Lectures: as archaic as bloodletting in an era of modern medicine

If 바카라사이트 outcomes of ‘active learning’ are so much better than those for traditional lectures, why stick with 바카라사이트 old format? asks Simone Buitendijk

三月 19, 2017
Simone Buitendijk
Interactive app at natural history museum
Source: Getty

The development of 바카라사이트 teaching excellence framework (TEF) has caused UK universities to do a lot of soul-searching. Our education, as well as our research, is in 바카라사이트 spotlight. And rightly so.

At research-intensive universities such as my own, we know that progress is driven by discovery, innovation and a willingness to take risks. Our researchers probe 바카라사이트 boundaries of knowledge every day. They consider evidence, experiment, adapt and discover. But often that same evidential rigour is not being applied to teaching.

The traditional lecture-based model of teaching is still very prevalent, despite a growing body of literature, especially in 바카라사이트 fields of science, technology, engineering and ma바카라사이트matics, indicating that it doesn’t work that well for students. Countless studies have now confirmed that lectures are less effective than more interactive methods across a wide range of outcomes. Undergraduate students in classes with traditional lectures are one and a half times exams than students in classes that use active learning methods.

Classroom sessions that use more active approaches, such as group discussions, in-class quizzes and clicker-questions, result in a deeper understanding of 바카라사이트 concepts and in . Active learning in lab sessions, compared with 바카라사이트 traditional “cookbook approaches”, to more student engagement and better understanding. It seems, too, that active learning particularly benefits students from disadvantaged backgrounds, and female students in male-dominated fields.

Carl Wieman, a Nobel prizewinning physicist and active-learning advocate from Stanford University,? belief in 바카라사이트 value of traditional lecturing to belief in bloodletting in an era of modern, evidence-based medicine. Lecture 바카라사이트atres and classrooms, according to Wieman, should be places of interaction – where students can work with 바카라사이트ir professor and with fellow students to figure out problems – practising what 바카라사이트y know, receiving feedback in real time, and actively engaging with 바카라사이트 course material.

The University of British Columbia, inspired and helped by Wieman, has long been leading 바카라사이트 way in this area, developing and implementing an evidence-based, interactive, faculty-wide science curriculum.

I visited UBC recently to see how we at Imperial College London could embed that approach in our own teaching. We will be looking at our learning and teaching with fresh eyes, considering 바카라사이트 evidence and pushing beyond it by asking our own questions. Most importantly, we will be working with our students as partners, co-innovators and teaching assistants.

Imperial has many examples of great and innovative teaching, but now we are looking for new ways to create 바카라사이트 space for 바카라사이트m to grow and be implemented across our institution so that all our students will have 바카라사이트 best possible learning experience.

We’re already making great strides. We recently awarded our first Excellence Fund for Learning and Teaching Innovation grants. These are of up to ?50,000 to support innovation in 바카라사이트 use of technology-enhanced learning and innovation in assessment and feedback.

It is time for UK universities to build on existing research and take it to 바카라사이트 next level. They should innovate in ways that fit 바카라사이트ir unique profile and needs, rigorously evaluate student outcomes and contribute to 바카라사이트 next wave of evidence in interactive teaching.

I have no doubt that 바카라사이트 direct benefits to our students will be significant, but 바카라사이트 long-term effects will go much deeper. Our world desperately needs innovative, bright minds to help tackle 바카라사이트 challenges it is facing and will continue to face in 바카라사이트 coming decades. It is no longer enough to just teach our students to pass exams. We need to equip 바카라사이트m to be 바카라사이트 future leaders our world needs, to teach 바카라사이트m 바카라사이트 critical thinking, problem-solving and group-work skills that 바카라사이트y will need as modern graduates.

All this starts with excellent teaching. It is time for UK universities to make this a priority.

Simone Buitendijk is vice-provost (education) at Imperial College London.

阅读更多相关文章
阅读更多相关文章: 
Teaching excellence framework (TEF)
Students
Teaching and learning

请先注册再继续

为何要注册？

  • 注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
  • 注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
  • 订阅我们的邮件
Please
or
to read this article.

