The time-worn tool of the instructor “telling” and students “listening” has become passé to a new generation of educators who are solidly based in the constructivist philosophy.

Believing in these principles, these educators embrace a number of interactive strategies to engage and involve students in active learning. Even so, educators must not, in an excess of zeal, dismiss the lecture format as outmoded or ineffective. The lecture format, is not—nor has it ever been—a one-way process: that is, it was never intended to be a boring “telling” to a bored “listening” audience.

The lecture format, as my colleagues and I employ it, allows us to share information illuminated by appropriate illustrations and stimulated by frequent pauses in the dissertation for questions, comments, and discussion of the points covered, thereby setting the stage for active discourse among our students.

Such a “retooled” schematic for the lecture format gives thoughtful instructors reason to believe in the efficacy of the lecture as a viable instructional tool. This tool enables students to comprehend complex concepts as they construct new meaning of the knowledge they encounter in their classrooms.

This lecture format also provides students with the opportunity to hone critical thinking and analytical skills through their questioning and analysis of concepts. Thus, the principles of active learning are realized in this format.

Gone (I hope) are the days of instructors’ 20-minute monologues to blank faces and, perhaps, blank minds of students. The lecture, having undergone many transformations, remains an effective teaching tool.

* Jacqueline A. Hughes is an assistant professor in the Department of Teacher Education at California State University, Bakersfield. She is a 2004 graduate of the Emerging Leader Academy and a co-chair of the CFA membership committee at CSUB .

No, the lecture should be replaced with a format that connects the classroom with real-world experiences.
Peter Potamianos *

For the most part, the lecture is dead. The proverbial “sage on the stage” at the head of the classroom is now a museum relic. Those who disagree and continue to use the podium are lulling their students to sleep. Even Socrates did not lecture much in his day. Instead, he dialogued with students and spent most of his time listening and challenging their beliefs.

Today, our students have a shorter attention span than those 25 years ago. Students, then, did not have access to the sophisticated media they have today to distract them from reading and listening. Now, however, these technologies are more cheaply available. Their addictive images and sounds contribute to an attention span that, for the average 17 to 23-year-old, may be between 5 to 7 minutes, and even less for those with attention deficit disorders.

Students who spend a great deal of time watching TV and playing video games have trouble concentrating. Reading scores of incoming college freshmen, especially those at the community college level, back this. Todd Gitlin, author of Media Unlimited, claims that the average American child lives in a household filled with a variety of media technologies. How, then, can a teacher with a podium compete with this?

I find that most of my students learn best in the laboratory and in the field. In my humanities and English composition courses, students spend at least 60 percent of their classroom time on field trips. Admittedly, this mode of instruction requires more of my time, but I am delighted when I see them connect the classroom to their experiences. They are fully engaged and on the way to a richer understanding of themselves and of the world.

* Peter Potamianos is is an adjunct professor at the College of DuPage and legislation committee chair for the adjuncts’ association (CODAA). He teaches humanities and English composition in the Department of Field and Experiential Learning, and in the Liberal Arts division.