Teaching in Higher Education

ISSN: 1356-2517 (Print) 1470-1294 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cthe20

Reassessing the value of university lectures

Sarah French & Gregor Kennedy

To cite this article: Sarah French & Gregor Kennedy (2017) Reassessing the value of university
lectures, Teaching in Higher Education, 22:6, 639-654, DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2016.1273213

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1273213

Published online: 27 Dec 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 8644

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 33 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cthe20
TEACHING IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2017
VOL. 22, NO. 6, 639–654
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1273213

Reassessing the value of university lectures

Sarah French and Gregor Kennedy
Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria,
Australia

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

This paper discusses the role of the lecture in contemporary higher Received 10 February 2016
education. Moving beyond the polarised perspectives that Accepted 18 November 2016
characterise recent debates on the subject, it considers both the
KEYWORDS
potential problems and possible pedagogical, practical and social Lectures; higher education;
benefits of the lecture as a mode of teaching and learning. pedagogy; teaching and
Through an examination of scholarly literature on the pedagogical learning
uses of the lecture as well as recent articles on its place in the
future of higher education, we outline the key arguments and
highlight some of the problems, contradictions and inconsistencies
implicit in the debates. Drawing upon the recurring themes in
the literature, we identify seven reasons as to why the lecture
continues to be valuable in contemporary higher education.
However, we also suggest that more innovative approaches to
lecturing as well as alternatives to lectures are needed to adapt to
a changing educational environment.

Over the past few years, the question of whether the lecture is an effective teaching method
has been one of the most heatedly debated topics in the field of higher education. While
research on the effectiveness of lectures has been carried out since at least the 1960s, the
value of the lecture has been increasingly questioned recently for a number of reasons that
include waning lecture attendance rates by students, the heightened emphases on active
learning and interactive modes of teaching and technological advances that allow for
the instructional component of lectures to be delivered online.
In a series of recent articles and opinion pieces, academics variously defend or deride
the lecture as a mode of teaching and learning. Many argue that the lecture is a boring,
passive, ineffective and antiquated teaching method that will soon be obsolete (Ben-
Naim 2012; Biggs and Tang 2011; Clark 2014; DiPiro 2009; Dodd 2015; Lambert 2012;
Palmer 2012). Donald Clark, for example, describes the face-to-face lecture as ‘a lazy
and damaging pedagogy’ that is ‘a throwback to a non-literate age’ (2014). The authors
of a recent study comparing traditional lectures to active learning in the STEM disciplines
go so far as to equate their article on the harm done by lectures to the Surgeon General’s
1964 report on the harms of smoking (Bhatia 2014). Commenting on the same study,
Harvard physicist Eric Mazur suggests that ‘it’s almost unethical to be lecturing’ (Bajak
2014).

CONTACT Sarah French [email protected] Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education, Elisabeth
Murdoch Building (Building 134), Spencer Road, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia
© 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
640 S. FRENCH AND G. KENNEDY

Yet, there are equally strong arguments for the continued relevance and pedagogical
value of the lecture. Those in favour of retaining face-to-face lectures suggest that when
done well lectures can be informative, engaging, inspiring and even transformational
learning experiences (Charlton 2006; Charlton, Marsh, and Gurski 2015; Cowling and
Brack 2015b; Furedi 2013; Gunderman 2013; Penson 2012; Wolff 2013; Worthen 2015).
Richard Gunderman describes a great lecture as a work of art, ‘a kind of dance, in
which lecturer and listeners watch, respond to, and draw energy and inspiration from
each other’ (2013). While some claim that ‘“digital natives” are killing the “sage on the
stage”’ (Cowling and Brack 2015a), for others the role of the lecture has become more
significant in the digital age. For example, Molly Worthen suggests that ‘Professors
should embrace – and even advertise – lecture courses as an exercise in mindfulness
and attention building, a mental workout that counteracts the junk food of nonstop
social media’ (2015).
The recent discussions on the lecture are often driven by passionate opinions and tend
to depict the lecture either at its very worst or as a romantic ideal. In this paper, we try to
move beyond the polarised and often polemical perspectives that characterise the debates
and consider both the potential problems and the possible pedagogical benefits of the
lecture. We propose that the lecture remains a valuable teaching method for both practical
and pedagogical reasons. However, we also suggest that in many cases lectures need to be
improved and their scope broadened to incorporate more dialogic, active and interactive
teaching and learning approaches. Recent descriptions of lecture practices suggest that in
many institutions the lecture has already evolved beyond the traditional idea of a uni-
directional monologue and that the lecture format is becoming increasingly interactive
(Dawson 2015; Palaima 2014). It is also important that lectures are used in combination
with a range of other teaching methods to provide flexibility and diversity for students as
well as to enhance their learning. Thus, while the lecture remains a useful mode of teach-
ing, we suggest that more innovative approaches to lecturing as well as alternatives to lec-
tures are needed to adapt to a changing educational environment.

