Hello Ho:

I think your perception is true, but I don't have any statistics to support my belief. However, the latter may just mean that in your culture the didactic lecture is the preferred one, so I think comparing yourself with other countries may not necessarily be the way to go. You can include some of the active learning strategies that are used in the West, but to make a complete switch and have these as the dominant form of instruction may not fit in your culture.

Many thanks,

Debra

Dear Ho Yin Cheung,

In my opinion, your perception is true. In pedagogical terms, we are faced with two choices orientation: Teacher Center learning (TCL) or Student Center Larning (SCL). Many researchers claim that the SCL more successful in improving student creativity and reasoning than TCL. However, It does not mean TCL does not have the advantage. On specific topics TCL is still needed, especially when teaching declarative and procedural knowledge. So, sometimes didactic lecture is still the dominant way of instruction.

Nadi

Dear Ho,

As a precedent to flipped classrooms you may wish to look at self paced learning. I have had an article published on the use of this method in the modern context of virtual learning environments (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220140006_Web-based_Personalised_System_of_Instruction_An_effective_approach_for_diverse_cohorts_with_virtual_learning_environments).

In particular, the study we reference by Tennison on the Big Wrench may shed some light onto the issue of why it is difficult to switch between different dominant forms of teaching and learning.

I get the impression that most Western teaching is still orientated around lectures which are augmented by a pedagogically poor use of virtual learning environments. See Kirkwood and Price's paper on learning in the 21st Century (also in our reference list).

Article Web-based Personalised System of Instruction: An effective a...

Hi Ho Yin Cheung

Your question refers to a kind of quantitative measurement of users of didactic lecture, as you name it.  I wonder if this question can be answered given the enormous complexity of didactic (educational) methods.

Indeed, there are some cultural traditions that are in favour of one or another 'philosophy' of educating, linked to a particular interpretation of learning theory. For example, the German educational philosopher Herbart highly influenced within European countries the use of a strict didactic model, allowing few degrees of freedom for the learner.

At times of programed instruction in the USA and Europe, the strict behaviorist interpretation of learning was adapted with again limited or no freedom of the learner.  When society became more complex and needed knowledge construction instead of knowledge replication, in the 1990s, the constructivist approach was preferred, with a lot of self-monitoring or self-regulation of learners, what has been labeled as 'active learning'. See:

 http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=ijpbl&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fscholar.google.be%2Fscholar%3Fhl%3Dnl%26q%3Dproblem-based%2Bteaching%2Bin%2Bhigher%2Beducation%26btnG%3D%26lr%3D#search=%22problem-based%20teaching%20higher%20education%22

Recently, a more critical view on 'active' learning/teaching. has been taken by Kirschner, Sweller & Clark who documented their position in the following article (pdf)

http://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/16899/kirschner_06_minimal_guidance.pdf?sequence=1

From my part, I published a critical analysis of the link between learning theories and technology which reveals the complexity of answering your question. See:

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_1#page-1

Consequently, the choice of a method is dependent on many variables and reflects high tension between educational tradition and drastic changes in society.

Hello Ho Yin, 

Great question. As an Educational Technology student hoping to transform the culture at the post-secondary level, I  can confirm from my research that most college professors still primarily use the didactic mode of teaching, which is outdated and ineffective. This "net generation" of learners don't absorb information in this fashion and rote memorization is considered "lower level" brain functioning. I recently stumbled upon a survey of faculty attitudes towards technology that I found to be interesting (Jaschik, S., & Lederman, D. (2014). Faculty Attitudes on Technology. Inside Higher Ed , 1-44.) however, it is limited in that it addresses primarily online class instruction. This is similar to didactic teaching unless the instruction is live, so it is not truly a good reflection about faculty attitudes towards more active/interactive learning styles. There is a very slow progression towards the need for active and experiential learning, which must move at a more rapid pace in order to keep up with global demand. Our K-12 teachers in the U.S. are already drastically changing their instructional methods but if we do not meet this same demand at the post-secondary level, all the efforts put forth by our K-12 teachers will be fruitless. 

