Re: The college lecture may be fading - forward from Donald Bligh

[Richard Hake <rrhake@EARTHLINK.NET>]

Please excuse this cross-posting to discussion lists with archives at:

Chemed-L <http://mailer.uwf.edu/archives/chemed-l.html>,

EVALTALK <http://bama.ua.edu/archives/evaltalk.html>,

Math-Learn <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/math-learn/>,

Math-Teach <http://mathforum.org/epigone/math-teach>,

Phys-L <http://lists.nau.edu/archives/phys-l.html>,

PhysLrnR <http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/physlrnr.html>,

POD <http://listserv.nd.edu/archives/pod.html>

The APPENDIX contains a forward from Donald Bligh. Because Bligh is
not a subscriber to any of the above lists, as of 6 Sep 2002
12:00-0700) his message had gotten through only to to subscribers of
Math-Teach, PhysLrnR, and POD (by courtesy of the list managers).

Bligh's message corrects and extends my previous erroneous reference
to his book "What Is the Point in Discussion?" and references his
valuable book "Understanding  Higher Education: An introduction for
parents staff, employers, and students."

Even though Bligh's message was received by subscribers to
Math-Teach, PhysLrnR, and POD, I'm forwarding it again to those lists
in order to correct Bligh's suggestion that my referencing error was
due to a jumping eye:

"Richard - I think your eye jumped a line looking at Amazon."

My misreferencing of "What Is the Point in Discussion?" was NOT due
to a line-jumping eye, but to an ERROR BY AMAZON (not uncommon), as
can be seen by bringing up AMAZON's reference to "What Is the Point
in Discussion?" at

<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1871516692/qid=1031065355/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/103-2206815-8245428?v=glance&s=books>.

Today I alerted AMAZON regarding their error but I'm not holding my
breath until they correct it.


Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
24245 Hatteras Street, Woodland Hills, CA 91367
<rrhake@earthlink.net>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi>



XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
APPENDIX
From: Donald Bligh <D.A.Bligh@exeter.ac.uk>
Sender: D.A.Bligh@exeter.ac.uk
To: Richard Hake <rrhake@earthlink.net>
Cc: ASSESS@LSV.UKY.EDU, CHEMED-L@MAILER.UWF.EDU, EVALTALK@BAMA.UA.EDU,
    math-learn@yahoogroups.com, math-teach@mathforum.org,
    PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU, PHYSLRNR@LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU,
    POD@listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: The college lecture may be fading
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 00:10:45 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)


Richard

I think your eye jumped a line looking at Amazon.  See below.
"Understanding Higher Education" is UK based, but the early chapters
on the Aims and development of HE and the later ones on assessment,
how to do a project/thesis,
academic freedom and Ways of learning are all relevant to the US.

>  REFERENCES
>  Bligh, D.A. 1998. "What's the Use of Lectures" 5th Edition from
>  Intellect Books, ISBS, 5804 N.E. Hassalo St, Portland Oregon
>  97213-3644, <http://www.intellectbooks.com/books/>. The UK sail mail
>  address is
>  Intellect Books, The Mill, Parnell Road, BRISTOL UK BS16  3JG.  Their
>  telephone is 0044-117-958-9910. The UK 1998 edition is £14.95. U.S.$
>  24.95 Paperback, 230x174 mm, 192 pages. ISBN 1-871516-79-X.
>
>  Bligh D.A. 2000. "What's the Use of Lectures." Jossey-Bass. Evidently
>  a severely eviscerated version of Bligh (1998). Evidently all
>  editions after 1998 have been or will be similarly degraded,
>  presumably in order to increase sales to the non-scientific
>  educational establishment within the US.
>
>  Bligh D.A. 2002. Private communication to R.R. Hake of 31 August:
>  Comments on Hake (2002a). Excerpts given here are by permission of
>  D.A. Bligh.
>
>  Bligh, D.A., H. Thomas, & Ian McNay. "Understanding
Higher Education An introduction for parents staff
employers and students" Intellect Books ISBN
1-871516-74-9  (1999).

Bligh, D.A., "What Is the Point in Discussion?"
>  Intellect Books; ISBN: 1871516692; First edition (2000).
The maxim in this books is "START WITH SIMPLE TASKS IN
SMALL GROUPS FOR SHORT PERIODS OF TIME, AND THEN GRADUALLY
INCREASE THEIR RESPECTIVE COMPLEXITY, SIZE AND DURATION.  I
think you will find the argument well supported by
research, but I accept that more, in this case, is
laboratory based than is the case in "What's the Use of
Lectures?".