Some subscribers to Phys-L might be interested in an article "Curmudgeonly Comments Concomitant to Corrigan's 'To Lecture or Not to Lecture?' " [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:
Paul Corrigan has ably reviewed the contentious debate over lecturing. In the present article I borrow from and supplement Corrigan’s "Atlantic" article "To Lecture or Not to Lecture?" at <http://bit.ly/1cGQaKW> and his blog entry "Beyond the Lecturing Debate" at <http://bit.ly/1eKAR0A> so as to include discussion of the following:
1. Lecturing is prevalent but "active learning" is advised by researchers.
2. Nevertheless, some academics defend "lectures."
3. But such academics often advocate lecturing *along with* "active learning."
4. Corrigan distinguishes "lecturing" from "Lecturing."
5. Physics education research emphasizes *higher-level learning* and
distinguishes "lecture" from *passive-student-lecture.*
6. Positive and negative depictions of the lecture.
7. Depictions of "active learning."
8. Literary and YouTube criticism of the passive-student-lecture.
"People have nowadays . . . got a strange opinion that everything should be taught by lectures. Now, I cannot see that lectures can do so much good as reading the books from which the lectures are taken. Lectures were once useful; but now, when we can all read, and books are so numerous, lectures are unnecessary." - Samuel Johnson <http://bit.ly/17PdW5Y>, via James Boswell (1791) at <http://bit.ly/qfDXPz>.
REFERENCES [URL shortened by <http://bit.ly/> and accessed on 15 Feb 2014.]
Hake, R.R. 2014. "Curmudgeonly Comments Concomitant to Corrigan's 'To Lecture or Not to Lecture?'," online as a 2.9 MB pdf at <http://bit.ly/1nA6z5e>. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists and are on my blog "Hake'sEdStuff" at <http://bit.ly/1mhTFxw> with a provision for comments.