The Compleat Lecturer
The Compleat Lecturer – or, the quintessence of
traditional lecturing
Bruce G Charlton
Professor Bruce G Charlton
School of Psychology
Newcastle University
NE1 7RU
England
e-mail: bruce.charlton@ncl.ac.uk
Abstract
The primacy of lectures in providing a framework of
knowledge and understanding for most students in most types of
undergraduate-level study has been recognized in universities and colleges for
many hundreds of years; and nothing substantive has happened to challenge this
primacy. I set-out a plausible rationale for the effectiveness of
lecturing, based upon assumptions regarding human nature and evolved
psychology. Then, based upon this
framework, I discuss some principles of good lecturing; with reference to the
lecturer’s art and craft, implications for design of courses and lecture
theatres, and the responsibilities of teaching administrators and the lecture
audience. My conclusion is that – properly done – lecturing is potentially a
first-rate method of teaching; rewarding both for lecturer and lectured-to. And,
if there is a single word that encapsulates the essence of that in which
lectures excel; the word is ‘explaining’.
Introduction - the first mass medium
Lectures are the most ancient form of
the ‘mass media’ – because they are a one-to-many method of communicating.
The lecture was the first method of amplifying the range of teaching from the apprenticeship situation of one-to-one (or a handful of people), by creating an environment with good visibility and acoustics suitable for larger groups of students; being used to provide mostly verbal instruction in a curriculum which took the attendees through a ‘course’ of study.
Something of the sort seems to have
been used in Greek and Roman civilizations – but it was at the founding of the European
Medieval universities (from around 1100) in places like Bologna, Padua,
Salamanca, Paris, Oxford and Cambridge; when the lecture became the main focus
of higher (post-school) teaching.
In the early Medieval era, before the
invention of printing and the availability of cheap books, the lecture was
usually given slowly, as a form of dictation – and an ideal student’s lecture
notes were therefore an accurate copy of the manuscript book from which the
lecturer was reading. At a more advanced level, the lecture was a commentary (exposition, clarification,
discussion, expansion) of a classic text; which would slowly be worked-through,
line by line.
As books became more widely available,
at least in libraries, the lecture evolved into a personal distillation by the
lecturer of knowledge from a variety of sources – with advanced students
amplifying this by further reading. These lectures were not always read-out,
nor were they always given at dictation speed – but the delivery of a lecture
could be enlivened and tailored to class response by elements of improvisation
on the part of the lecturer; and the making of lecture notes necessarily became
a more engaged and creative business - a matter of extracting, summarizing, structuring.
This type of lecturing probably reached
its peak in the Scottish and German universities of the 18th and 19th
century ‘Enlightenment’ era; when leading Professors became figures of
national, even international, fame and significance. Such a semi-structured,
semi-improvised lecture – having a skeletal plan, but with room for extempore features;
systematic yet active and somewhat unpredictable - seems to me the ideal and
best form of lecturing; as both lecturer and student are most engaged, and
there is no possibility of either side switching to ‘autopilot’ - which may
easily happen when a lecturer is simply reading aloud from notes and a student
passively transcribing them.
To contrast the Medieval/ dictation and
Enlightenment-style lectures: the Medieval lecture essentially provides merely
a written resource for later private study; whereas the Enlightenment lecture is itself a part of the educational
experience. When the lecture is structured yet partly-improvised; the
mind of both lecturer and student are engaged, and education is very obviously
going-on in the here-and-now; understanding, learning and insights are actively
happening in the classroom.
This type of lecture served as a vital
introduction and orientation to what would have otherwise (to a novice) been a
bewildering rage of sources – in pre-textbook days, sources typically too
advanced to be easily comprehensible to the beginner.
A lecture course of this kind will give
the student a structure of knowledge and understanding - valuable in
itself, and upon-which he can build by private study. However, most students
have probably always neglected private study and relied heavily upon their
lecture notes (so long as the lecturer is doing a good job). Student-made
lecture notes may be superior (for the student who made them) even to the best
textbook; because making lecture notes (in class, and revising them afterwards)
is an active and creative process of deep-learning.
The end result of lecture note-taking
is (at its best) a revision text uniquely-tailored to the student’s personal
character, learning style and needs.
The effectiveness of lecturing
Lectures
work; but nobody seems to know why. And the lack of an accepted rationale for
the method seems to make people feel guilty about using lectures.