Dear Ho Yin:

I am not convinced about the "fact" that Western educational institutions are using active methods for learning and flipped classroom models.

I did my undergraduate and graduate work in the USA at two large state universities, and especially in the undergrad, classes rely mostly on lectures delivered by the professors.  

My advice is to look for data about the average number of students per section in colleges and universities.  I do not have these data, but I bet that you will be surprised to find out that most courses seat hundreds of students in large classrooms and auditoriums.  It is difficult to resort to active participation methods.  Online learning as a complement to face-to-face classes can be an asset in this regard.

Edgar Salgado

Hello Stefan, I didn't say that teaching is only about memorization. Memorization is also essential but in the U.S., in a typical college classroom setting, the professor puts up a power point and essentially "talks at" the class. Do you think this is effective? This isn't nearly as effective as practicing on a guitar or keyboard, wouldn't you agree? As to your response about practice exercises, this type of learning is not rote memorization, this is actually active learning which is what I am trying to encourage. 

Janice,

I still use didactic instruction, however it is only part of a comprehensive instructional program. I use it to introduce, summarize, discuss, as well as to function as formative assessment. Following this method I will also include some form of team work, individual research, and all of this contributes to the class project which is the culmination of a unit. In my opinion didactic instruction is a necessary instructional methodology if nothing else than to help the students learn how to learn through, perhaps the most prominent type of instruction.

Although interactive learning has been part of US education for some time, the flipped classroom is a way of having students review the didactic, lecture material on their computers at home. Classroom  time is spent questioning, applying and discussing theory, data or information reviewed at home online. Unless a program from Couresera etc. is used, the teacher must record the webinar or lecture in advance.   

 The lnk below will provide examples and research findings that demonstrate the effectiveness of the Flipped Class in schools.

I think it all depends on the discourse strategies used by the lecturer. In one of our projects, the discourse strategies used in a classroom lecture andan e-lecture were examined. It was found that there are interesting variations inthe strategies used in e-lectures to simulate a sense of classroom community.

Here is the link for the full paper:

https://www.academia.edu/1841775/Discourse_strategies_for_ensuring_involvement_in_electronic_lectures

I did some research where I asked teachers first which teaching style they used. I used The Spectrum of Teaching Styles to define the styles. I then asked for volunteers who would let me come and observe 3 X 1 hour lessons and then coded the lessons (10 second observe then 10 second record). In total 4465 observations.

The dominant teaching style was Practice Style which many would describe as didatic/teacher centred.

My PhD is online. Search SueSee eprints.

Hope that this helps.

Dear Ho, there appears to be some concern about the popularity of lectures in an a higher education environment. I enclose a link that illustrates this point.

http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2014/may/15/ten-reasons-we-should-ditch-university-lectures

I think didactic lecture is always needed but how you used them it depends to whom you are teaching or what are you teaching.  At the university the students review the didactic lecture material and in class time we discuss the information reviewed and we try to associate it to real cases and to make critical thinking. In the university a few years ago we used  service learning and critical thinking.

Critical Thinking

http://www.criticalthinking.org/data/pages/29/159e33cd3add1bb75c1f848a06a80d37519cf2e476776.pdf

Dear colleague,

 It is an interesting question to ask for a method as a dominant way of instruction. However this question needs to be linked with the question of methods' effectiveness. And this link learns that there is no direct link between use of methods and effectiveness since this is no matter of yes-no, but of if-then.

One size never fits all.  Teachers and students often approach the teaching/learning process in various ways. Lecture is one of many different ways. Which method is most effective in getting specific learnings t o happen is a very individual dynamic.,.

