iGens, Google, and the Future of Universities

An overstated stereotype if I've ever heard one. And simply not true.

But the same cannot be said of many of the big universities that regard their prime role to be a centre for research, with teaching as an inconvenient afterthought, and class sizes so large that they only want to "teach" is through lectures. (Tapscott)

RJS:

I agree it is a stereotype. But based on my experience of teaching at three large state universities, it is true to a large degree. And students are not stupid. Most of my students agree with me on this one.

"But the same cannot be said of many of the big universities that regard their prime role to be a centre for research, with teaching as an inconvenient afterthought, and class sizes so large that they only want to "teach" is through lectures. (Tapscott)"

This whole topic makes me anticipate even more an independent grad course I'm taking at my seminary in the Fall. Here's the course description:

"With an understanding of what makes for an effective preacher, the readings of this course are designed to investigate aspects of being an effective collegiate professor. Topics explored include creation of, and adherence to, an effective and realistic syllabus, characteristics of effective collegiate classroom communication and professorial ethos, and creation of engaging lecture material, both verbal and visual."

In light of the current post, I see more clearly that I went into the course assuming that lecture is the predominant style of college-level education. But I am relieved to go through the book list and see that discussion and collaboration-based education features heavily in the titles.

To inquire, to have an animated conversation not a lecture, to enjoy an interactive education not a broadcast. That's what I always hoped for at a church actually. And if that's the way it'd be done my teenaged daughters and many others will actually look forward to Sunday mornings.

Never quite understood why it's a called a "service" ...

William

Scot,

I don't think that the shift in the brain due to twitter or FB or texting is all that significant. But I do think that methods of teaching should always be changing and adapting to the environment.

The thing that struck me in Tapscott's column is his suggestion that the availability of information "knowledge" on the web would undermine a monopoly held by Universities. I don't know about you but I don't consider the dispensing of "knowledge" or facts to be a significant part of my job. My job is to teach students how to think, how to use the information available and make sense of it, and how to expand beyond our current limits, how to engage in creative problem-solving. The availability of information of the web is a tool that we use to make this easier and more effective.

If I remember you've been positive about outcome based teaching on this blog. What would you say is the goal of your teaching - what defines a good "outcome" in your opinion?