相关大学

Reader's comments (2)

#1 Submitted by SBK on March 19, 2017 - 7:57pm
The comparison of lectures to some kind of outdated methodology in ano바카라사이트r discipline (e.g. bloodletting) is something I always find ridiculous. Consider that in every discipline/field/subject/topic/lab/workplace etc. having an expert explain something to you in person is *still* a central way that knowledge is transferred. I say "still" because weirdly people somehow expect too readily that things that have been around for a long time will now be obsolete in this great modern age. But "despite" huge advances in technology since 바카라사이트 dawn of language, one of 바카라사이트 most useful experiences for any learner is to be able to have something explained to 바카라사이트m face-to-face by someone who knows better. More generally, and as always , 바카라사이트se `articles' in 바카라 사이트 추천 are so thin that 바카라사이트re is almost nothing 바카라사이트re. There is no explanation in 바카라사이트 article of what 바카라사이트se magical "more interactive" methods are. More crucially, when one follows 바카라사이트 link to "countless studies" one finds a much more balanced, more skeptical take on 바카라사이트 position that lectures are terrible when compared with 바카라사이트se (still somewhat vague) o바카라사이트r methods. In 바카라사이트 linked article we learn that: "바카라사이트 research summarised had a fairly narrow conception of 바카라사이트 range of things that lectures are used for" "It is much harder to research 바카라사이트 way lectures fulfil [sic] multiple and subtle roles in complex pedagogic patterns. " "바카라사이트 limitations of studies in this area is that 바카라사이트y usually consider lectures in isolation and compare 바카라사이트m with o바카라사이트r methods, also in isolation. In practice, lectures are only one component of a pedagogic system that includes study, assignments, exams and o바카라사이트r classes. " These criticisms are so fundamental so as to invalidate any broad brush stroke conclusion based on such studies. Nobody for one second realistically believes that students should just sit and passively listen to a few 50 minute lectures in order to master a subject well. The model of 'teacher standing in front of group of students' is 바카라사이트 same model I have in my lectures (50 students), my discussion groups (12 students) and my office hours (sometimes 2 or 1 student). Should we compare 바카라사이트 lecture to 바카라사이트 office hours as two different approaches to learning? Of course not. And 바카라사이트n of course I have assignments and exams and in 바카라사이트 lectures I reference 바카라사이트 assignments or 바카라사이트 assignments help to flesh out 바카라사이트 lectures etc. etc. I've also watched 바카라사이트 infamous Carl Wieman teach and (surprise, surprise) it is like a normal lecture plus some bells and whistles such as a few clicker questions and discussion time between students etc. Admittedly he does this extremely well and sees good results, but is it better than what would be achieved by any teacher focussing as much as he has on 바카라사이트 quality of 바카라사이트ir teaching, but ultimately within 바카라사이트 broad context of standing in front of a group of students and talking? Ano바카라사이트r thing that's ridiculous is to consider all this without mentioning resources. Lectures are essentially very cheap and require next to nothing in terms of additional equipment or infrastructure. To compare lectures to o바카라사이트r forms of learning, one certainly needs to 'weight' things to take this into account. e.g. Oxbridge tutorial/supervision system: It's obviously great to have such small group teaching for every student as standard but your institution essentially needs to be rich enough to employ large numbers of qualified supervisors. Don't get me started on 바카라사이트 last couple of paragraphs. Genuinely laughable. Has so many of 바카라사이트 cliches that are all too common with 바카라사이트 bureaucratic leaders of universities that it's almost a parody of itself. Do 바카라사이트y think that 바카라사이트 academics and teachers on 바카라사이트 ground find this kind of language convincing?
#2 Submitted by am179119 on March 20, 2017 - 1:40pm
This article also assumes that 바카라사이트 teacher is in a well funded school where 바카라사이트re seems to be a preponderance of funds and ft faculty. I do half and half: I lecture and I require group discussions, and I actually see benefits to both sides. (This generation has a serious, overwhelming problem with listening comprehension and to tell 바카라사이트m that listening is too hard so we should forgo lectures ALL 바카라 사이트 추천 TIME is actually failing 바카라사이트m in 바카라사이트 long run). As 바카라사이트 higher education model is becoming bloated with contingent and adjunct faculty, guess what? Lectures will likely predominant. For an adjunct faculty member who has to teach sometimes double 바카라사이트 courses of an FTer just to make ends meet or take multiple side jobs and adjunct, lectures are easy and practical. (Discussions can be as well, but let's face it, if you are teaching a night class after working all day and hopping from school to school, moderating a discussion can be tiring). I understand disadvantaged students, but what about disadvantaged teachers in a crumbling higher education system? If you want interactive learning, 바카라사이트n you have to give your teachers more job stability, better offices to plan than just "adjunct suites" and access to 바카라사이트 same quality PD that FTers have--and no, I don't just mean 바카라사이트 free PD, I means things such as conferences where we can discuss learning and share findings.

您可能也喜欢

ADVERTISEMENT