Is going to lecture a huge waste of time?

[Skrew]

you are a perfect example of why teachers should not be blamed for the failure of their students. some people just cannot be helped.

You believe professors have an ability to convey knowledge better then textbooks, this has not been the case in every single class I have ever taken.

The best classes are ones where the instructor mimics the textbook, the worst were ones when the instructor felt like doing something "differently" instead of following a tried and true method/presentation.

 

[kylem]

You believe professors have an ability to convey knowledge better then textbooks, this has not been the case in every single class I have ever taken.

The best classes are ones where the instructor mimics the textbook, the worst were ones when the instructor felt like doing something "differently" instead of following a tried and true method/presentation.

You want to go to university to have somebody read a book to you?

 

[canadiankid]

I go to all my lectures mainly for two reasons:
A) lack of self motivation to study the material, I'd rather go to those and party on the weekends
B) I find I am very good at getting a feel from the professor as to what they will put on examinations by the amount of time they spend on it, and more importantly the parts that they are enthusiastic about (those concepts are ALWAYS on the tests)

 

[gravenewworld]

I go to all my lectures mainly for two reasons:
A) lack of self motivation to study the material, I'd rather go to those and party on the weekends
B) I find I am very good at getting a feel from the professor as to what they will put on examinations by the amount of time they spend on it, and more importantly the parts that they are enthusiastic about (those concepts are ALWAYS on the tests)

But are your lectures recorded? If not, then I can understand going to lecture. Even if it is recorded, OK, I'll buy A as a reason to still go to lecture. However, you can gauge what a professor will put on exams by watching their videos.

Maybe you guys don't go to universities where they record and post every single lecture yet.

 

[danago]

I have found that many of my lectures follow a textbook almost word-for-word, so the lecture notes/slides are just a diluted version of what can be obtained from the book. In these cases, the only real benefits i get from the lectures is finding out what parts of the textbook will be examinable. If my lecturers are just going to repeat what i can read in a book, i often won't waste my time driving over an hour to the campus when that time could be spent doing something else. I will still watch the lectures online as a means of consolidating what i have already read, but i don't find them necessary.

I have had the occasional lecturer though who presents his own ideas and teaches from his intimate knowledge of the subject (this is very important to me, and it really shows through when people start asking questions). In these cases i am more than happy to attend lectures, and i find it a very pleasantly refreshing experience. I have often reached the point where i will watch MIT OCW lectures rather than my own, because i find the level of teaching to be of a much more superior quality.

I actually have a class (mathematical finance) this semester which i am extremely disappointed in. The lecturer has written a comprehensive set of lecture notes which are quite good, however the lectures consist of (no exaggeration at all) him pretty much re-writing the notes on the blackboard with very minimal commentary (which is hard to understand when his back is turned to the class). I see absolutely no point in attending a lecture like this.

 

[romsofia]

Also, some professors if they see you come to class every time, try hard, and if you happen to slip up on a test will be more lenient on you.

Just a question, is EVERYTHING recorded? What will you do when the professors says something important for the test, but said it after the camera has been turned off?

 

[gravenewworld]

Also, some professors if they see you come to class every time, try hard, and if you happen to slip up on a test will be more lenient on you.

Just a question, is EVERYTHING recorded? What will you do when the professors says something important for the test, but said it after the camera has been turned off?

Everything is recorded. You can even watch the students leave the room. I love watching at faster speeds. You can finish a 60 minute lecture faster, take accurate notes, and not miss anythimg.

 

[romsofia]

Everything is recorded. You can even watch the students leave the room.

In that situation, don't go if you don't like lectures.

Obviously, this will hinder on your ability to get recommendation letters from professors because you won't interact with them much.

 

[gravenewworld]

In that situation, don't go if you don't like lectures.

Obviously, this will hinder on your ability to get recommendation letters from professors because you won't interact with them much.

Meh, I see them enough in lab.

 

[Choppy]

I think I missed the point about ALL lectures being recorded. I was under the assumption that the original thought was about locking yourself in dorm room, reading the textbook, and maybe supplimenting that with a few YouTube videos instead of going to the lectures.