As others have stated, the 'classical' lecture is one of many pedagogical modalities available, and has its place in terms of providing an overview, generating enthusiasm for a topic through exposition, or simply transmitting key salient points. One must however questions its ubiquitous use; student contact time is scarce, and within the HE environment it often makes sense to 'flip' - front-loading the student with proposition that may then be discussed in more detail within a seminar environment. This is now much more easily achieved with VLE's and tools such as Panopto. The lecture itself can however be adapted to increase interactivity; I myself have been using chatroom technology to generate a 'live feed' during lectures (paper hopefully forthcoming). This increases interaction (especially where large numbers are concerned), and allows more reticent students to contribute effectively.

While traditional lecture is not the only method that I use in the classroom, it is still a valuable part of the learning process. Students learn in different ways and the material should be presented in several different formats to facilitate better understanding on the part of the student. However as the professor, we are expected to profess on the basis of our expertise. I like to show the students how the theories have practical application in various cases that I actually worked while serving in the field or that I have studied. This brings the material to life. Other exercises that require the student to apply the material learned in lecture in a scenario or lab also aid in comprehension.

Hi Ho,

I have been teaching in the military, corporate healthcare, and higher education since 1997 and still see traditional lecture as the prominent method of teaching. I am currently teaching in several RN to BSN completion programs online where a variety of tools and technologies are being used. I am researching for my dissertation innovative technologies used in the online learning environment to promote the development of critical thinking in RNs. I believe that faculty using innovative pedagogies that support higher order thinking can provide insight into active learning.

Coleen

A didactic approach to anything always seems to get bad reviews these days because of the limitations it imposes.  My favourite statement that describes an old-fashioned "didactic" type of lecture is "the process whereby the lecture notes of the lecturer are transfered to the student without passing through the brain of either".

It is of course a gross over simplification.  As others have pointed out in this thread, while a lecture will have a didactic base a good lecturer will tease, cajole and provoke students in ways that enable them to creatively engage with the didactic content.

Teaching is perhaps the most satisfying job in the universe?

Lecture has its place, but any of us in the sciences use a Modeling approach, wherein students develop and construct scientific models to describe, to explain, to predict and to control phenomena in science. We utilize some lecture, but rely on experimentation, analysis, and discussion, sometimes guided by Socratic questioning. See more at http://modeling.asu.edu/modeling/synopsis.html. This approach has raised test scores in many classrooms, but more importantly, in many cases triggers a deeper understanding and a longer memory of concepts. I have to say, I really enjoy the class discussions, and observing the "delta" of knowledge. For the record, I got greater gains on testing with less lecture at all levels of courses at several schools over the years.

http://modeling.asu.edu/modeling/synopsis.html

Flipped classroom is not necessarily a panacea. Either the lecture (life or on video) is monological or not (Bakthin). The flipped classroom method presupposes somehow that all lectures are monological. And that is not always the case. Many teachers give dialogocial lectures where the audience is actively involved. My experience tells me that the most important thing to do is to make lectures as dialogical as possible. Many teachers give dialogocial lectures where the audience is actively involved. To have dialogical lectures at home would not be possible with flipped classroom, only with AdobeConnect for example. In the case of really monological lectures it can be a good thing to make the students watch the videoclip at home. Flipped classroom is in my opinion only a new and perhaps good form of homework. But to ask your students to only watch your videos and to base a whole course on this method is in my opinion not recommended. It is important to use varied methods. Flipped classroom is one of them. Flipped classroom can't replace a teacher and his pedagogical-content knowledge.

Socratic method is key to making a lecture a success. It cannot just be a monologue. You need to ask questions to involve the students in the lecture.  If tells you if the students are understanding the material. It allows the students to express their opinions and share their experiences. I teach criminal justice and often have cops in my classes. A simple "has anybody ever worked a similar case?" brings a wealth of experience and information into the classroom for the traditional students. If nothing else, asking questions keeps the majority awake during the lecture.

