{"id":55,"date":"2010-12-02T09:50:52","date_gmt":"2010-12-02T15:50:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.acu.edu\/sensingt\/?page_id=55"},"modified":"2010-12-02T09:50:52","modified_gmt":"2010-12-02T15:50:52","slug":"to-lecture-or-not-to-lecture","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/blogs.acu.edu\/sensingt\/cool-stuff\/to-lecture-or-not-to-lecture\/","title":{"rendered":"To Lecture or Not To Lecture"},"content":{"rendered":"

Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

The case was written for use by the Association for Case Teaching to introduce case teaching as an active learning strategy for the theological classroom. Long standing tensions at Nelson Seminary erupted at a faculty meeting as the professors examined various complaints with the distance education program. All of Dr. Roland Stanford\u2019s leadership and mediation skills would be needed as he managed the various philosophical approaches to classroom pedagogy in both the residential and distance learning contexts. Topics include: case teaching, conflict resolution, distance education, and active learning strategies.<\/p>\n

<\/em><\/p>\n

To Lecture, Or Not to Lecture<\/em><\/p>\n

Dean Roland Stanford sat at his desk staring at the minutes from last week\u2019s ad-hoc meeting. He glanced at his watch. \u201c2:56 p.m.\u201d He wondered to himself why these kinds of meetings always seemed to be scheduled so late in the day. Four o\u2019clock would be here before he knew it.<\/p>\n

Last week\u2019s meeting adjourned abruptly when Tom Fryer, tenured professor of New Testament, dismissed himself saying, \u201cWe are talking in circles. I hate meetings where nothing is decided. Roland, if you don\u2019t get a handle on some of the new faculty, then the whole curriculum will suffer. I\u2019m tired of students taking my seminars who still do not know the difference between Barth and Bultmann.\u201d<\/p>\n

Tom Fryer and George Tucker had called the meeting shortly after George, associate dean of continuing education, received several complaining emails from students who were all part of the recent initiative to recruit second career students to the seminary. Nelson Seminary\u2019s umbilical connection to the larger university generated a culture of attracting only recent graduates. The average age in Nelson\u2019s M.Div. program lingered at 24. Tucker, a former electrical engineer himself before entering the ministry, came to Nelson after a successful teaching career at Fuller. Stanford hired him specifically to coordinate Nelson\u2019s diversification initiatives.<\/p>\n

Stanford looked at the minutes again. He slowly read through each item.<\/p>\n

Minutes <\/em><\/h1>\n

March 12, 2008<\/em><\/p>\n

<\/em><\/p>\n

Attending: Tom Fryer, George Tucker, Roland Stanford, Jessica Daly, Hassid Ner, and Kimberly Jackson.<\/em><\/p>\n

<\/em><\/p>\n

1. George passed out a series of emails to the group.[i]<\/a> After everyone finished reading, George set an agenda for the meeting: I believe our efforts to transform the classroom with newer approaches to teaching is doing a disservice to many of the students we are here to serve. Most of these students need more traditional approaches to education.<\/em><\/p>\n

Stanford stopped reading for a moment. He reflected on how much George loved to lecture. Previous attempts to get him to consider changing his style had all been summarily dismissed. George often chided other faculty saying \u201cI think that too many of us have forgotten how effective a good ol\u2019 fashioned lecture can be.\u201d<\/p>\n

2. <\/em>Dr. Stanford passed out another memo.[ii]<\/a> \u201cThis is from Terri Clifton, one of the unnamed professors in the emails, who I asked to respond to me about the complaint.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Stanford knew Clifton was one of Nelson Seminaries most popular professors. \u201cWhy in the world was George paying so much attention to these emails,\u201d he muttered under his breath. He had agreed with Hassid when Hassid had leaned over to him during the meeting and whispered, \u201cI still enjoy lecturing too. It is the best way that I can cover all that I want to in a single semester. But I too hear feedback from students that they do not have the time to reflect, discuss, and review the material covered. Why didn\u2019t those students email or contact the teacher directly?\u201d Stanford made a note, \u201creview policy regarding appropriate feedback loops.\u201d<\/p>\n

3. <\/em>Kimberly Jackson reminded the group of the McKeachie[iii]<\/a> book given to the entire faculty at last year\u2019s faculty development seminar. She said, \u201cLecture is as effective as any other method in conveying factual knowledge but that on other criteria such as attitude change, development of thinking, and problem solving, the lecture falls short of more student-active methods. We have encouraged faculty to make a shift from an information-delivery model to a student-learning model. We need to proceed full-steam ahead.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cKim was always the voice of reason,\u201d Stanford thought. Her coaching had helped him to successfully transition out of the classroom. Kim always protected her own. Although Terri was at least 12 years behind Stanford in school, both remembered fondly sitting at Kim\u2019s feet in class. He remembered when Kim scolded the others during the meeting, \u201cHow any of you could question a teacher like Terri is beyond me?\u201d But then Stanford remembered Tom\u2019s outburst; \u201cMcKeachie also talked about good lectures citing several studies in support of them. He also wrote about how to improve them and the value of note taking. There is good reason why lecture is still the most popular form of teaching.\u201d Stanford wondered, \u201cWhy is Tom so intense about this subject? Something else must be going on.\u201d<\/p>\n