But if the videos are recorded and posted I see that as having a lot of advantages for a student. Not so much the fast-forward (although I can see the merrits), but the ability to rewind and go over anything you may have missed would be great. I wish they had that when I was a student. I'd be a little leary of the quality of the video - particularly if I'm trying to follow something that's written on a black or whiteboard. But it sounds to me like Gravenewworld doesn't have much of an issue with that. So basically you're attending lectures in a virtual manner.

You know what else would be great about that is being able to preview classes that you may want to sign up for next year.

Something else that I've come to learn is that people learn in different ways. Some students will do just fine if given a syllabus and a textbook that follows that and are told to show up for a final exam in four months. I would stop short of calling lecture a "huge waste of time," but for this subset of students, I can certainly understand the lectures are not the optimal way for them to learn.

Part of being an undergraduate student is learning how you learn. That's going to be different for different people. So I'm not going to tell someone to stop something that's working for him or her.

 

[Vanadium 50]

The problem isn't restricted to U of X, it's the entire higher-level education system.

Entire? All 5000 schools? That's nonsense. Does anyone really doubt that MIT is not Harvard is not Reed is not St. Johns is not Wellesley?

 

[Vanadium 50]

Meh, I see them enough in lab.

If you don't mind letters that say "He showed up in my lab but couldn't be bothered to show up for lectures."

Are you pulling down A+'s in the classes you're skipping? If not, there's a line from Bull Durham: "Think classy, you'll be classy. If you win 20 in the show, you can let the fungus grow back and the press'll think you're colorful. Until you win 20 in the show, however, it means you are a slob."

 

[Allenman]

Personally I think lectures are an ancient practice that needs to evolve. We get the material taught "at" us for an hour and go home to read a book or the internet that does the same thing, teaching "at" us. For me, I'm a hands on learner. If you teach at me, I will know it for a day and tomorrow it will be gone.

Now if instead, the class was split up into groups to have the students provide the lecture with the guidance of the instructor (maybe with the instructor clarifying things that are obviously misunderstood, rather than wasting time on trivial subjects that everyone already knows about (maybe the book was pretty clear)). In this way, the instructor immediately see's his/her students' weak points. I think there would be a much higher rate of actual learning (opposed to temporary learning) with this sort of teaching strategy. I'm a firm believer that if you can teach the subject, you know it.

We're getting taught "At" from every angle there is, mostly commonly through commercials. I think it's becoming a pre-programmed thing in our minds to simply toss that stuff out the other ear, and with it goes the important stuff that we learned in that same exact way in class.

I think a lot of it has to do with the university I am at though too... Most of my classes have 100+ students. That makes it hard to really involve everyone. Not to mention, a lot of the professors are only teaching classes to fulfill grant requirements for their research. So if you fail, it's not the end of their world.

 

[gravenewworld]

If you don't mind letters that say "He showed up in my lab but couldn't be bothered to show up for lectures."

Are you pulling down A+'s in the classes you're skipping? If not, there's a line from Bull Durham: "Think classy, you'll be classy. If you win 20 in the show, you can let the fungus grow back and the press'll think you're colorful. Until you win 20 in the show, however, it means you are a slob."

It's pass fail.

 

[canadiankid]

I wish my lectures will all recorded and online, however some of my teachers don't allow it as they want students to come to class. I would imagine my brand new 500 person lecture theatres for Chemistry and Physics would be quite empty if it was all online, and the class average would drop too. Let's be honest, a majority university students (especially first year) procrastinate and would pick sleeping in and partying over classes any day.

 

[phoenix:\\]

Not really. I always liked the lecture atmosphere and I get to ask questions that may seem confusing to me. You can't really do that and get a decent response whilst looking on a streaming version of the lecture.

 

[doppelganger]

Lecture is sometimes the only way to learn about a particular instructor's quirks. Off the top of my head, I remember a chemistry instructor who stated in a lecture that he considered all other physical sciences to be fields of chemistry. One of the questions on his test was 'Name 12 fields of chemistry'. Without attending his lecture and catching that throwaway remark, it would be very difficult to answer the question for full credit.

