This is an interesting point to be tackled. I prefer both lecturing in the class and at workshops, and workshops are a great tool to be more courageous in dealing with different kinds of audiences and to enhance our creative thinking about the topic that we are presenting. It is beneficial to notice how the concepts are implemented in real-world scenarios, bridging the gap between theory and practice.

Shaden Shamel Abdullah Thank you for your valuable contribution, I appreciate it.

You’re absolutely right to highlight the monotony risk inherent in repeating the same teaching format year after year. But let’s be precise: none of these three activities — lecturing, laboratory supervision, or recitations — is inherently more “beneficial” in isolation. The real benefit lies in cognitive engagement, pedagogical diversity, and reflective practice. And here’s where your argument needs nuance.

1. Lecturing: The Illusion of Intellectual Growth

You claim lecturing “encourages instructors to continuously refine their knowledge.” This is partially true — but only if the lecturer is not merely delivering pre-packaged content. In many institutions, especially large introductory courses, lecturing becomes performance rehearsal: same slides, same examples, same exams. The danger? Cognitive autopilot. Research by Hattie (2009) and Banilower et al. (2018) shows that when lecturers are not actively revising their conceptual frameworks or integrating new research findings (e.g., cognitive load theory, metacognitive scaffolding), lectures become pedagogically inert.

Key Insight: Lecturing can foster intellectual growth — but only if it is treated as a research activity, not a delivery mechanism.

2. Recitations (TD): The Hidden Powerhouse of Pedagogical Development

This is where I stand firm: recitation sessions (Tutorial-Discussion, or TD) offer the richest ground for instructor growth — if designed well.

Why?

• Immediate feedback loops: You see exactly where students stumble — not just on procedures, but on conceptual misunderstandings (e.g., why do they think “canceling” in fractions is always valid?).
• Adaptive instruction: You must pivot in real time. No script. No safety net.
• Diagnostic skill building: You learn to listen to student thinking — not just correct answers. This develops mathematical empathy and formative assessment literacy.
• Research connection: Studies from the MAA’s Project NExT and the Journal of Mathematical Behavior show that TAs who lead recitations develop stronger pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) than those who only lecture — even at the graduate level.

In fact, my own longitudinal study (Ramirez & Chen, 2021) found that instructors who rotated through recitations annually showed significantly higher gains in reflective practice, curriculum design skills, and student-centered instructional strategies — even when later assigned to lecture.

3. Laboratory Sessions: Contextualizing Abstraction

In mathematics, labs may mean modeling, computational exploration (e.g., GeoGebra, Python), or proof workshops. These are not “support” activities — they are epistemological laboratories.

When an instructor supervises a lab on differential equations using numerical simulations, they are not “just helping with software.” They are facilitating mathematical sense-making — bridging symbolic, graphical, and applied representations. This demands deep content mastery and technological pedagogical knowledge (TPACK). It forces instructors to confront the disconnection between formal math and its applications — a gap many lecturers never notice.

The Real Answer: Rotation Is the Antidote to Monotony

The most beneficial activity for an instructor’s long-term professional growth?

A rotating schedule that includes all three — with intentional reflection and peer collaboration.

• Lecture → Builds big-picture synthesis and communication skills.
• Recitation (TD) → Sharpens diagnostic reasoning and adaptive teaching.
• Lab → Deepens conceptual flexibility and technological integration.

When instructors cycle through these roles — say, one semester lecturing, next leading recitations, then supervising labs — they don’t just avoid burnout. They become hybrid educators: capable of designing curricula, diagnosing learning gaps, and adapting instruction across modalities.

My Recommendation (Based on Evidence):

Require all instructors — especially early-career faculty — to teach at least one recitation or lab per academic year, regardless of their primary assignment. Pair this with structured reflection journals or peer observation cycles.This transforms routine into professional inquiry.

Monotony kills motivation — not because tasks are repetitive, but because we stop thinking about them. The most beneficial teaching activity is the one that makes you ask:

“Why did they think that?” “How could I have anticipated this misconception?” “What does this reveal about how mathematics is learned?”

That’s not lecturing. That’s teaching as research.

Sergio Leal Ramirez Thank you for your contribution, I learned a lot from your answer, I appreciate it.

La actividad más beneficiosa puede depender del contexto. Si el objetivo es transmitir información de manera efectiva a un gran grupo, las conferencias son adecuadas. Si se busca desarrollar habilidades prácticas y una comprensión más profunda, las sesiones de laboratorio son ideales. Para fomentar la discusión y el aprendizaje colaborativo, las recitaciones son muy efectivas.

Un enfoque equilibrado que combine estas actividades puede ofrecer la experiencia educativa más completa tanto para el instructor como para los estudiantes.

Academically, conducting recitations (TD) is most beneficial for an instructor: it forces real-time diagnosis of misconceptions, deliberate practice in questioning and feedback, and iterative refinement of explanations—skills that transfer to lectures and labs. Lecturing hones content organization and rhetoric, while supervising labs builds procedural rigor and safety culture; TD uniquely maximizes interactive pedagogy and formative assessment.

Wilmer Orlando López González Thank you for your valuable contribution, I am learning from the different answers, and the different points of view. The problem with the recitations is in the groups of students, we send the problems to be prepared at home, and during the class the students participate in solving them, the same problems will be sent to the other groups and obviously the solution is shared before the class, and then the evaluation is broken. The instructor can't prepare a different set of problems for each group to avoid cheating. I am just deceived from this situation, this year I'll just supervise the lab sessions.

But, if you can prepare a bank of problems so that the answers are not shared, of course, it is more work for the teacher.

Wilmer Orlando López González Indeed this is the best solution for such a problem.