Arts One: Seeing and Knowing
Christina Hendricks
Lecture: Freud
ISW (Instructional Skills Workshop) and this teaching certificate course teach us the importance of participatory learning and how to give students learning activities relevant to the learning objectives. This, however, does not mean that traditional lecturing is not a good way of teaching. There are times when lecturing seems necessary: there are things that students just need to sit and listen to before any learning activities can be given. And there are also times when lecturing is a good way of teaching. The question is, how can I decide when lecturing is suitable? The lecture I observed was delivered in the traditional lecturing way, and it was delivered well. After discussing the lecture with my mentor Christina Hendricks after the observation, I gathered that there are several important consideration in deciding whether lecturing is suitable.
(1) Class Size
Simply put, the bigger the class, the more difficult it is to give learning activities. The class I observed was fairly big, approximately 100 people, so arranging and managing learning activities would not be easy. But if there are (say) only 40 people (like the course I am teaching), it is easier to arrange learning activities.
(2) Content
There were quite a lot of materials that had to be covered in the lecture. The lecture was on Freud and psychoanalysis. My mentor had to explain a wide range of things such as Freudian slips, Freud’s thoughts about dreams, his Topographical model, Id, Ego, Superego, and Oedipus Complex. There wasn’t much time for learning activities. Also, the materials simply need be delivered through lecturing. They are hard facts that have to be taught through lecturing. Crafting some learning activities to let the students figure out what the Oedipus Complex is on their own doesn’t seem practical, not least with the time constraint.
I can relate this to my teaching experience. If I need to explain the main argument of an article, e.g. What motivates it, what are the supporting reasons, what is the significance, what are the possible objections, these have to be taught through lecturing. There can be some learning activities, but the major part will be delivered through lecturing. Or if I am teaching some advanced concept of validity, I will need to explain the technical concepts by lecturing (e.g. why an argument with necessarily false premises is, counterintuitively, valid). This is a decision I had to make this term when teaching critical thinking. I wasn’t sure then if it was right, but now I think my decision (to teach by lecturing) was reasonable.
(3) Structure of the Course
Simply put, are there other meetings where there will be opportunities for learning activities? And does the course give enough time for lecturing? Or is there little? The course (Arts One) is structured such that there is one lecture and two tutorials/seminars. So there is enough time in tutorials for learning activities but not much time for lecturing (compared with other courses). So the lecture needs to be spent on lecturing and delivering the materials. That’s okay, because there will be time for learning activities in the two tutorials.
But even though a lecture is mostly lecturing, small learning activities can be arranged. For instance, the lecturer can ask questions. There can be short small-group discussion if the class is not too big. iClicker can also be used, depending on the nature of the materials.