 

[clope023]

I think it depends on the lecturer, one of my professors just does nothing but quickly read off his power point slides. The notes are well written and great for review but he doesn't present it in such a way as to catch anything interesting or meaningful in the lectures. Other professors give very rigorous notes that you learn a hell of a lot from the lectures, it can be a hit or miss situation.

 

[deluks917]

Its worth-while I think to see the professors approach to the subject. For example in my complex Analysis class the professor often presents the material in a way that intuitively seems a bit odd to me. However more than once doing homework I've been stuck and thought "how would professor X look at this" and was able to do the problem.

 

[hadsed]

Entire? All 5000 schools? That's nonsense. Does anyone really doubt that MIT is not Harvard is not Reed is not St. Johns is not Wellesley?

Maybe I'm arguing something different than everyone else. I'm saying classes in general suck. As far as I know, MIT, Harvard, Reed and St. John's all have classes in the same general way (lecturer gives a lecture while 10-300 people sit and listen).

 

[Choppy]

Its worth-while I think to see the professors approach to the subject. For example in my complex Analysis class the professor often presents the material in a way that intuitively seems a bit odd to me. However more than once doing homework I've been stuck and thought "how would professor X look at this" and was able to do the problem.

Yes, but ultimately Professor X can always solve his problems by sending in Wolverine.

 

[Choppy]

Maybe I'm arguing something different than everyone else. I'm saying classes in general suck. As far as I know, MIT, Harvard, Reed and St. John's all have classes in the same general way (lecturer gives a lecture while 10-300 people sit and listen).

Perhaps for you. But the argument that's being made is that surely there is some university that approaches teaching in a manner that doesn't 'suck' quite so much. What about open universities or on-line or correspondence courses? What about reading courses? There are plenty of other options out there - particularly for the more common undergraduate courses.

The general teaching methods we have right now are heavily influenced by history. For hundreds of years lectures have been the most efficient way to convey complex intellectual information. They seem to have worked pretty well for students throughout history.

The only thing that's special about the current generation is easier access to information. We may now have the technological means to challenge the efficiency of the lecture hall teaching method, but that doesn't negate any value it has. It's a baseline that works. If you can improve on it - great. I think as educators we should be exploring that.

 

[hadsed]

Right, in that case what I was talking about fits. I was arguing against the classical lecture-style classes. I fully agree with doing directed reading courses with teachers and other alternatives. What I'm confused about is Vanadium seems to think that the value of going to college is contingent upon how much you get out of the [literal] classroom.

 

[symbolipoint]

Students should attend lecture because they, being humans, are social and intelligent animals.

 

[chiro]

Students should attend lecture because they, being humans, are social and intelligent animals.

The natural education system is set up with a classroom, social style focus, and as such most of us are used to the idea of going into a classroom, being taught by some authority figure (teacher) and then using that medium for interaction in education.

Chances are that if this was not the case, then we probably wouldn't be in this mindset. There are people who do not learn a majority of their knowledge/experience in this environment and still manage to be good at what they do. Not many people are like this, but they do exist and some particular industries have a bias for these kinds of people.

Also I think you'll find that people who have an inclination to learn by themselves have the advantage that they do not "require" coursework to learn something. They do not have the mindset that in order to learn, they must take a formal class on something to actually learn it and this is a very powerful advantage over someone else who is so used to the social system, that they think that learning and social interaction are both prerequisites for each other.

 

[Vanadium 50]

As far as I know, MIT, Harvard, Reed and St. John's all have classes in the same general way (lecturer gives a lecture while 10-300 people sit and listen).

Well, you're just wrong about that.

 

[Vanadium 50]

What I'm confused about is Vanadium seems to think that the value of going to college is contingent upon how much you get out of the [literal] classroom.

I said no such thing.

Tell you what - you argue your points and let me argue my points.

 

[hadsed]

Well, you're just wrong about that.

--

I said no such thing.

Tell you what - you argue your points and let me argue my points.

Sorry... I wrote up a well-sized reply explaining what I was talking about in my first reply to your earlier post. Your posts are these little one-liners that don't tell anyone about what you're trying to say. Maybe you should try and explain a little bit what your points really are instead of leaving it up to others to try and guess at it.

