<p>hi, sylvan, by the way you’re responding to the feedback to your OP, it’s become clear this isn’t a real life situation involving your child or someone you know; instead, I’m guessing you’re either in education or perhaps working on a thesis on education! Whatever, I wish you luck. (And yeah, as jaylynn said, “flipping” is all the rage. UT Austin has been doing it a while, so there’s already some useful data coming out.)</p>
<p>Do they like it so far at UT Austin, TXArtemis?</p>
<p>My D’s AP Physics class (2011-2012) was run this way. D mostly liked it.</p>
<p>I teach under prepared students. They often have trouble following thought that is not obvious and think some things are off topic when there really is a connection; it is just a connection they are unable to make.</p>
<p>jaylynn, yes! They’re running a feature about it on the home page of the website now, and the first link at the bottom goes to the flipping article I had read in the alumni mag this summer. So interesting! See [Transforming</a> courses, learning and success | The University of Texas at Austin](<a href=“The University of Texas at Austin”>The University of Texas at Austin)</p>
<p>That’s fascinating. And awesome!</p>
<p>
Actually, teaching a class using a lot of alternative methods this semester. A colleague, whose expertise is college-level physics education research, had basically this comment on one of his reviews (“doesn’t teach, expects us to learn from reading the book, almost no time lecturing or teaching, not the best teacher”). The colleague is actually quite good, as evidenced by his student outcomes, and is helping me with a style of teaching I myself am not accustomed to. </p>
<p>Reading the student’s comment, however, it occurred to me that some students may come to the class having primarily had experience with traditional lecture-style teaching. So much so that they equate the two:<br>
Lecture implies teaching.
Teaching implies lecture.<br>
No lecture, therefore no “teaching”.<br>
(No teaching, no learning.) </p>
<p>But such a student is probably unaware of the many other possible teaching techniques, and of the research showing that (for physics at least) straight traditional lecture-style has been found to be about the least effective method. Lots of research with lots of students. He is also probably ultimately unaware of whether he and/or his classmates have done better or worse than they would have with a traditional model.</p>
<p>It is interesting to pose the question here to parents, whose responses have ranged from “my kid’s classes are like this already” to “tell them to pick better teachers” and suggestions to see if there is a TA so they have “someone knowledgeable” to ask questions of, indicating that even some parents subscribe to the syllogism above to the point where the instructor who is not running a traditional lecture is seen as not only not a good teacher, but as not even knowing the material.</p>
<p>Perhaps the upshot is that it may be a good idea to explain briefly to the class that traditional lecture-style is not as effective as we would like, and to continue reiterating that at times throughout the course.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s funny because what you describe as teaching some HS teachers I’ve had harshly denounced as “spoon-feeding” that we should learn to leave behind not only in their classes, but moreso for college. This included one jerky HS teacher I had as a 13 year old who declared students who need to be spoonfed into the college years “Won’t last beyond their first semester there”*. ROTFLOL…what BS. </p>
<p>Personally, while I favor the non-lecture type teaching style, lecturing has its place for certain types of fields/subjects for novice students with little/no previous exposure. </p>
<p>However, there was the expectation in intermediate/advanced courses that Profs discuss/expand on the readings…but not cover them so the onus was on us students to complete them beforehand, digest them, and if needed…go to the Prof’s office hours to clarify points. </p>
<ul>
<li>IME, he wildly overstated the rigor/difficulties of undergrad academics for me and the majority of my HS classmates…including those who attended most elite/Ivy universities.</li>
</ul>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just that sometimes, you’re stuck learning the material on your own. Fortunately, this is easier in the age of the Internet than it used to be. Especially for fairly standardized introductory subjects, you can often find lecture notes and sample problems from other colleges online to help fill in the gaps in what’s taught at your own college.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>You started off with: “but expects you to learn stuff from the book”</p>
<p>Fair enough. An orchestra teacher once said: “'Practice is what you do at home. ‘Rehearsals’ is what you do here. Learn the piece at home, and come here ready to play.”</p>
<p>But, you went on to say: “spends almost no time lecturing or teaching”. So what is the prof doing? Talking about his research that has nothing to do with the class? Complaining about how the Administration is making professors teach more classes vs research? Showing videos?</p>
<p>If the prof takes the attitude “learn it from the book”, then I would expect the class to be like an honors class (go beyond) where the prof teaches you what is not in the book. He supplements, and expands upon it. Shows you the real world applications (and how to get around real world problems). To me, that is “lecturing or teaching”. Using class time to “rehearse” - learning to apply what you have learned.</p>
<p>One thing about that kind of learning: You can’t miss class, because what prof has to teach is not in the book.</p>
<p>^ and ^^ I appreciate the genuine responses.</p>
<p>
It is the kid’s interpretation that the professor “spends almost no time lecturing or teaching” because he/she views teaching solely from the perspective of the traditional lecture format. If the professor has alternative activities which have been proven successful at helping students learn the material, but do not fit into that traditional format, they can nonetheless be considered “teaching”. Isn’t the point for the students to learn the material? Or is the point to do “the traditional thing” no matter what?</p>
<p>Which would you choose for your child? A classroom where they used only the traditional educational practices, or a classroom where they used the results of large amounts of research in order to try to improve your kid’s chances of getting the best grasp of the subject at hand?</p>
<p>You’ve already answered that.</p>
<p>You also started out with saying “science teacher”. What kid in a science class is not use to lab work (alternative activities)? I have to admit though, in unstructured problem solving type classes (here’s the problem, go find a solution vs a specified lab exercise), I would find unique solutions that bypassed the point the prof was trying to teach.</p>