 As I understand the basic principle of flipped learning, the purpose is for the students to have read/viewed relevant context content prior to attending a class lesson/activity.  The contextual content previewed is preparation for involvement in discussion or other interaction with the instructor and/or other students.  Being prepared for the lesson content is the purpose.  This approach is the opposite of typical student behavior of coming to class in order to obtain a context for later reading/viewing/exploration/ thinking/writing.  Many students do not understand the expectation that the syllabus intends for the student to prepare in advance for the class.  In literature study, for example, of course it would make sense to have read passages and be ready for discussion.  When students have the context that the class is intended to be performance by students in addition to the instructor we have turned around the old lag model of "wait-and-see" and then try to catch up later in which the student is always a class meeting behind the instructor.  Flipping puts a responsibility on students that previous was practiced by the enthusiasts for the topic.  Pre-reading has always given an advantage to those students who chose to do it and have access.  In the 1950s I bought a set of Encycl.Brittanica and read essays by some of the world's great scholars from the greatest universities (In addition to the textbook chapter).  My knowledge and reputation rose to at least one level above my classmates.  Today we have the encyclopedia essays online and many other sources as well as videos, reports, diagrams, and other scholarly resources.  Students can now pre-read, pre-view, pre-pare easily, but it takes discipline in time management to actually do this work.  The main thing now is to be able to know what is important in what we read and view--what am I seeing/viewing? What is this reading/viewing  telling me in the context of this course and the intentions of the instructor?  This critical mind is assumed to be operative in the students (critical in knowing the variety of influences impacting the message of the writing/picture/graph according to purpose, intended audience, construction tools, intended effects, reactions, etc).  Sometimes we are just teaching some procedures that require only exposition followed by Q&A in business and industry presentations.  But in the classroom we are intending that the students attain understanding as well at action, and development of student is more long-term, cumulative, and complex.  Flipping can be used flexibly for whatever the purpose of the instructor at any age.

Hi Yo,

I have recently published an article outlining changes to a face to face course that moved online. This move proceeded the notion of flipped classrooms but meets the principles of the theory - namely students are required to engage significantly with the content online prior to communal learning experiences. I have provided the link to the article below. Hopefully it is of some use for you. 

http://www.merga.net.au/ojs/index.php/mted/article/view/193

Dear Ho, I support an idea that is evident in the embedded link, namely that a lecturer cannot be regarded as having all the knowledge/information anymore (fulfilling the role of 'a sage on the stage' is not suitable anymore). Students also cannot merely be regarded as empty vessels that need to be filled with the lecturer's 'superior' knowledge in the current educational environment, because too much knowledge is freely available. 

https://agenda.weforum.org/2015/05/how-digital-technology-is-changing-the-university-lecture/

Given the knowledge explosion, instant global internet research access and interaction,  progressive education that is student centered and teacher driven is being replaced by an interactive method of teaching/learning in which student and teacher are learning from one anotjher. Of course, the teacher takes the lead and creates the context in which learning happens. The Futurist Magazine predicts that humanity will change more in the next 20 years than in all of history. Old ways of teaching/learning prepare for the past . The future awaits us and demands a more creative approach.   

A great opportunity inherent in prior preparation involved in flipped classes, is to be able to examine the historical threads of the topic in advance of a discussion or presentation of current aspects.  I find it amazing that young people jump into discussions of current facts with little or no awareness that issues often have long histories that inform the current analyses or debates.  There is no substitute for knowing as much as possible from primary sources, since many of the issues were present much earlier than the current information age.  Many basic and excellent aspects were discovered or developed over many years and can be recognized and attributed properly by those