Typically
lectures are taken for granted (which makes it unlikely that they will be
improved); but the attitude is often hostile, and sporadic attempts are made to
replace lectures with almost-anything-else in the name of innovative teaching:
such experiments are usually short-lived… In modern mass higher education
systems, it is impractical, and unaffordable, to replace lectures with a
sufficient quantity of individual or small-group teaching. Attempts to do so, in
any more than an ineffectual and token fashion, merely lead to less teaching of
students.
Yet
pragmatic realism about the lack of viable options is not a positive reason in favour of promoting
lecturing as a valuable method in its own right; nor is it likely to guide or
inspire good lecturing.
Perhaps the most convincing evidence of lectures’ specific effectiveness comes from what people actually do, rather than what people say. I find it highly significant that lectures have been especially used in teaching the most quantitative and systematic sciences, and for intensive professional training courses such as medicine, engineering and law.
In
other words, lectures have been a focus of teaching in exactly the situations
where transmission of knowledge is most vital, and in subjects where relevant
learning is most validly measurable. This is an indirect argument in favour of
their value.
(Of
course, lectures will only get you so-far; and individual teaching by direct
and sustained personal contact or ‘apprenticeship’ - supported by ‘drill’ or
repeated practical exercises - remain absolutely essential methods for learning
specialized and high level skills.)
Taking
these observations of long tradition and their place in serious professional
education together, there seems to be ample prima
facie evidence that lectures are a good teaching method in many
circumstances and for many students. However, it is not generally understood why lectures are useful - or, at least,
plausible positive explanations why good lectures are effective are not
generally articulated. And because their rationale is not understood, the
conduct of lectures has often been changed in ways that tend to make them less
effective.
Human
nature and evolved psychology
I
believe that the effectiveness of lecturing can be understood by taking into
consideration what is plausibly known of human nature and evolved psychology.
In brief; lectures are effective when, and insofar as, they tap-into spontaneous human social behaviours,
as these are understood by the various psychological disciplines.
Therefore,
the primary and specific reason for their effectiveness is essentially that lectures are a form of spoken communication,
which is delivered to an audience by an actually present and visible person,
through a series of repeated social interactions.
A
lecture can be considered as a formally-structured
social event whose pattern fits some aspects of evolved ‘human nature’;
and when that basic event is well-designed and ‘exploited’ in a lecture, this
situation artificially manipulates
instinctive human behaviour in order to improve learning.
As
well as being spoken communications, lectures are properly delivered by an actually present individual person. This
living presence creates a here-and-now social situation which unfolds in real
time. Because humans are social animals, we are naturally more alert and
vigilant in actual social situations.
What makes the lecture a ‘social event’ is the potential (even when, as usual, not actually realised) for two-way communication. Think of the difference between attending a play in a theatre and watching a movie: a theatre audience is typically much quieter and more focused than that of a movie. Because, although in practice the actors and audience almost-never communicate individually; the reality of human presence has a powerful effect on the activity, alertness and concentration of individuals in the audience - especially in a theatre when the audience can be seen and heard from the stage.
What makes the lecture a ‘social event’ is the potential (even when, as usual, not actually realised) for two-way communication. Think of the difference between attending a play in a theatre and watching a movie: a theatre audience is typically much quieter and more focused than that of a movie. Because, although in practice the actors and audience almost-never communicate individually; the reality of human presence has a powerful effect on the activity, alertness and concentration of individuals in the audience - especially in a theatre when the audience can be seen and heard from the stage.
In
lectures, this factor of presence works mainly by actual sensory-contact (mainly visual and auditory) between
lecturer (or actor) and audience. The situation of real-time social
communication makes students spontaneously more vigilant than when alone with a
book or computer, because a student’s failure to pay attention can be observed.
A
properly-conducted lecture also exploits the psychological disposition to
attend to persons of authority in
social situations. In effect, the formal lecture is a mutually beneficial
‘collusion’ between class and lecturer: the class lends authority, and the lecturer uses it, in mutually-valued pursuit of effective education. Indeed,
the physical structure of a well-designed lecture theatre - the arrangements of
seats and stage - enables a situation in which a group’s attention is spontaneously
focused on the lecturer; and this physical structure, of itself, artificially
generates authority in the lecturer.
Most
evolutionary psychologists would agree that humans were naturally selected to
attend-to, and thus better remember, the words of authoritative individuals. The
lecture situation is that socially-effective collusion whereby a class of
students implicitly, by their silent attention, temporarily creates a
psychological state of authority for the lecturer with the purpose of making
learning more effective.
