Do you think classroom teaching of purely theoretical subjects is outdated?

[alekhkhanna]

Although I had some excellent teachers during my schooling (one of them being an absolutely gorgeous Bio teacher, whose classes I doubt any of the boys ever missed) and med school, I do find some online video sessions interesting. In my case, there is a series of lectures by Dr. Conrad Fischer on Physiology, Medicine etc. and the way he discusses basic and advanced concepts is something not many of my college teachers were able to do.
IMO, a healthy mix of offline and online is the best option.

 

[OinkBoink]

For those of you who have studied engineering/mathematics, please tell me this isn't a better way to learn Double Integrals than how your AVERAGE Indian teacher teaches. Yes, you can elaborate the concept further and learn it more in-depth later through books and teachers (or first learn it from a book and watch it later).

- - - Updated - - -

Although I had some excellent teachers during my schooling (one of them being an absolutely gorgeous Bio teacher, whose classes I doubt any of the boys ever missed) and med school, I do find some online video sessions interesting. In my case, there is a series of lectures by Dr. Conrad Fischer on Physiology, Medicine etc. and the way he discusses basic and advanced concepts is something not many of my college teachers were able to do.
IMO, a healthy mix of offline and online is the best option.

I agree with you.

- - - Updated - - -

The thing that should be removed from many colleges in India is the strict attendance criteria (at least for theory subjects) because many people benefit from other methods of learning purely theoretical topics than classroom teaching (which in the average case is a pretty rote way of learning). Also, many people find it hard to focus in class in which case videos are a very good alternative. If you have a conceptual difficulty, you can always seek your professor's/peers' assistance.

- - - Updated - - -

 

[paarkhi]

I think Online Video tutorials should be used as a Backup and alternative referential method of learning instead of completely depending on it.

 

[OinkBoink]

I think Online Video tutorials should be used as a Backup and alternative referential method of learning instead of completely depending on it.

Perhaps. I doubt anybody is talking about completely depending on one system. One of the issues is, what do you use as your primary system? Do you use videos as a first line of teaching and then build upon them through more research/peer discussion or do you use classroom teaching as a first option and use videos as a supplement.

The answer to this is pretty subjective based on individual tastes.

Also, this method might not work for all subjects. I'm not taking these subjects into account.

 

[Zinc]

Nope. It is the system that drives students to learn. The fact that you have to do assignments and clear exams/courses to get a degree. Any sensible student would try to educate himself/herself in a holistic way. Which is learning both the theoretical and practical aspects of a subject because at the end of the day it is an amalgamation of both that you need in order to be good at what you do and to learn things properly.

Firstly, you're quoting half the post which isn't right since both parts complement each other.

And I was talking about schools as well because that's where the basic foundation of education is laid.
Students in schools may or may not have the proper approach towards how to study, what to study and how much time to devote to a particular topic, how much to study, etc.

Also, clearing exams is never the point (although it's the basic mentality in India).
People need a guide, who's much more experienced and learned, to show them the flaws in their understanding and comprehension of a particular subject/topic.
A student may study all theory and he/she may clear all exams with flying colors but who knows what they actually understand from theory.
There's a huge difference between studying (sometimes even cramming) to clear exams and studying to understand.

And all students aren't sensible enough while they are actually studying.
A lot of people realize the importance later in their lives.

 

[OinkBoink]

Firstly, you're quoting half the post which isn't right since both parts complement each other.

And I was talking about schools as well because that's where the basic foundation of education is laid.
Students in schools may or may not have the proper approach towards how to study, what to study and how much time to devote to a particular topic, how much to study, etc.

Also, clearing exams is never the point (although it's the basic mentality in India).
People need a guide, who's much more experienced and learned, to show them the flaws in their understanding and comprehension of a particular subject/topic.
A student may study all theory and he/she may clear all exams with flying colors but who knows what they actually understand from theory.
There's a huge difference between studying (sometimes even cramming) to clear exams and studying to understand.

And all students aren't sensible enough while they are actually studying.
A lot of people realize the importance later in their lives.

Yes, I agree with everything you say, though I don't understand how this contradicts anything that I said (not that you want to contradict me for the sake of doing so) .

Of course clearing exams isn't the main point. But even students interested in a particular subject might lack the motivation to put in the effort. This is where the system comes in. And yes, teachers are a part of the system and not the entirety of it (the other aspects being exams, assignments etc.) .

