Education rip-off number #2: Show films!

This is the biggest time waster in use today---take up lecture time by showing a film in class.

On the other hand, you can tell a serious instructor, if films and videos are on reserve, and you are expected to view them outside of class, and learn from them in addtition to class materials.

Any instructor who shows more than 5 minutes of "an instructional video" is admitting that your time would be better served by actually listening to someone else . . .

I don't agree 100% as not every teacher, professor or lecturer cant be an expert on all subjects so why not show a film that can explain it better than they can? Personally I would rather watch a film that makes sense and I learn from than a teacher thats weak or boring on the subject or that doesnt make sense and not learn anything

[edit on 5-8-2006 by warpboost]

I agree with you. But your own comment underscores my core point: you'd rather watch a film than listen to a poor speaker. Which points out how teachers often cover their inadequacies by using media presentations, instead of simply teaching.

you are right. nothing is true 100% of the time. And yet, I remember professors who spend most of a class showing films. Couldn't we have just rented the course from blockbuster?
.

I can't agree with this either. Having the students sit and watch the video not only assures that all will see the film and eliminate a rush to the library to check out the material, thus possibly leaving some students out, but also gives everyone a chance to discuss the material while it is still fresh in their minds. Even teachers deserve to take a break in class from time to time, I think.

I did have a class once in which we had to watch an explicit one hour film of nothing but paralyzed patients having sex. That's one film I could have lived a lifetime without seeing.

[edit on 2006/8/5 by GradyPhilpott]

What we know about the way people learn, is that some people learn best through audio presentation, some through visuals and still others may have another way they learn best. We also know that a person learns best when they've been exposed to the material more than once, and preferably in a variety of media several times. All of this would mean that lecturing, showing films, having discussions, etc. for the same material would produce better results for the students to learn.

My husband was a teacher at the country's top public high school for 20 years. He taught biology. He would do his frog imitations (hilarious, the kids loved it), he lectured, he showed films, had the kids doing experiments, took them outside to explore, used various props for his lectures and a variety of other techniques to teach his students. He felt that some things were best learned from a film or pictures. For example, how could you ever possibly describe with words, the beauty of an ocean floor teeming with coral reefs, tropical fish, etc.? It's much better if you have a video to show them, then they can appreciate the beauty of this world and appreciate it, thereby inspiring them to find ways to help protect our environment.

Besides, no one can listen to straight talking for a long time without becoming bored. It's good to teach in a variety of ways, it keeps the kids alert and interested. Some things are better seen than heard. My husband must have been doing something right, as he has been in Who's Who 6 or 7 times, was voted Best Science Teacher of California, and his kids adore(d) him. He's still in touch with some of them.

Yes, forrest lady, you and grady and the other posters are correct about good technique in teaching.

What I'm talking about is a different issue: crappy technique

Crappy technique is not where you enspire and lead through example; it's where you mindlessly plug in one dynamic, and use it instead of putting your soul into the teaching process.

That's what I'm talkin 'bout.