4. <\/em>Jessica Daly noted, \u201cSeminaries have always had difficulty in dealing with the delivery of courses designed to prepare students for entry into a professional practice. Past attitudes concerning the construction of curricula conveniently ignores the fact that through experience and reflecting, thinking practitioners construct a personal form of knowledge about what they do. In busy ministries, good pastors do not necessarily engage in a hypothetical, deductive form of reasoning; they simply enact what works for them. This largely tacit form of knowledge is embedded in their actions.\u201d[1]<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

Stanford thought, \u201cJessica\u2019s long tenure in the pastorate, field supervision, and experience with ATFE had proven again the value of life experience in the classroom.\u201d And yet often George, Tom, and other older faculty often dismissed her contributions to meetings. Stanford jotted down another note, \u201cEmphasize item #4.\u201d<\/p>\n

5. <\/em>A discussion concerning older students continued for several minutes. George Tucker summarized, \u201cThe ever upward progression of an educated adult population and work force and the reduction in high-paying jobs that require little advanced education might be the single most powerful factor in the maintenance of an ever increasing older student enrollment.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Stanford poured himself another cup of coffee. Looking out the window he remembered that this is when Jessica had said, \u201cWe are aware that our classrooms are more diverse. That is the very reason we must recognize the need for a variety of teaching techniques.\u201d She looked at Tom and George\u2019s side of the room only. Stanford wondered, \u201cwas she trying to say something to affirm George\u2019s role in recruiting older students or was she sending Tom a message. That is when Tom snapped back, \u201cWe\u2019ve all learned to reason and put into practice the knowledge we learned in school. Most of our skills came after graduation. Anyway, that is the purpose of the practicums, internships, and ministry classes. There is an essential body of knowledge that every graduate from this school should have at his or her disposal.\u201d<\/p>\n

And Stanford remembered that George had turned quickly to Tom and said, \u201cThe students in question think in more complex ways due to cognitive development. They are on a more mature and intellectual stage. Older students bring a diverse background to the classroom. These experiences should enhance the learning experience for all students. Older students tend to keep appointments and complete assignments on time. These students should be welcomed and appreciated. The teacher needs to respect this stage of life. These student\u2019s goals and motives for pursuing more education need to be appreciated.\u201d \u201cNow,\u201d Stanford questioned, \u201cwas George agreeing with Jessica or Tom?\u201d Stanford added to his list, \u201cdiversity of student body = diversity of teaching techniques???\u201d<\/p>\n

6. <\/em>Kimberly Jackson, \u201cI just read a study by Cavanaugh[iv]<\/a> stating it takes more time for us older adults to turn sensory memory into working memory. Therefore, more time in practice, exercise, digesting of material, and demonstration is needed. Then Cavanaugh notes that once the older student makes connections, retrieval of information is the same. Also, pairing older students with traditional students would create a synthesis of learning not available in homogeneous groups.”\u00a0 [some discussion continued \u2026]<\/em><\/p>\n

Stanford\u2019s head began to pound. He thought, \u201cDorothy must have lost track of who said what too.\u201d Even during the meeting Stanford remembering thinking that only Kim had the ethos to say what she said, but even then, everyone started talking at once.<\/p>\n

7. <\/em>The question was addressed to Dr. Stanford, \u201cHow do we support new faculty? Do we provide training and support for the classroom? None of us came out of school with the skills to teach.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cI guess I shouldn\u2019t have ignored that question,\u201d Stanford reflected. \u201cI guess I thought it was self-evident.\u201d<\/p>\n

8. <\/em>George asked, \u201cWhy did we spend all the money to remodel the three lecture halls to look like highly technical theaters and in many cases with fixed tiered seating? I like the new seating but much of the data projection and video equipment creates a barrier between the teacher and the students.\u201d[2]<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

Stanford recalled how his predecessor had raised a significant amount of money for the renovations. \u201cI am amazed,\u201d he grimaced, \u201cabout how short-sighted we sometimes are about facilities. Sometimes these four walls determine more about our mission than people do.\u201d Hassid said something then, something important. \u2026 He said, \u201cI know that my classes are far more effective in the new rooms and we need to stay the course. Is this really about whether to lecture or not to lecture?\u201d Stanford mused, \u201cIt sure is hard to figure out which side of the fence Hassid is on, but I think he is often the one to cut to the chase.\u201d<\/p>\n

