Why Lectures Matter

Sitting in lecture, this topic came to me as a rather useful one to have.

Lectures and classes are the typical vantage point individuals have into new topics. Taking a class - either in high school or at the intro level in college - can be the make or break situation for an individual in continuing with that subject. An intro class should not be poorly taught, under any circumstances.

Here's the deal: it is not fair to students to "test" their commitment to a subject by making the intro class difficult or boring. In college, intro biology was considered "weed out" - we had extremely difficult labs and tests that made our grades go in the crapper very quickly. On top of it, none of the lecturers were engaging. It was well known that to be landed with the job of teaching intro bio was a a dreaded prospect by the faculty. They did not want to be there.

I get it, honestly. I do. Specific topics in biology are much more interesting than the general overview.

But if you're bored, then I'm willing to bet, your students are also bored. I certainly was.

Boredom leads to not paying attention (or even, in some cases, not coming to class). Boredom leads to worse grades. Worse grades (exacerbated by the extra difficulty in the class) leads to not continuing in the subject - or even dropping the class.

This is not the way to teach a subject.

I understand why weed out may be necessary, but I don't think intro classes are the location to do it. You want to reassure students that the subject is interesting and one that they could enjoy continuing on with. Weed out is a job for secondary classes - things taken just after the intro class - and at the very least, they can't be boring. Boring + Weed Out = not fair to students.

I love biology. I am supposed to be a biologist. But my intro class almost weeded me out. How many students like me did this happen to, because the lecturers didn't care and couldn't hold their attention? Because their grades were so poor due to being bored in the class and then doing badly on the extra-hard tests? How is this system fair to them?

Perhaps I am overestimating students. That may be true. In biology especially, many students join with the mindset of "I'll be a doctor! I'll always be employed AND make a lot of money!" Those students need to be weeded out. I acknowledge this.

I just don't think we should be losing other students in the process.

When you lecture, you have to be excited about it. You have to have passion for the subject regardless of what it is and regardless of what time of day. You have to be enthusiastic. You are essentially trying to gain a student's interest - you are competing with the internet and television and everything else as you teach. You don't need to do a lot, since the students presumably want to do well - but you can't just drone on in monotone.

Also, you can't just read off what the slide says. That's just unfair to the students. You're wasting their time. They can read the slides on their own. Use the slides as a backbone and have the bullet points direct your thoughts, rather than using them as a script.

Needless to say, my lecturer for my first graduate class utilizes the "monotone, power point as script" format, and it's not a good way to start off my graduate education. At least there will be a new one for this class in about two, three weeks.

My goal is to never lose a student to boredom. Science isn't boring, and no one should think it is.

~ Meg