1. The evolution of the lecture

Since the emergence of the first universities in medieval Europe, the lecture has been the
dominant mode of academic teaching. The term ‘lecture’ derives from the Latin lectura
meaning ‘to read’ and the terms ‘lecturer’ or ‘reader,’ from lecture, meaning ‘to read
aloud’ (Exley and Dennick 2004, 3). The historical and traditional understanding of the
lecture adheres very strongly to this etymology. In the thirteenth century, lectures were
presented in monasteries where a monk would stand at a lectern and recite passages
from a manuscript to a group of students who wrote down what he said verbatim. At
this time, books were difficult to make or reproduce and universities often only had
one copy of a book which may be the only copy in the world. Thus, scholars would
travel long distances to gain access to rare texts (Bates 2014).
In his examination of the impact of the invention of the printing press on universities,
Gavin Moodie usefully traces some of the ways in which approaches to curriculum and
pedagogy emerged as a result of technological developments, highlighting in particular
the influence of printing on lectures (2014). He explains that in the later middle ages, cur-
ricula were largely uniform across institutions due to the scarcity of manuscripts. Early
 TEACHING IN HIGHER EDUCATION 641

European universities such as Oxford adopted the practice of cursory lectures in which
students who had achieved a bachelors degree were admitted to read books aloud to
undergraduate students who could not afford the texts. However, there were also two
other forms of lectures at this time: the exposito, ‘which was restricted to elucidating
the arguments of the author being presented’ and lectures cum questionibus, ‘expository
lectures which posed problems and questions arising from the text’ (Moodie 2014, 460).
Thus, lectures gradually progressed beyond the reading of texts to include some discussion
of the subject matter. From the late 1400s, scholars began to question the need for lectures
since printing had increased the availability of books and students could acquire knowl-
edge through the private study of texts (Moodie 2014, 462).
Moodie shows that the invention of the printing press ‘had a major role in changing
universities’ curriculum, broadly from one organised around authorities who addressed
various subjects, to more diverse curricula organised around subjects which were informed
by various authorities’ (2014, 458). He adds, however, that ‘printing did not revolutionise
university teaching by, for example, replacing lecturers or their lectures’ (2014, 462). By
increasing access to books, the invention of printing changed the nature of what was com-
municated in lectures. Students could read the books themselves and lectures could focus
on the analysis and discussion of questions arising from the texts. While the increased
availability and affordability of books resulted in the end of the cursory lecture, ‘lectures
cum questionibus persisted after printed books became ubiquitous despite problems with
attendance’ (Moodie 2014, 469). By extension, Moodie suggests that similar observations
might be made about the impact of contemporary information technology on the role of
lectures.
The view that lectures might be replaced with other teaching methods has been
expressed for a long time, often as a response to the educational possibilities offered by
new technologies. George Veletsianos argues that ‘the idea of automating aspects of edu-
cation and replacing instructors with machines’ has existed since at least the 1920s when
American psychologist Sidney Pressey invented the automatic teacher, a machine that
‘presented information, accepted a response and returned pre-recorded feedback’ (Velet-
sianos 2014). Since then, various technologies have assisted with the delivery of higher
education and expanded the availability and accessibility of resources to students includ-
ing radio transmissions, television and video. The Open University in the UK is one
example of a successful teaching and learning model based on widening access through
the use of filmed lectures. In recent years, the use of lecture recordings captured on
video has risen in prominence as a result of the possibilities offered by online courses
such as MOOCs. The internet is likely to have an increasingly more significant impact
on the ways in which teaching and learning are carried out, and it has some unique edu-
cational benefits. For example, unlike most previous technologies employed for edu-
cational purposes, the internet is potentially interactive and social, opening up
possibilities for interactive learning to occur in off-campus study modes (Wolff 2013).
Universities are increasingly employing blended learning approaches that integrate
online and face-to-face teaching methods and a range of sophisticated technologies
have been created to potentially enhance teaching and learning, including the use of
lecture capture and the creation of online video lectures. While in some instances,
online teaching resources can provide alternatives to campus-based learning, it is also
the case that lecture recordings and other web-based learning technologies can be
642 S. FRENCH AND G. KENNEDY

effectively used to supplement, support and enhance face-to face lectures without necess-
arily displacing them.