This
situation ought to be mutually gratifying as well as for mutual benefit: to
have authority bestowed-upon-him is gratifying to the lecturer; and the
resulting enhancement of attention and memorability is gratifying and
beneficial for the students. The justification is improved motivation, and therefore
learning, all-round.
It is, indeed, precisely because the authority structure of a formal lecture is so powerful an instrument for focusing attention and improving learning that the lecture medium can be abused for propaganda purposes – for example by political or religious orators who orchestrate mass-meetings or rallies.
It is, indeed, precisely because the authority structure of a formal lecture is so powerful an instrument for focusing attention and improving learning that the lecture medium can be abused for propaganda purposes – for example by political or religious orators who orchestrate mass-meetings or rallies.
Because
lectures can so effectively exploit human psychology, lectures are indeed intrinsically
an imposition by one upon the many.
The justification for such a potentially-hazardous asymmetry of power, and a
factor that tends to prevent abuse, is the requirement that the lecturing process must genuinely be motivated
by a shared ethic of education.
The
lecturer’s self-presentation
A
lecture is a matter of persons; so the lecturer ought to be seen and known
personally – at least to the extent that knowing is valuable in learning.
Of
course, a lecture is not a ‘chat show’, and certainly ought not to be
‘confessional’ in nature; and the teacher’s perceived personality can only
really be a ‘persona’ – a kind-of dramatic
mask adopted for performance. However, although partial and selective, the
lecturer’s persona needs to be
authentic – it needs to be some honest aspect of the reality of his character. This
is especially the case when, as is optimal, the relationship between lecturer
and audience is extended over multiple interactions. An authentic persona allows an honest, natural,
spontaneous relationship to develop.
It
is therefore likely to be helpful for lecturers to introduce themselves in
reasonable detail; and furthermore to refer to personal contacts, experiences
and anecdotes. Years of feedback, in the form of examination answers written
from memory, indicates that personal data certainly assists in learning;
serving as pegs upon-which to hang those explanations and facts which are the
heart of a lecture.
In
other words, the lecturer should embrace the benefits of allowing the audience
to know something about himself – always bearing in mind that this is justified
only in terms of what is educationally helpful.
It
also needs to be noted that a lecturer’s persona
will - almost inevitably - annoy and grate-upon some members of the class;
since different people have different personal likes and dislikes. Indeed, this
is strictly unavoidable; since it is
a weakness of the strength of the lecture method.
However,
you don’t really need to like someone
to learn from him. Serious students
will usually be able to set-aside such irritations - so long as they have
learned to trust the lecturer’s honesty and competence.
How large a lecture audience is
possible?
A perennial question is the ratio of
teacher and students in a class: one teacher to how many students? How large a lecture class
can effectively, or optimally, be taught at once?
I would argue that for specifically educational purposes (as contrasted with
entertainment, or mental stimulation) there is something like an absolute
maximum size for teaching lectures; which size depends upon how good a
lecturer, how well-designed the lecture theatre, and how motivated and
disciplined are the students.
For average situations, this maximum is
about two hundred – and numbers in
excess of this (e.g. those sitting far away) will probably be getting very
little from the lecture while – by their disengagement, and inattention – be
damaging the experience of the rest. With too-large lectures, only some smaller
proportion of the class will truly be engaged and actively-learning: this
situation constitutes a type of fake teaching, because it pretends to something
it cannot deliver.
At one time I mostly lectured in a
steeply-raked, two-tier Victorian-built theatre that sat about 250, and yet the
lectures ‘worked’, because none of the audience were very far away from the
lecturer (the balcony seating jutted forward over the lower seats), so despite
the numbers there were good acoustics and sight-lines. Furthermore, the large classes
were usually of cohesive, highly intelligent and motivated groups (e.g. medical
or dental students) - keen and able to learn.
But that was an ideal situation; not readily transferable to other circumstances
such as sub-optimal lecture theatres, and mixed-subject classes including
less-motivated, less competent students. As a broad generalisation, applicable
to most lectures (by most lecturers to most students) the ratio ought to be no more than about
one-to-a-hundred; that is the lecture theatre should not usually be larger than
a hundred seats (assuming that the genuine intent is that all students present
may be engaged in active classroom learning).
A hundred students in a class is
actually a very large number; and keeping classes down to this size (and only
as big as this, in a reasonably well-designed venue) would not be regarded as an
onerous constraint by any serious
educational institution… however (by what they actually do, rather than what
they say) sadly few institutions really are serious about education.
So there is often pressure to push
above even this maximum class size;
for example by using audio-visual amplification technology to address many
hundreds of students in vast, or multiple-simultaneous, venues… These, I can
only regard as pseudo-lectures; and
they have little to do with a serious attempt to provide real education.