9. <\/em>Dr. Stanford answered, \u201cWhile lecturing is regarded by many as a constrained and inflexible way of teaching, the reality is that teachers have enormous possibilities and freedom within the classroom. Yet when a course is a necessary foundational course or a prerequisite, then it is the responsibility of the instructor to cover the material. Students have an implied contract to learn what the instructor indicates on the syllabus. In these type courses, much of the material is unavailable any other way. The instructor needs to provide direction and continuity.\u201d[3]<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cI guess Hassid is not the only one who argues both sides.\u201d Stanford re-read point 9 several times. Then he heard Kim\u2019s voice loud and clear. She didn\u2019t even look his way when she said, \u201cYet we all know of too many who still see the classroom as a 55-minute uninterrupted discourse from the teacher with no discussion between students and no student activity other than listening and note-taking.\u201d<\/p>\n

Was it Kim\u2019s remark that made Tom push away from the table? Stanford pulled a post-it note from the pad. \u201cFind out what\u2019s bugging Tom,\u201d he wrote. He pasted the note in his Day-Timer thinking, \u201cI can\u2019t have Tom disrupt any more meetings like that.\u201d<\/p>\n

10. <\/em>Dr. Stanford concluded, \u201cSince some of us have other engagements, let\u2019s meet again this time next week.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

<\/em><\/p>\n

Respectfully Submitted, Dorothy North<\/em><\/p>\n

Stanford remembered how Kim had lingered at the door after the meeting had adjourned. \u201cRoland,\u201d she insisted as she enunciated her words slowly. \u201cIt is not enough just to know how you would resolve each of these issues. You must provide this faculty with a clear vision and a prioritized agenda so that a coherent and unified philosophy will propel Nelson Seminary into the forefront of theological education.\u201d Although Kim neared retirement, her commitment to new learning strategies earned her the respect of students and faculty. Her own courses in Church History modeled an innovative and effective classroom. No matter what else occurred, he knew he wanted teachers like Kim affirmed.<\/p>\n

Stanford glanced at his watch again. \u201c4:12 p.m.\u201d He walked to the conference room door and paused, head bowed, eyes closed, knuckles clenched white around the knob. Dorothy had already informed him that everyone else arrived on time ten minutes ago. Stanford bit his lip as he stepped through the door followed closely by Dorothy.<\/p>\n

Teaching Note<\/strong><\/p>\n

The case was written for use by the Association for Case Teaching to introduce case teaching as an active learning strategy for the theological classroom. Long standing tensions at Nelson Seminary erupted at a faculty meeting as the professors examined various complaints with the distance education program. All of Dr. Roland Stanford\u2019s leadership and mediation skills would be needed as he managed the various philosophical approaches to classroom pedagogy in both the residential and distance learning contexts. Topics include: case teaching, conflict resolution, distance education, and active learning strategies.<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

Objectives:<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The case offers a variety of issues that could be selected for analysis. Select 2-3 learning objectives that correlate with the issues that are anticipated in your context.<\/li>\n
  2. Examples:\n
      \n
    1. To analyze pedagogical strategies employed by university professors.<\/li>\n
    2. To explore and practice conflict resolution skills by academic leaders.<\/li>\n
    3. To compare and contrast the residential classroom with the distance learning environment.<\/li>\n
    4. To introduce and model case teaching as an alternative to lecture.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Introduction: <\/strong><\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Utilize a \u201cpair sharing\u201d activity by asking the participants to pair off and talk to one another about a positive memory of an effective teaching moment they experienced as a student. After five minutes of discussion, ask three groups to report their experiences. Afterwards ask, \u201cDid anyone have an outstanding lecture as an example?\u201d<\/li>\n
      2. Alternatively, one might ask about a time either as a teacher or as a student of a teaching fiasco.<\/li>\n
      3. Brainstorm: What are the habits and characteristics of excellent teaching or its opposite?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Read Case<\/strong><\/p>\n

          \n
        1. A reenactment of the faculty meeting could be videotaped.<\/li>\n
        2. The student emails could be converted to \u201cvideo\u201d emails and presented as a data set prior to reading the case. The video emails correlates with the fact that the students are in a distance education program.<\/li>\n
        3. The minutes could be separated from the case and presented as a discrete data set.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Characters<\/strong><\/p>\n

            \n
          1. Name the characters in the case<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            Tom Fryer<\/p>\n

            Kimberly Jackson.<\/p>\n

            George Tucker<\/p>\n

            Students who sent emails<\/p>\n

            Roland Stanford<\/p>\n

            Students who did not send emails<\/p>\n

            Jessica Daly<\/p>\n

            Others?<\/p>\n

            Hassid Ner<\/p>\n

              \n
            1. Do you identify with one particular character? Let participants name different characters explaining why they identified with them. When a character is named for the first time, solicit details about what is revealed in the case about this person.<\/li>\n
            2. If one of the primary characters is not named, explore why this character did not create a sense of identity. Ask, \u201cDo you recognize any former teachers who you might identify with this character?\u201d\u00a0 Seek to be fair with each characterization. The temptation to vilify one of the characters can be dismissive of legitimate points of view.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              Issues<\/strong><\/p>\n

                \n
              1. What is the real issue of this case? Be prepared to hear more than one answer and be skeptical if only one issue is identified as the one real issue.\n
                  \n
                1. The case can be analyzed from various perspectives depending upon the learning objectives of the case presenter.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n