2. The limitations of the literature on the lecture

Bligh’s (1971) book What’s the Use of Lectures? was the first comprehensive analysis of the
lecture and it remains one of the most influential texts on the subject. Bligh argues that
while the lecture ‘may be used appropriately to convey information … it cannot be
used effectively on its own to promote thought or to change and develop attitudes
without variations in the usual techniques’ (1971, 13). Bligh’s findings are frequently
employed in arguments against the lecture; however, they are often simplified and miscon-
strued to support the view that lectures are inherently ineffective for promoting thought,
changing attitudes and inspiring students (Bates 2014; Light and Cox 2001, 98). Yet, Bligh
presents a far more nuanced argument than this, emphasising that while ‘the lecture
method alone is rarely adequate’ this statement ‘does not imply (as is sometimes miscon-
strued) that the lecture method is rarely appropriate.’ ‘The lecture has a place’ he argues,
‘but the place it is given is often too prominent’ (1971, 182).
Bligh’s conclusions do not suggest that the lecture should be abandoned, but rather that
it should be given a less prominent place in the curricula and used in conjunction with
other teaching techniques. He further implies that with ‘variations in the usual techniques,’
it might be possible for lectures to exceed some of the limitations he identifies. For
example, to promote thought in large lectures, Bligh proposes the inclusion of visual dis-
plays, handouts and pre-reading requirements as well as a reduction in speed to allow for
thinking time. He suggests that thought can also be stimulated by problem-centred lec-
tures that present a chain of argument and require students to follow a line of reasoning
(1971, 162). Bligh’s observations on some of the potential problems with the traditional
lecture format and practical advice on how lectures might be improved remain highly rel-
evant and illustrate that the recent arguments regarding the pedagogical value of the
lecture are neither new nor unique to the digital age.
There are two distinct foci that permeate scholarly literature on the role of the
lecture. The first defines the lecture as a format or teaching method in which the
lecture is contrasted with other teaching formats, especially small group teaching.
Since at least the 1960s educational scholars have presented a range of pedagogical
arguments for the superiority of one teaching method over the other. Such arguments
tend to construct an unhelpful dichotomy between lectures and small group teaching
and obscure the fact that both teaching modes require great skill in their design and
delivery to successfully engage students and facilitate learning. The second focus is
more recent and positions the live lecture in opposition to the pre-recorded online
lecture. Thus, developments in technology have resurfaced old debates about the
place of the lecture in higher education. In some recent articles, face-to-face lectures
are characterised as traditional, old-fashioned and antiquated teaching methods while
online formats are perceived to be inherently more innovative (Ben-Naim 2012;
Dodd 2015). Such arguments tend to underestimate the skill required to effectively
utilise the online medium. They also perpetuate a problematic dichotomy between
face-to-face and online learning rather that recognising the potential for the two
modes to be utilised in a complementary manner.
 TEACHING IN HIGHER EDUCATION 643

A central focus in the recent debates is the possible threat that the use of lecture capture
poses to the live lecture. The use of lecture capture – that is, the audio and/or video record-
ings of lectures made available digitally for students, usually with slides presentations – has
steadily increased over the past decade, leading to concerns that the availability of lecture
recordings might be accompanied by a reduction in lecture attendance. However, it is dif-
ficult to determine the precise impact of lecture recordings on attendance and the research
is inconclusive. Three empirical studies suggest that attendance is not unduly affected by
the availability of lecture recordings (Hove and Corcoran 2008; Larkin 2010; von Konsky,
Ivins, and Gribble 2009), and a fourth study found there was a minimal reduction in
attendance when recordings were provided (Traphagan, Kucsera, and Kishi 2010). A
recent study on lecture attendance by Harvard University suggests that undergraduate
lecture attendance is not systematically related to the availability of digital lecture
videos, with preliminary results suggesting that there is a positive correlation between
lecture attendance and lecture video viewings in some courses and a negative correlation
in others (HILT 2014).
While these studies use attendance data, it is more common for research in the field to
rely on student and staff survey data which tends to be more equivocal. Survey results
show that students claim to attend lectures even when lecture recordings are available
(Bongey, Cizaldo, and Kalnbach 2006; Gyspers et al. 2011; Holbrook and Dupont 2009;
Marchand, Pearson, and Albon 2014; Pale, Petrović, and Jeren 2014). They further indi-
cate that students like lecture recordings and primarily use them not as a replacement for
live lectures but as a supplement to enhance their understanding of particular sections of
the lecture, to catch up on missed lectures due to illness, work or timetable clashes, and as a
revision tool for assignments and exams.
While students report little change in their attendance, lecturers perceive a far more sig-
nificant reduction in attendance when lecture recordings are made available (Gosper et al.
2010; Marchand, Pearson, and Albon 2014). For example, in their study of four Australian
universities, Gosper et al. (2010) found that 55% of lecturers surveyed believed that web-
based learning technologies had decreased lecture attendance. Staff perceptions are likely
to provide an accurate picture of lecture attendance; however, it should be noted that
attendance rates may have fallen due to a variety reasons other than the availability of
lecture recordings. Hughes-Warrington argues that lecture capture ‘isn’t that powerful,
and it isn’t the problem’ (2015b). Her recent study conducted at the Australian National
University provides evidence to support anecdotal perceptions that student attendance
rates have declined, but it also illustrates that students are not necessarily replacing live
lectures with lecture recordings (2015b). The study data show that students are not down-
loading lectures beyond week three, until there is a spike in downloads prior to exams
(ibid). Thus, troublingly, the majority of students in the study (approximately two
thirds) were neither attending lectures nor listening to the lecture recordings during the
semester. In our view, lecture capture does have potential value, especially as a supplement
to live lectures. However, it is important that staff and students are given guidance on the
role of lecture capture in the curriculum as well as advice on how to effectively utilise the
lecture recordings to benefit teaching and learning.
A key problem that emerges in the recent debates is that the lecture tends to be dis-
cussed in isolation, yet the lecture is rarely, if ever, employed as the sole teaching
method in a course but as one element in a suite of teaching and learning activities.
644 S. FRENCH AND G. KENNEDY