who are well read.  What is problematic is to see well-intentioned persons exerting effort , time and money on aspects or topics that may have been solved long ago.  In my field of education, too many people are reinventing the wheel or do not know the full frame of the issues or problems.  It seems that today in education only the most recent ideas and publications are considered.  Somehow some/many have gotten the idea that if information is more than 10 years old it is outdated.  Many really fine resources that have are data-based are now ignored because of their age.  Having read a historical strand back through time provides a basis for a contemporary continuation or a new thread, but based on some continuity.  Education issues in the USA is mostly fashion of the moment because of publishing periods in which a particular topic is shared by many authors for a period of time.  When the editors/ publications move on to new topics, the previous topics are regarded as outdated.   Labeling the new article or issue as "newest," "latest," or other publicity-laden adjective, the older, in contrast, appears less important.  We are conditioned by the popular journalistic news cycles that arouse interest but often ignore historical context.  Professional curriculum and instruction, on the other hand, should be more comprehensive and explain context that mere facts cannot provide.  A good example is the political leader's attempt every decade to impose a strict retention policy for every 4th grader who is not reading at grade level.  This retention policy has been discarded innumerable times as unworkable, but the idealist will want to try it anyway while damaging a group of students for a short time.  This example is probably the most blatant, but many other similar trial and error attempts have been attempted without any consideration of the research over the last 70 years that can clearly inform school improvement issues.  History is important, and the flipped classroom creates an opening for exploring the past in regard to almost every issue.  We live in a media gadget age that provides extraordinary access to past explorations and explanations when we take the time to actually read and recognize the giants who have come before us.  Many of those previous findings now need contemporary voices to research and build on the foundation work already available.  Being truly original is rare.  Recognizing the roots and proceeding from those roots is good progress.  Web searches require close attention to the bibliographies and tracking back and back to the earlier roots in order to establish a valid historical evolution.  This practice is called "Scholarship."

Dear Ho, I thought I would share this post from Faculty Focus where a faculty member shares his experience with flipped learning and describes the approach that he followed.

http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-with-technology-articles/professor-and-students-share-reactions-to-the-flipped-classroom/

Dear Stefan,

Going back to the initial question  of Ho Yin Cheung:  her  hypothesis is that, all over the world, specific educational methods are dominant dependent on educational  and cultural traditions. Of course you are right that in this discussion terminology plays an important role. However, terminology is not neutral but refers to meaning that reflects different positions.  From this angle, e-learning, m-learning, blended learning, flipped classrooms, etcetera,  all describe a linking field between evolving technologies and learning.  In my view, this is not an abstract nor confusing terminology. In addition, often very rough distinctions are made between e.g. passive learning and active learning, teacher-centered and learner-centered learning, instructivism  and constructivism and a lot of other dichotomies that tend to represent only the poles of a continuum.  

I think that Ho Yin Cheung refers to  didactic lecture as the dominant way of instruction in China and expects other countries to “have a lot of active learning components built into the curriculum”. If I use your definition of face-to-face and didactic lecture, methods is multi-faceted reality in which a mix of different characteristics are embedded.  Maybe we have to better define terminology since ‘didactic’ lecture seems very much or exclusively teacher-centered, while classroom teaching is more open to components of active learning and peer  interaction.

I think didactic lecture is still used in a big way in India. All of us are products of Didactic Lecture method of class room teaching. Evaluation was also related to this method of teaching. There is a need of extensive studies for studying the effectiveness of various methods in over all development of a person and knowledge creation.

A didactic lecture can become learner centred depending on the level of interaction of the teacher and follow up activities. Classroom instruction is a mix of various methods in the hands of an effective teacher. I agree with Mr Joost Lowycik's idea of poles of a continuum. In a didactic lecture teachers have a greater challenge of making the learning process more interactive and student centred. The teachers who are able to base their lecture on stimulating questions are able to have greater engagement with the subject and students. This leads active involvement. 

Stefan;

Good point! All research confirm that higher education student prefer the F2F class but they want the e-learning and blended classes for their convenience and flexibility. At the of the day, the students have the power as without them we have no jobs:-)

Best regards,

Debra

A principle of physics is: “” the one constant is change.“ Given that principle, lecture is useful in downloading or teaching known knowledge, theory and research findings. However, it is through the process of interactive and creative thinking between student and teacher that new ideas and relationships develop. This is how we build a body of new knowledge to teach or lecture What we have learned.

Best equation

Following

Many use e-learning