At most, such situations may attain the
level of those ‘dictation-transcription’ lecture of the Medieval universities;
in which both lecturer and audience have ‘engaged autopilot’. But in an era of
abundant, accessible and good quality textbooks, such exercises are largely
redundant; and insofar as many modern lectures conform to this description,
then this probably accounts for the generally poor reputation of the lecture
method.
In fact, if modern students have only
attended ‘PowerPoint’-style presentations to audiences numbered in their
hundreds; in which the proceedings occur in the dark, making note-taking
impossible; surrounded by people on laptops and mobile phones, browsing the
internet and social messaging; the invisible teacher merely an amplified,
disembodied and un-localised voice reading-off the slides; and the entire
substantive content available in lecture handouts or on the internet - then
these students have, in fact, never
actually experienced a real lecture.
Such unfortunate students are being
palmed-off with a dishonest simulacrum
of what lectures can and ought to be.
Talk and Chalk and problems with
‘visual aids’
‘Talk and Chalk’ is a slang term for
the traditional, and I would say best,
method of lecturing – although nowadays a whiteboard and dry-wipe marker pen is
used rather than a blackboard and chalk.
(Aside: The blackboard and chalk were
very messy, and the chalk dust was unpleasant for the lecturer. However, for
reasons I cannot altogether explain, I believe that the blackboard was overall
a more effective teaching method than the whiteboard; and that classes enjoyed
blackboard teaching more than whiteboard. One hunch is that writing and
illustrating with chalks imposed on the lecturer a slow and stylised way of
working. My understanding is that blackboards have by now been removed from almost
all universities and colleges – so ‘chalk’ is probably no longer an option.)
Talk and Chalk means that the lecture
content is delivered by some combination of the spoken word, and material
written or drawn on the board in real time for the audience to copy.
Thus the only cognitive transition the lecture audience needs to make, is between
taking notes ‘aurally’ from dictation, alternating with copying words and
pictures - and for most students this alternation is not a problem. Those parts
of the lecture written on the board tend to be key facts and concepts – such as
references, summaries, definitions, tables and diagrams. The spoken parts
amplify and illustrate these key facts and concepts.
For example: the lecturer defines key
terms at dictation speed and written on the board; then verbally explains a
concept while students listen; then summarises the explanation on the board,
while students copy. He may then invite questions.
‘Visual aids’ comprise media such as
projected slides, audio-visual material such as videos or short movies,
overhead projectors, ‘demonstrations’ at the front of the lecture theatre, and
so on. While these may sometimes be necessary, and at other times provide a
useful change and stimulus, I would argue that in general they are all
significantly sub-optimal.
The problem is partly that visual aids
encourage passive observation, and discourage the creative process of making of
lecture notes – since they typically contain too much information and/ or
information of a kind which cannot be captured in lecture notes. But another
problem is that visual aids generate the need for a ‘cognitive gear change’
between very different media – in the sense that learning from a photograph,
detailed slide, or movie is of a different form than speaking, writing and
drawing.
For example, if the audience has been
watching a five minute video; when the video finishes and the attention needs
to be reactivated for Talk and Chalk teaching, then there is a kind of mental
waking-up, a ‘lurch’, that results from the need for a sudden effort after
passive relaxation.
This gear change is not necessarily
fatal to the lecture, but it is a difficulty which takes some time and
discipline to overcome – and it leads almost inevitably to a psychological fragmentation of the
lecture.
Therefore, I believe that lecturers
should in general stick-to Talk and Chalk, and resist the temptation to add
visual aids – except when absolutely necessary.
Such uniformity of lecture medium does,
however, imply a need to give the audience short breaks to refresh attention -
to converse, stand and stretch limbs, and fidget. A fifty minute lecture
requires at least one such break of a
couple of minutes - just enough time for the lecturer to wipe the whiteboards.
Problems with hand-outs and
online-lecture records
My repeated emphasis on the importance
of making each lecture into a real time,
here and now, unique and un-repeatable, active learning event; is what explains
why hand-outs and internet ‘support’ are so often a problem, with negative
effects on learning.
The core problem is that anything which
diminishes the importance of being-there, paying-attention, understanding and
recording the information; will certainly diminish the learning.
