Some educators and policy makers believe that the lecture as a teaching technique is destined for the bone yard of oblivion—and deservedly so. In fact, as reported earlier, there's an organization dedicated to hastening its demise. Here's the home page of the National Center for Academic Transformation, which prominently displays a graphic with one of those "crossed out" emblems over a photo of a lecture hall. Those who may have missed TCCTA reports on this issue are urged to peruse the NCAT Web site for background and updates.
As reported previously, the Coordinating Board, with Legislative approval, is engaged actively in an enterprise called the Course Redesign Project, funding pilot programs at colleges and universities wishing to make the switch in certain fields. Redesigned courses typically make prominent use of technology and require fewer full time faculty. The idea also is to use faculty members to contribute to planning and design, relieving them from routine grading and other chores associated with traditional instruction. Redesigned courses are usually in entry-level, high-volume subjects, with the stated goal of efficiency and increased retention. Reportedly the effort has been voluntary so far. In other words, professors wishing to continue lecturing in the traditional manner can continue to do so, assuming their schools don't enforce any conformity locally.
But there is still plenty of lecturing going on, and this is likely to continue. What isn't discussed much these days is a distinction between "good" and "bad" lecturing, as the pedagogical tool evolves to fit today's students. Rob Weir of the Instant Mentor section of Inside Higher Ed. offers his "ten commandments." It's worth a look and available for free. Here's the link.
Comments