You may have seen the op-ed in Sunday’s NY Times, ”Lecture Me. Really.<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/18/opinion/sunday/lecture-me-really.html>” It was the latest defense of the lecture. It has gotten a lot of discussion in social media. It is an interesting read, and if you haven’t done so already, I encourage you to take a look. But I would also encourage you to take a look at a few well argued replies. These replies are quite powerful on why active learning strategies are important. None of them say never lecture, but there is excellent research support that says we shouldn’t lecture all the time, or even for a long period in any single class.



Active Learning Is Not Our Enemy: A Response to Molly Worthen,<https://josheyler.wordpress.com/2015/10/20/active-learning-is-not-our-enemy-a-response-to-molly-worthen/> Josh Eyler, Director, Center for Teaching Excellence, Rice University

In Defense of Continuous Exposition by the Teacher<http://derekbruff.org/?p=3126>, Derek Bruff, Director, Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching

Professors Shouldn’t Teach to Younger Versions of Themselves<http://www.slate.com/articles/life/education/2015/10/professors_shouldn_t_only_teach_to_younger_versions_of_themselves.html>, Slate

Active Learning in Mathematics, Part V<http://blogs.ams.org/matheducation/2015/10/20/active-learning-in-mathematics-part-v-the-role-of-telling-in-active-learning/#sthash.KqErQUCK.dpbs>, AMS Blog



Bill