 

[ashnek]

Well for example in my university i can say its almost a waste of time to go to class, the professors they just mind their work, some don't even bother to answer your questions because they just come to university when they give class, they don't really teach you something that isn't in the book so i would rather just read the book.

Now i think this is actually a good thing, not that the class is worthless but the fact that you have to study by the book because it forces you to learn how to absorb and generate knowledge, some people are too used to ask someone else as soon as they get a doubt, at least i used to but as the time went by i got better at clearing doubts by myself, so i barely now need a teacher to ask something for. If you think about it when you need to generate knowledge by research or something else in something new you won't have a teacher for that, at some point you have to do it by yourself so its better to learn soon.

So if class was a time of the day for the professor to tell you something he had gained by his experience in the field and not something that you are capable of learning by the book it would all be great, but it generally isn't like that. Also i would say its good if they would teach you how to '' read a book'' in the sense of to be critical about what you are absorbing and think about it and make conclusions about it, then i think it would be worth it (im no exactly sure how that would be possible i guess you learn it by watching your teacher deduce things from given info).
In change of that we get an education that every semester turns easier making most of the students lazier, which in turn makes professors care less about students and it just makes a vicious circle.

I can say in all my undergraduate time as ME i only had a good professor, he was the one that i had from Calc II-III-IV-complex analysis-numerical analysis and it wasn't because his class were great i mean he tried but he had to teach a lot from the book and didn't have time for lots of insight but when i asked him stuff outside the class he answered in such an analytic way of thinking, not the ''ok i solve your problem this way'' but he would really give meaning to what he was doing and i just really appreciate him for that.

PS English is not my language so i hope the idea is understood

 

[sandy.bridge]

If you present to me a good lecturer that can speak fluent english and can convey concepts in a way that I can understand then yes, I will go. However, this is not always the case. Most of the time I get more from skipping my classes and reading the textbook...

 

[johng23]

Well, I missed a huge fraction of my lectures in undergrad - and mine weren't recorded.
I found that most classes were either boring and too slow, or too fast so that all I could manage to do was scribble down the notes without understanding. Later I would be studying, but my handwriting is bad and I didn't like looking at my notes, so I would always read the book instead, and usually that was enough to complete the problem sets. In fact, piecing together some sparse information in the notes was usually much more challenging than looking at a full description in a textbook. So you see where that kind of experience can lead. Then you just get in the habit of skipping classes even though you probably would have gained at least a few tidbits from going.

I think I would have been able to benefit a lot more if I didn't have to write down notes, but it's hard to sit there without writing anything down if you know it's material you're responsible for.

Also if I would have read through the chapter a bit before coming to a class I'm sure I would have gotten a lot more out of it, but I could never manage to keep ahead like that.

I can't tell you how many times I got in a tough situation studying for an exam or completing an assignment, where I knew it would have been far easier if I had been to class. Ah well, it worked and I got into graduate school, and now I skip classes for the much more noble reason
of being in the lab.

 

[SophusLies]

I would say if I read ahead of schedule and maybe even worked problems before the upcoming lecture I would almost always get something out of it. If I was behind, then it was next to worthless because the lecture was too fast to follow without knowing anything beforehand.

One thing I would always try to do was to think before the professor. If there was a concept being written on the board I would try to think of an analogy for it. Or if there was a problem, try to solve it faster than the professor writes. Doing these things kept me interested and challenged during a lecture. I am a strong believer that only listening to someone talk about something will teach you next to nothing. The best method for me was to take info in, process it, then teach it to myself (by explaining it out loud) or to someone else.

 

[coreluccio]

I'm in first year engineering. For the first 1 1/2 weeks at the beginning of this term I went to all my lectures. I haven't attended a single one since. I learn best through self-study, through thoroughly reading the textbook and doing problems. Now I only go to my labs. So far I've been getting along quite well. I've had one midterm so far, in Chem, and did considerably better than the class average.

Lectures may benefit some, but they certainly are of no help to me. All of the profs I have just go through powerpoint presentations with stuff taken directly from the textbook. I honestly think lectures are more for people who are too lazy to actually read the book themselves and hope for just enough of an understanding of the course material to get by with a passing mark.