 

[eternoMind]

To the original question, the answer would be no. Classroom teaching is still very much relevant and when the said teacher is an enthusiastic and committed one, no recorded session can match its sheer fun factor and intensity. I still remember a bunch of my friends preparing for their MBA had very less knowledge about our economy's basics and its different aspects. I linked them many articles but they were best satisfied after a series of lectures on the same by the director of their coaching institute. Some of the complex terminology was best understood by them when explained with simple examples. Recorded sessions are fine i guess for supplementing classroom sessions.

 

[OinkBoink]

To the original question, the answer would be no. Classroom teaching is still very much relevant and when the said teacher is an enthusiastic and committed one, no recorded session can match its sheer fun factor and intensity. I still remember a bunch of my friends preparing for their MBA had very less knowledge about our economy's basics and its different aspects. I linked them many articles but they were best satisfied after a series of lectures on the same by the director of their coaching institute. Some of the complex terminology was best understood by them when explained with simple examples. Recorded sessions are fine i guess for supplementing classroom sessions.

Classroom teaching is relevant. No one denies that. And when you say recorded sessions can never match classroom teaching, I suggest you take a look at the millions of people who report that they finally understood something after watching a good video than they ever did by sitting in class. Several online teachers are committed and enthusiastic too. Also, you're cherry picking a particular aspect of a particular subject to illustrate your example. Yes, there are some subjects/some aspects of some subjects where classroom teaching is superior. But this doesn't hold true for all of them.

Also, I hope you are not suggesting that an instructor in a video cannot explain complex terminology using simple examples. This is obviously false. Some cases do require hands on teaching but in many cases videos do just fine.

When we use terms like 'online teaching', 'videos' etc. we tend to forget that at the end of the day it is a human who is doing the teaching in these videos.

The question one must ask is, given a particular aspect of a particular subject, which is a superior primary mode of teaching? The classroom or the flip method.

 

[Lord Nemesis]

^^ So you are basically saying that if somebody records a teacher teaching and put it online, it would be much more effective than if you are physically present in the class room that he is teaching? That may indeed be true for people who don't understand stuff till they go over it a few times and since a teacher cannot keep repeating the stuff so many times for a few students, recorded videos would be more efficient for them to go over in their own time.

If that is the case, why don't you just record the lecture and go over it at your leisure? Students have done it in the past and still do.

Learning can be done in many ways (especially with the availability of the internet) and people have been learning efficiently even before the era of online lectures. You don't really need online lectures to learn. Personally, I have found on occasions that an unbiased text book is much more efficient and accurate than a lecture delivered by a teacher (either in class or online) with presumptions and bias which reflect in the way he presents the topic or the examples he chooses. There is no single approach to efficient & accurate learning.

 

[OinkBoink]

^^ So you are basically saying that if somebody records a teacher teaching and put it online, it would be much more effective than if you are physically present in the class room that he is teaching?

In some cases, yes.

If that is the case, why don't you just record the lecture and go over it at your leisure? Students have done it in the past and still do.

We're not allowed video-taping equipment in our classrooms. But I watch lectures all the time.

Learning can be done in many ways (especially with the availability of the internet) and people have been learning efficiently even before the era of online lectures. You don't really need online lectures to learn. Personally, I have found on occasions that an unbiased text book is much more efficient and accurate than a lecture delivered by a teacher (either in class or online) with presumptions and bias which reflect in the way he presents the topic or the examples he chooses. There is no single approach to efficient & accurate learning.

I love reading books too. But it is also possible for a text book to be biased and an instructor to be unbiased. Textbooks, at the end of the day, are written by people. They don't just pop into existence carrying the objective truth.

Also, I don't know why people keep repeating this, but I have never suggested that there is a unitary approach to learning nor will I ever.

That being said, I would again like to quote a member on another forum, "Bringing people to a central location for teaching made sense in the age of books, it makes no sense in the age of networks. Arguments can be made against network teaching due to it not being everyone's preference, but we have that now.Central teaching isn't to everyone's preference, and it's less efficient. With equal drawbacks, efficiency and cost should win the discussion".

I have nothing against people who want to sit in a classroom. I would want classroom teaching for many subjects too. But it is still imposed on us even when we don't want it and we find the alternative a superior way to learn.

 

[karim]

Teaching in online is good ,when compared with class room teaching