undefined

points

[-]

This is hilarious. This comment would imply that the people who got multiple degrees and were very successful through their careers (that would be everybody in my generation: we started in 1980) learning from lecturers scribbling with chalk on a blackboard, writing it all down with pen on paper, somehow had a less effective education than modern students using modern tools. Yeah, looks all around, remembers training youngs, no, I don't think so... Actually sometimes it was bad because people, but sometimes it was fucking awesome. I lectured undergrad mathematics at UF and ASU using chalk and a blackboard and to this day that was some of the most enjoyable experiences of my life. Especially for the upper division classes, my students paid attention. They asked questions. It was glorious.

by groby_b1 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

That's not what I said.

I'm absolutely supportive of using blackboards & paper and pen over computers.

What I'm saying is that making unsubstantiated claims like "you'll hear the lecture again when you read it" is completely detrimental to making that point, because it's entirely unsubstantiated and doesn't make any relevant point you couldn't make in a well-supported way instead.

by WalterBright24 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

The relevant part is it filled in the missing parts of my notes. The prof says more than what he writes.

by WalterBright3 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

> a BS claim

It worked for me. Have you tried it?

> given the quality of college lectures

I attended a university where that wasn't a problem. Prof Daniel Goodstein, for example, turned his lectures into a video series "The Mechanical Universe". But, frankly, I liked his in-person lectures using the blackboard and chalk better.

by groby_b1 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> It worked for me. Have you tried it?

I have. It doesn't work that way for me - but that hardly matters. More importantly, there's plenty of research around inner monologue and sensory replay also pointing out that this isn't true for most people.

> I attended a university where that wasn't a problem.

You were blessed :)

> But, frankly, I liked his in-person lectures using the blackboard and chalk better.

That's not something I'm arguing against :) I think they're a great teaching tool.

My objection is that making a specious but unsupported, and often easily anecdotally invalidated point to support a case that's actually got a ton of solid evidence in support is detrimental to making that case.

Physical note taking, and being actually present for a lecture are tremendously important. Laptops are hugely problematic for learning. And those points are important enough that we should make solid arguments in favor of them, not easily discredited ones. Because we also know that many students are very muched biased to discarding these points given half a chance.

There's currently a related post on the home page: "Good ideas do not need lots of lies in order to gain public acceptance (2008)"