The way I see it is that lectures are free to attend. Literally anyone off the street can go, buy the book, attend the lectures, and learn as much or more than anyone actually enrolled in any given class. The difference is they can't write the exams, attain the diploma, etc. You're paying for that opportunity. The lectures are optional.

 

[coreluccio]

Yes, but you're getting paid at work. In college, it's the other way. If someone thinks sitting in lecture is a waste of time, why in heaven are they paying for it?

The degree with your name on it which allows you a better quality of life.

 

[Vanadium 50]

You can get a degree from 1000's of places. If you are not happy with the quality bof instruction where you are, why not vote with your feet?

 

[Choppy]

I honestly think lectures are more for people who are too lazy to actually read the book themselves and hope for just enough of an understanding of the course material to get by with a passing mark.

This comes across as a little arrogant to me. People learn in different ways. And lots of people, if not most BOTH attend lectures and read the text.

Based on a single mid-term you've found a system that works for you. That's great. But why would you call someone lazy who learns in a different way?

The way I see it is that lectures are free to attend. Literally anyone off the street can go, buy the book, attend the lectures, and learn as much or more than anyone actually enrolled in any given class. The difference is they can't write the exams, attain the diploma, etc. You're paying for that opportunity. The lectures are optional.

You're equating "probably won't be escourted out by security" with "free to attend."

 

[Dembadon]

I'm in first year engineering. ...

Lectures may benefit some, but they certainly are of no help to me. All of the profs I have just go through powerpoint presentations with stuff taken directly from the textbook. I honestly think lectures are more for people who are too lazy to actually read the book themselves and hope for just enough of an understanding of the course material to get by with a passing mark.

...

Wow, you must be extremely intelligent; you're only in your first year and you've already figured out that lectures are of no use to you. You have also found some way of knowing that all of your future professors and classes will be the same as the ones you're in right now. Incredible! Have you ever considered dropping the whole engineering thing and going straight for the Nobel?

 

[Number Nine]

I honestly think lectures are more for people who are too lazy to actually read the book themselves and hope for just enough of an understanding of the course material to get by with a passing mark

You must have some very unqualified instructors.
Nothing compares to learning from an expert in the field; all of the most rewarding experiences in my academic life have involved interacting with my professors, either during classes/seminars, or in the lab itself.

 

[Haborix]

Well, this is all very interesting. I reconcile high tuition costs by considering what I gain from lectures. There is one driving reason that keeps me going to lecture. Here it is...

Every professor is different and comes from a different place/background. More than likely they see something in a way that is unique. They see a concept from a point of view that most don't, and all professors have their own little jewel. AND! All you have to do is go to lecture to gain access to the their view of things. If I sit in a class an entire semester and only get ONE unique point of view or idea then IT WAS WORTH IT. Each professor can offer you something that no other can.

Feynman always talked about seeing things from a different point of view. Now, maybe you have a different goal with your education, but if you want to do any research or solve any new problems you need to see things from all possible angles, even ones you don't know exist... yet!

Best of Luck,
Eric

 

[Mépris]

You must have some very unqualified instructors.
Nothing compares to learning from an expert in the field; all of the most rewarding experiences in my academic life have involved interacting with my professors, either during classes/seminars, or in the lab itself.

What makes an instructor qualified? A PhD? If yes, then you're probably wrong. If "good teaching skills/aptitude"? Then YMMV.

What works for you won't work for somebody else. I was watching a lecture on YouTube on multivariable calc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxCxlsl_YwY") and I didn't like it at all. Curiously, many of the comments for the video are positive and it's the first result that's returned on YT when one enters the words "multivariable calculus" in the search field. The cool thing with YouTube is you can close that tab and go view Berkeley's multivariable calculus lecture (I like this one better). It really sucks if you're spending bucket loads of money to attend an institution where the majority of your lecturers are not lecturing in a style that's not appropriate for you. Note: I'm not saying anyone is rubbish.