Typically, education needs both sticks and carrots - that is; punishments
and rewards to enforce attendance, alertness and cognitive effort. Otherwise, over
the ups-and-downs (and temptations) of a long course of lectures; class
attendance, and therefore the chance for active-learning, invariably fall-off
to some extent (due to the weakness of will of a minority of students). But
attendance and attention may collapse alarmingly and to low levels, even when
lectures are of high quality, when lectures are not explicitly (and also
implicitly) regarded by the authorities as being central and necessary to the
teaching.
The idea may be promulgated that
lectures are intended to be miss-able without
disadvantage by provision of all ‘necessary’ material without need for
attendance (or attention while attending) - for example by handouts, internet
material, or making audio and/ or video recordings of lectures. This is
something that administrators may emphasise as an amenity, or in order to
‘reassure’ students that they will not be ‘penalised’ for absences
(unavoidable, or otherwise). Such an attitude, increasingly common - due to
technological advances - is lethal to the
educational benefits of real lecturing.
In practice there needs to be occasional
exceptions to the requirement for lecture attendance to obtain optimal
educational benefit. But exceptions must
be exceptional; arrangements and adjustments should be one-off, specific
and tailored, not routine nor prescribed; and exceptions cannot without
educational harm, be addressed in ways that compromise the integrity of the
principle of attendance.
It ought clearly to be articulated and
respected that the mass of students will need actually to be present and
participating in lectures to get the fullest benefit.
To put the matter curtly: arrangements to assist those who do not
attend lectures should be regarded as a specific privilege, not a universal right.
Because if a student is not
disadvantaged by failure actually to attend and be attentive during a lecture
course; then there must be something seriously wrong with those lectures!
Lecture Theatre - design and usage
The size of audience that can
effectively be lectured-to partly depends on the specific venue. Indeed,
lecture theatre design is very important – and many (probably most) lecture
theatres are significantly (sometimes grossly) unfit for purpose.
For small classes, the specifics of a
lecture theatre are relatively less important – since everyone can see and hear
what is happening; but as the size of the class increases, the design becomes
more and more important; until with large classes (above about 100) only the
very best-designed lecture theatres are adequate.
It is necessary that the audience in a lecture be
in audio-visual contact with the lecturer. In general, the closer the physical proximity of lecturer and audience,
the better. For big classes this means that the lecture theatre must have a steep rake; that is, steeply-sloped
seats (as in a traditional theatre – some Medieval lecture theatres were
positively vertiginous in this respect!); so that all students are close enough that they can clearly hear and see
the lecturer and any visuals, because the sight-line is above the heads of the
students sitting in front.
Another aspect of sight-lines is that
all members of the audience need to be able to maintain ‘eye contact’ with the
lecturer. This implies the lecture theatre should be well lit, with plenty of
bright lights especially at the front where the lecturer and writing boards are
located. In sum, the level of brightness in a lecture theatres should be more
like a bright kitchen (500 Lux) than a gloomy bedroom (50 Lux). As well as
encouraging eye contact, and maintaining alertness, bright lighting also
enables lecture notes to be created more effectively.
Naturally, the benefits of a bright
environment also mean that the ‘house lights’ (illuminating the audience)
should be kept-on for most of the lecture – with the whole room lit such that
everybody can see everybody else. The practice of showing slides on a screen in
a dark room should be kept to a minimum (when it is not possible to eliminate
slides altogether).
As well as sight-lines, the lecture
theatre acoustics must be good; including an absence of background noises and
external noises (e.g. from traffic, builders, or conversations from students
passing outside). Sound-proofing is necessary both to avoid distraction, and in
order that all students present can easily hear what is being said without
artificial means of amplification.
The use of microphones may sometimes be
unavoidable for some lecturers and some venues (even I have occasionally been
forced into this by laryngitis – although I have trained myself to ‘project’
the voice like a stage actor). But microphones should be discouraged and the
usage of amplification regarded as exceptional - since electronic reproduction interposes a psychological barrier between
lecturer and audience. (For example, most amplification systems do not
localise the voice to the exact place from which the lecturer is speaking –
which creates an alienating dislocation.)
Of the other ‘sensory’ factors, the
most important – and most neglected - is ventilation. Lecture theatres simply
must have an ample flow of cool air –
because a warm, stuffy, humid lecture theatre may become soporific such as to
render a lecture futile. Therefore it is better for the lecture theatre to be a
bit too cold than too hot; and too draughty than too stuffy. After all, in extremis the lecturer and students can
always wear an extra layer!
Furthermore, and vitally; taking
lectures seriously means building enough
lecture theatres of the necessary size, and designing them to be effective
environments for learning. There is no need to ‘reinvent the wheel’ –
colleges should simply find and copy the best examples of lecture theatre
design (which are often the oldest).
