. Way too many distractions now. Lectures never worked especially well and are even less effective now.
Studies have shown that listeners only retain about 5-10% information from lectures. It is a very inefficient way to deliver information.

+1

If professors are going to lecture, they should just type up what they're going to say and assign it as a reading and cancel class.

Anonymous wrote:Times have changed. Smartphones have decimated people’s attention span. Way too many distractions now. Lectures never worked especially well and are even less effective now.
Studies have shown that listeners only retain about 5-10% information from lectures. It is a very inefficient way to deliver information.

Anonymous wrote:Times have changed. Smartphones have decimated people’s attention span. Way too many distractions now. Lectures never worked especially well and are even less effective now.
Studies have shown that listeners only retain about 5-10% information from lectures. It is a very inefficient way to deliver information.

Anonymous wrote:

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 wrote:

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 wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of my best professors were lecturers (in lit!) and some of the worst classes I attended were the ones where students (mostly male) mansplained during discussions and would shout down alternative ideas. Both formats have their strengths and weaknesses. In my lit classes, we read some fantastic books and I was able to get my ideas across in my writing (as well as have conversations with my professors about contrasting ideas).

OMG the discussions filled with mansplaining and/or the kiss-ass striver trying to let everyone but mostly the prof know how well they know the material. Ill take the curmudgeon lecture with 200 anyday.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Wait. Are they?

My brother went to Oxford and I think most of his were grad students. So, essentially, TAs?

Anonymous wrote:I'd rather a professor who delivers information over a "discussion" which is often one or two 18 year olds who think they have a LOT of really interesting ideas and can drone on and on about that one excerpt of that one book they read by that one author that one time.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a humanities prof. I don't have any choice: I _have_ to lecture because students won't prep for discussion by reading in advance. Even when I scaffold activities to get to discussions, the students literally let one another down. I wish they were climbing all over one another to express any opinion at all (even one that is off-topic), but they are unwilling to take the risk. It's really sad.

Anonymous wrote:Just watch political philosopher Michael Sandel's lectures for his Justice class at Harvard. He's brilliant and it's wonderful they're widely available.