Author
|
Topic: Lectures without Lecturing: Toward More Active Learning
|
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064
|
posted 19 October 2002 01:11 AM
Okay, as I've told some people here, I've been teaching part-time, a course called "Environmental Geology and Earth Resources," at a college here in town. I find it great fun, but I need some ideas on how I can make it a better experience for the students.I like teaching, but as I've never been trained in it I teach "intuitively," i.e., following the example of the teachers I liked best, and using ideas I've heard here and there. But I've quickly realized I'm still just doing variations on the old stand-and-deliver (TOSAD). Not everyone learns well that way -- perhaps only a few do -- and so, especially since the prospects are good I'll continue teaching next term and next year, I'm looking for better ways. Understand, there are some constraints on what I can do, just how far I can shake it up. It's a scientific and technical course, which means the students have to pick up some theory and a fair amount of factual information -- and since they can't collect more than a minute fraction of it directly, they have to get it from from the textbook or other media, and/or from me. And I do have to use that text as a framework, at least. And it's not a core course -- in fact there's no geology program as such at this college, which is a place where some people finish high school, others get diplomas and still others prepare for university. So the students are taking it as an option, meaning they have little geology background and are ... well, not all of them enthusiasts, exactly, shall we say. As for variations on TOSAD, I've tried various things... getting them to break into groups to discuss some environmental or philosophical issue, for example, which seemed to work well. Of course I break up my lectures with graphics to illustrate what I'm talking about, and ask them questions to get them thinking about what I'm talking about, and show videos in class on which they have to answer questions, and so forth. But I'm wondering: given the constraints I've mentioned, how can I best organize the course so that the learning is as active as possible? Big question, of course, and I'm open to suggestions at all levels, from little techniques right up to the philosophical level -- though at the high end, I'd hope people could suggest one book or another. (Hmmm... How would Ivan Illich handle this, I wonder...? )
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478
|
posted 20 October 2002 02:07 PM
With your own examples -- and especially that "and so forth," I suspect -- you've already described more dynamic methods than I ever used when I was teaching, 'lance. I taught a very different kind of subject -- language/writing courses that were required, and a few literature courses that were electives. I am semi-ashamed to admit on this thread that I loved -- really loved -- lecturing (you suspected that already, didn't you?), although my lectures were heavy on discussion and participation all the way through. I discovered one technique for drawing resisters into lit courses that I suspect would help some teaching similar courses -- and maybe you can even think of ways of adapting it for your purposes. Every time we started a new novel, everyone in the class was required to arrive with a passage -- which could be as short or as long as he/she wanted -- to talk about in the first couple of sessions. People could say anything they liked about their passage, including, "I hated this novel, and this paragraph is absolutely the worst part and I hated it most." I then I just went around the room, judging time by, well, how much people had to say about their own passages and how everyone else reacted. Honest, it was magic. For one thing, by the time you've run through the "passages" of a class of 20-25, they've probably singled out most of the touchstones you as teacher would have wanted to talk about anyway. More important, everyone in the class has read and reread and returned again and again to the text, which, as anyone here trained in old-fashioned "close reading" knows, is the trick in seducing students who otherwise suspect teacher of "reading things into" a literary text. For me, the simplest techniques always worked the best. I think the one that counted most was that my students could see -- I believe they could -- that I am in love with reading and writing, and that I loved talking to them about it.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064
|
posted 21 October 2002 12:35 PM
Thanks, one and all, for these thoughts, and I hope more babblers can search their memories (or present experiences) of different courses, especially scientific and technical ones, and recall what they loved, liked, tolerated, and hated.Since I'm a bit pressed for time, this is only a placemarker, and I'll be back later with more coherent thoughts. But it's dawned on me that my scenting about for some new (to me) Grand Philosophy of Teaching that I can apply wholesale to this course would be misguided. Instead I'm going to have to work things a bit more by trial and error, which I'm more predisposed to use anyway. I am, after all, pretty new at this.
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885
|
posted 21 October 2002 01:06 PM
My mother used to teach using a method called (I believe, and apologise if wrong) theme-based teaching. Basically, you give the students a problem to solve, then serve as a resouce they can come to for help on the way. The students can ask for a lecture on a particular aspect of the problem if they feel it will help. For environmental geology, you could ask them to design a monitoring system for an industrial site (a real one), or determine the possible water-well designs for a growing town or suburb. I'm sure you can come up with better ideas than me. It sounds a bit intimidating at first, especially if the students have no background in the subject, but you tend to learn the basic tenets of the subject very quickly, out of neccesity. It's also interesting for the teacher, because the students will often come up with unique solutions you wouldn't always consider, or may ask you for a lecture on a subject you are only vaguely familiar with, forcing you to learn something new, too.
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sisyphus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1425
|
posted 21 October 2002 05:46 PM
'lance, I co-teach an upper level undergrad biology course which I am in the process of completely revamping, having inherited the current(unsatisfactory) curriculum from an absent colleague. There are many ways to organize the lab portion of the course with various "out-of-the-box experiments. All these courses then begin to look the same and your course becomes "just one more hurdle between me and my degree." One approach that we have been phasing in is to see if there are any intrinsically interesting questions within the accepted purview of the subject matter. These must have no obvious (or better yet, have counter-intuitive) answers and be at least partly tractable in the course of an empirical or literature-based investigation. It is optimal, too, if they require certain foundational notions of the discipline for solution. Trying to achieve all this before Xmas within the bugetary, temporal and student-quality limitations imposed by the Ontario post-secondary universe is turning my remaining hair gray but, judging from discussions with graduates of the course, this seems to be just the approach they would have wanted. Good Luck.
From: Never Never Land | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
wei-chi
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2799
|
posted 02 November 2002 07:25 AM
'lance, my thoughts on lectures:I've always thought the best tool in explaining a concept is an example or an anecdote. For less abstract-minded students it gives them a more managable way to tackle the topic, and for others it usually reinforces the point you are making. I think this works because people are more atune to 'stories' (which they ingest daily through tv, movies, books, etc) than 'lecturing' (which they don't usually ingest at all). Research indicates that visual stimulus is very effective. Ie diagrams, maps, pictures, etc. My experience has been that these CANNOT speak for themselves, but must COMPLEMENT the point or topic discussed and must be accompanied by verbal comment. But do not over-stimulate (this turns-off learning) through very elaborate setups...and no death-by-powerpoint. I've always disliked group work as well. Most students are not motivated enough to encourage others, let alone themselves. Interaction between students can be very positive, but it must be structured. For example: "split into groups and discuss this question" isn't usually too effective, unless you have a good group - particularly if you have limited time, such as 5-10 minutes. You can't engage everyone in that time frame. I like the assigning different readings, that's a good one. last one: I always liked the profs who played music before the class started. It was a good way to differentiate their class from all the other profs. I think this was a very effective way to say: hey, this is a different kind of class; so forget your seat-ettiquet, forget your sitting at the back of the class, forget all that structure you've become complacent with and get excited about learning again.
From: Saskatoon | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|