Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-L] book versus video versus lecture



Of course the 3 methods of conveying information may have the same info, but
slightly different effects. First lets dispel the myth that the learning
style is important. They did a study of audio vs visual styles and found
that it didn't matter. Visual and audio style preference students learned
just as well from either style. The big problem with the book is getting
students to actually use it, and many books have become counter productive
by presenting too much stuff. The busy pages with 5 concepts per page make
learning difficult.

Videos can have usefulness, but one should be careful how it is used.
Students tend to look at people rather than the thing being presented, and I
assume the same thing happens in lectures. The live lecture can have the
students predict results before they see them, which has been found to be
important to retention. The interactive lecture a la Mazur also has similar
properties.

If all you want students to do is see algorithms, then the Khan approach to
video lecture is appropriate. However, none of these involve a learning
cycle, which has been found to be necessary for improving the level of
thinking. Straight lectures, video presentations, and book readings before
class do not promote exploration, which must be the first part of a learning
cycle according to the seminal research by Karplus, Renner, Lawson...
However, if the students are already at a high cognitve level, some research
shows that exploration need not be the first part, but it is still needed.
Lawson's book "Science Teaching and the development of thinking" is probably
the best book for the learning cycle, and contains many references to the
research. Every science teacher should read it!!!

In class videos can be very useful as experiments. You can pose a question,
and have students predict the results. Then the video can be used to show
the results. Finally some discussion needs to happen about why you got the
results. This is similar to the Interactive Lecture Demos (ILDs). Thornton
has written that these ILDs do not always have to have the actual
experiment, as you can show the results on a power point and get almost as
effective learning.

Lectures are actually not all bad, but when they take away from exploration
and interaction, they stall the development of deeper learning and improved
cognitive functioning. So if they are targeted and not long, they probably
have some effectiveness. Actually there was one study as I recall where
they were trying to get teachers to design experiments. Normally
conventional lecture/lab courses are not at all effective. So they used a
guided inquiry approach and found it was partially effective. Then they
tried having a summative lecture at the end. The effectiveness went up
dramatically. The ILDs have some deliberate micro lecture (comments) after
each demo to promote bridging.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX