One of the main problems with TV-based education is the difficulty or lack of interactivity.
I am viewing that video from post #20. What is very notable and important, "...animations are fleeting...",
I think TV education is good when you want to take some extra study or need help in an area. TV education is also great with distance and remote rural areas education as mentioned in post number 13. However traditional lectures will never end up looking up to TV education, they will always be better in my opinion. I think you always remember and take in more from lectures than watching TV.
The video is very to the point. However, when I said "TV based education:, this is what I had in mind.
- --- There will be still a school building with class rooms as before. Schools/Colleges will be exactly like before with the exception that teacher will be replaced a huge, high resolution TV with life like image, capable of showing the teacher's image from head to tow. There will also be a class co-ordinator present in the class, who keeps everything in check in a class room (taking roll calls, maintaining peace and discipline). This person does not need to be much educated, hence can be hired very cheap, may be at hourly rate (ex. people who work at Starbucks). The teacher in the video can be the best teacher in the world for the subject. ( Imagine Einstein himself teaching relativity, for example.) The video recording can be refined again and again in an iterative process, so that every sentence the teacher speaks can analysed beforehand for clarity purposes. Imagine such video being watched by a poor kid in rural India or africa. Such a class will also provide possibility for learning social skills by interacting with fellow students and class coordinator. -----------
For the student, what is the better option ?
A regular teacher, with *Possibility of interaction* during lecture or
Einstein (or some other world's best teacher) himself teaching the subject along with amazing animations/videos for almost free? Which one would you choose (even if you are in the developed world) ?
The live, real teacher in the classroom WINS. Real interactivity at its best is when and where the actual students and the actual teacher are in class together. Students may (if allowed) interrupt to ask any questions during lecture time. All that TV stuff may work as a supplement.
I am not negating that, but I would like to mention one thing. Even in places like MIT or Harvard etc, most students usually don't ask the questions. This is evident from video recordings of MIT lectures on YT. For most students, for the most of the time, it is a one way communication from teacher to student.
Unusual. My experience as student in many academic classes was not like what you described. More NORMAL in a classroom is a few questions asked from students.
But do you think, there may be at least a few students who never ask questions, may be because they feel shy to speak up ? What do you think percentage of such students in class may be ?( in a typical class). I studied in Rice U., Houston, for some period. There were a few students who never used to ask questions. My most of the education was in India where rote learning is cultural. Hence in India one finds % of such students in a class higher, especially if class size is larger.
Thanks for the cultural information. Regarding some percentage of students in a class who never ask a question, this is not important. The best teacher-directed class instruction allows for immediate, live interactivity in case/ for whichever students want clarification on any details.
I'm going back to the very beginning here because people are talking over each other. There are actually TWO separate issues here, and unfortunately, this first post have mixed both of them.
The first is the issue on whether, IF the class is nothing more than merely students listening to lectures (i.e. a one-way communication), then isn't it better (cheaper) to simply replace the teacher with a recorded video?
The second is whether this methodology can give ".. worlds (sic) best education to the masses.."
I have no issue with the first, because it is obvious that one can simply produce a series of videos and then let students after students, year after year, watch those videos.
I disagree with the second conclusion, because many research on education has shown that this one-way, non-interactive means of communication isn't the BEST way to educate anyone.
Anyone who is involved in online or blended classes would have noticed this. There have been many research on educational methods on the best way to conduct these classes. ALL of the online lesson management interfaces include many features that allow for 2-way communications between instructors and students, often done live! Studies have shown that students engage more intently and retain a lot more important information in the presence of active guidance, especially when they encounter something they don't understand.
And then, of course, at the other end of the spectrum, we have Mazur's peer-instruction method, in which it is the antithesis of isolated, one-way delivery of lessons. Many schools are adopting this methodology as they see it being more effective and better than communicating the material to the students.
So already, this one-way communication is not the "best" form there is out there for education. And based on many studies, it may be one of the worst form of education.
ZapperZ, I just do not understand if you are making the point in favor or in opposition to the "TV recording" method of lesson delivery. I can ALMOST undrstand your discussion, and then it becomes uncertain. Try again! Were you saying what I was trying to say (like post #29), or were you saying something else?
I think he is saying that "He agrees that proposed method is cheaper but not better than interactive human teaching."
To which I say that the pre-recorded video will keep on improving through iterative process over the years, incorporating suggestions from world renowned experts and students themselves. Every doubt a student can have will be incorporated in the video through subsequent versions. (Version 10.0, for example will be a lot better than 1.0)
Now why such a video should not be able to answer students common doubts ? I think currently people are apprehensive about one-way teaching is because the course-material (video) does not go through such exhaustive iterations of improvements incorporating suggestions from world renowned experts. All the currently available videos are version 1.0.
Really hoping this is a typo.....
I thought I made it clear when I broke down the original post into two separate issues.
1. I am NOT in favor of video/one-way communication education.
2. If one-way communication is the ONLY means of education, then sure, a video lecture would save money.
Have you ever taught a class?
Just because something is said or written down, and even explained, doesn't mean the student WILL get it. I lost count how many times I've given students something, tell them explicitly what to do, and BAM, they make a mistake with it again! No matter how well you try to present the material, there will always, ALWAYS be questions. I see this all the time when the students have to learn from "pre-lectures" online videos. You get a whole spectrum of students with a whole spectrum of varying questions about the SAME video that they viewed.
So I will claim that it is a fallacy to think that one-way communication education is effective. In fact, research in education methodology have shown numerous evidence that it isn't!
The amazing thing about this thread is the idea that this is a new thing, and the weakness of one-way instruction is also a brand new discovery. This goes back to the early 50's. Zz's question "Have you ever taught a class?" is particularly relevant - it's the first question that gets asked whenever this idea comes back from the dead.
Never been in a class where students werent regularly participating. Even in an english class I had that was 7:00 am. If I had to pay tuition to watch instructional videos I would stop going to school and just read the books on my own.
The video below shows one educator's experience why one way education techniques often fail.
Yes, but it's also worth stating that distance learning has a long history. For example. the US Navy needed ways to provide content to sailors stationed on ships that were at sea for extended periods of time, and in that context it has largely been successful.
I always gave my lectures as a question and answer session, leading my students slowly towards discovery. The impact was very strong and the ideas, concepts, research methods, were very effectively communicated. Science, after all, starts by asking questions about nature.
Separate names with a comma.