Any motivated lecturer or serious
student will be able to say which are the best lecture theatres - unmotivated lecturers
and non-attending or unserious students should have no say in the matter!
The unit of lecturing is the course –
with one lecturer per course
The syllabus of a qualification such as
a degree is organized into units typically called courses – and as a generalisation it seems to work best when each
course is given by a single person. The reasons are probably psychological –
but the psychology seems to constrain the educational possibilities.
Lecturing requires some stability; the
lecturer and the class need to get to know each other – and in particular the
class needs to get-to-know and learn-to-trust the lecturer, which takes time
and repetition. Until this trust is established, the student will experience an
inner resistance to learning which is hard to overcome.
The first couple of lectures may be
entertaining or they may be dull, but they are seldom fully ‘educational’ in any
substantive sense – it is only later in the course when some solid
understanding and knowledge is likely to be transmitted. Therefore one-off
lectures by multiple lecturers should be avoided; and multiple (team) teaching
likewise avoided.
Also, the lectures in a course should
be given reasonably close-together; at least once a week, and ideally more
often – to assist and accelerate this process of class members developing
familiarity, and indeed getting to know each other: as well as bonding the class into a psychological unit,
so they develop a cohesive group
personality.
(Discovering the distinctive group
personality of a class, and adjusting the teaching to its needs, is one of the
things which keep lecturing fresh and enjoyable. Just like people, no two
classes are exactly alike in personality - and some are quite delightful!)
There needs to be attention both to the
desirability of free-standing, individually-comprehensible lectures within the course on the one hand; and
on the other hand a meaningful and structured overall arc linking between the individual lectures in a
course-of-lectures. Ideally – both
should be the aim: each lecture making a ‘short story’ and the whole set of
lectures adding-up to make a ‘novel’.
In practice, it is hard to do this –
and the emphasis should depend on the motivation and capacity for concentration
of the audience. A keener and more able audience can be assumed to retain and
keep-up-with earlier lectures, and can therefore appreciate the cross-lecture
integration of a grand narrative.
But the large, mixed, distractible type
of student audience must be given the content in ‘bite-sized chunks’ of almost-independent
lectures – each lecture relying as little as possible on prior knowledge. In
such situations the minority of best students will inevitably be frustrated by
repetition and lack of cross-lecture integration - but this is an unavoidable
disadvantage of mixed-ability teaching to heterogeneous students.
Conclusion
Lectures
cannot do everything in education; in general they work best for setting-out
core, essential content and for explaining principles. Indeed - if there is a
single word that describes what lectures do best, that word is probably explaining.
The
implication is that choices concerning lecture structure and content should be
subordinated to optimising that primary goal of explanation. The requirement of
effective ‘explanation’ is, indeed, a useful index for deciding on the selection
and volume of lecture material; and the degree of precision (or detail) with
which a topic is addressed should be guided by the over-arching objective of maximising
explanatory clarity.
By
contrast, I don’t think lectures work well for open-ended objectives such as
exploring, discussing, or encouraging genuine critical thinking. It is the
nature of the medium that makes lectures most effective when used for instruction, with confident and clear
didacticism. Presumably this is why lectures have generally been most popular
in professional education; in fields such as medicine, law, theology and
engineering.
Naturally,
lectures are limited in what they can do – which is surely obvious. Among the
most important limitations is that lectures cannot teach skills (these need
supervision, exercises and multiple repetitions); and of course individual
private study is always necessary for mastery. For such purposes other teaching
methods are necessary.
The
lecture medium has stood at the core of serious education in most of the best
universities and colleges for many hundreds of years – and for efficient,
explanatory teaching, no viable alternative method has emerged either to equal
or supersede lectures. That being so; the art and craft of lecturing is worthy
of serious consideration.
Note: I have been interested in
university teaching, especially of medicine and science, ever since my very
first article – a letter about ‘modelling’ in clinical instruction published in
the magazine World Medicine in 1981. As a lecturer; I have taught physiology,
anatomy, epidemiology and psychology; to student doctors, dentists, nurses,
biologists and psychologists. In 1992, I published a book on medical education
(The Making of a Doctor, with RS Downie; Oxford University Press); and I have
authored many papers, editorials and journalistic articles on educational
themes. The above essay considerably expands upon an earlier publication: Charlton, BG. Lectures are such an effective teaching
method because they exploit evolved human psychology to improve learning.
Medical Hypotheses. 2006; 67: 1261-1265.