If I can't convince the admissions committee of US colleges A, B & C that I'm worth the money they're going to spend on me, I'm going *elsewhere*. Where it's dirt cheap, comfortable enough to live and where I can still get a good maths/physics education. At the end of the 3-4 years, I'll still be getting out of the program with something that says BS Physics, so what does it matter anyway.

 

[johng23]

I honestly think lectures are more for people who are too lazy to actually read the book themselves and hope for just enough of an understanding of the course material to get by with a passing mark.

This comment seemed to draw a lot of criticism, but I have absolutely experienced this. I have met multiple people who wouldn't think of reading the book chapters. I studied the chapters front to back. Reading a book by yourself requires you to think harder - those who wouldn't read it are the same people who just go to office hours to drag all the information they can out of the apathetic TA. I have been to office hours about twice in my life, and I was amazed at the sort of information the TA was just freely giving out.

 

[Edin_Dzeko]

Arrogance and learning don't mix.

 

[Choppy]

This comment seemed to draw a lot of criticism, but I have absolutely experienced this. I have met multiple people who wouldn't think of reading the book chapters. I studied the chapters front to back. Reading a book by yourself requires you to think harder - those who wouldn't read it are the same people who just go to office hours to drag all the information they can out of the apathetic TA. I have been to office hours about twice in my life, and I was amazed at the sort of information the TA was just freely giving out.

I think you're missing the point of the criticism.

Obviously there are lazy people out there. I've met them. I've taught them (or at least tried to).

But Coreluccio's argument was that lectures are for people too lazy to read the course material - and this appears to imply that if you go to lectures, you're being lazy and not learning the material for yourself. While there will be cases where this is true, it most certainly does not apply gobally.

 

[ashnek]

Well i understood Coreluccio's argument in another way, it sounded like most classes were made so that their purpose was to give the material so you wouldn't have to look it up in the book aka for lazy people, it doesn't imply that you are lazy if you go its just the way its done.
Im not saying all teachers do that, sadly most of the ones i had were like that but the bad classes i attended were pure recitation of the book

 

[Dembadon]

...
But Coreluccio's argument was that lectures are for people too lazy to read the course material - and this appears to imply that if you go to lectures, you're being lazy and not learning the material for yourself. ...

Not only that, but he's deduced this while only in his first year of an engineering program.

 

[coreluccio]

Most students don't read the textbook. I've seen it first hand. I didn't go to a single Chem lecture and smoked the class average by 30%. I read the book, fully understood the material, did problems, and the test was a joke for me. In contrast, most of the class just went to class, attempted the problem sets from the book that the prof assigned, and maybe reviewed the lecture notes. Not everyone operates like this, but the majority seem to.

 

[romsofia]

Most students don't read the textbook. I've seen it first hand. I didn't go to a single Chem lecture and smoked the class average by 30%. I read the book, fully understood the material, did problems, and the test was a joke for me. In contrast, most of the class just went to class, attempted the problem sets from the book that the prof assigned, and maybe reviewed the lecture notes. Not everyone operates like this, but the majority seem to.

Did you get 100% on this test?
If not, this test obviously wasn't a joke, and a few people who went to the lecture got equal/higher scores than you.

This discussion is clear: For some people the lecture is a waste of time, while for others it isn't.

 

[johng23]

Most students don't read the textbook. I've seen it first hand. I didn't go to a single Chem lecture and smoked the class average by 30%. I read the book, fully understood the material, did problems, and the test was a joke for me. In contrast, most of the class just went to class, attempted the problem sets from the book that the prof assigned, and maybe reviewed the lecture notes. Not everyone operates like this, but the majority seem to.

What you're saying is that it's possible to do well without going to any lectures. I doubt anyone would deny that. That doesn't necessarily imply that lectures are a waste of time.

 

[GregJ]

Most students don't read the textbook.

1st year hmm? This will change soon enough

 

[coreluccio]

Just thought I'd update on my progress. Finished up my 1st term of engineering and now have all my grades back. I got a 3.8/4.0 GPA and was one bombed midterm (got a bad night's sleep, unfortunately) from a perfect 4.0. I didn't attend a single lecture after the first week of school. Lectures, at least for me, are a waste of time.