Criticisms of the lecture often focus on what it cannot do such as develop practical skills
and applied knowledge or teach ‘transferrable skills,’ like communication skills, to prepare
students for employment. Arguably, such criticisms are misdirected since lectures are
rarely intended to serve these purposes. Certainly, there are some aspects of teaching
and learning that are not able to be achieved within the lecture format, and it is for this
reason that lectures need to be integrated with a range of other teaching methods such
as tutorials, practical workshops, labs and internships. Equally, it is not the purpose of lec-
tures to merely transmit information since this can be achieved through other means such
as readings or pre-recorded instructional videos. Thus, the role of the lecture, and its
potential value, must be considered in relation to its purpose within the curriculum as
well as within the context of the learning experience as a whole, as we discuss in more
detail shortly.
A further problem that underscores discussions on the lecture is a lack of evidence to
support claims of the capacity of either the lecture or other teaching modes to advance
learning. Arguments both for and against the lecture are generally highly subjective and
mostly based on personal perspectives and experiences of lectures rather than evidence-
based research. While there is some evidence to suggest that students appear to value lec-
tures and view them as a good way to learn (Gyspers et al. 2011; Mitchell and Forer 2010),
there is insufficient evidence to support the notion that lectures are either pedagogically
superior or inferior to other teaching methods. Studies measuring the effectiveness of lec-
tures generally either use student evaluations or academic outcomes of students as the
primary metrics, both of which are problematic. Student evaluations produce unreliable
data since student perceptions do not necessarily correlate with learning outcomes and
can even stand in direct contradiction to them; students might respond very positively
to a course yet learn little from it and vice versa (Symonds 2014). Studies that focus on
academic outcomes compare student performance in courses that use lectures as a
primary teaching method with courses that mostly use other teaching methods. Overwhel-
mingly, these studies find that there is no significant difference between lectures and
various other teaching methods (Coleman et al. 1998; Costin 1972; DaRosa et al. 1991;
Huggins and Stamatel 2015; Kangari, Alipor, and Tabatabaee 2007). However, these com-
parative studies are problematic as there are a range of uncontrolled independent variables
across conditions making definitive conclusions untenable.

3. The problem of characterising the lecture

The way in which the lecture is characterised is central to evaluating its effectiveness, yet
debates are frequently complicated by the absence of a consistent or agreed upon under-
standing. Those in favour of removing the lecture from the curricula tend to adopt a
narrow, exaggerated characterisation of the lecture as inherently passive and didactic:
‘55 minutes of largely uninterrupted discourse from a lecturer with no discussion
between students and no student activity other than listening and note taking’ (Gibbs,
Habeshaw, and Habeshaw 1992, 9). This perhaps describes a pervasive mode of lecturing
and the prevalence of such an approach understandably raises concerns that lectures
might lack the capacity to engage students in active or interactive forms of learning.
There is strong support in educational literature that students develop their understanding
of concepts and best retain knowledge by engaging with so-called ‘active learning’ methods
 TEACHING IN HIGHER EDUCATION 645

that include problem solving and critical thinking (Bligh 1971; Lambert 2012; Prince
2004). It is often argued that non-lecture based teaching formats, including small group
teaching, have the strongest capacity to promote such forms of learning, while lectures
are perceived to be didactic experiences that turn students into passive observers (Clark
2014; DiPiro 2009). While this is certainly sometimes the case, it is by no means true of
all lectures. As Peter Penson suggests, it could be argued that such criticisms are stereo-
types that ‘only apply to poorly prepared lectures or badly designed courses’ (2012, 72).
A well-designed and well-delivered lecture that involves students in the processes of ques-
tioning, analysing and critical thinking has the capacity and be a highly engaging experi-
ence. Even purely instructional lectures comprised of ‘uninterrupted discourse’ can
provoke deep intellectual engagement when presented by an effective lecturer.
The narrow characterisation of the lecture employed by many of its critics can be con-
trasted with the very broad understanding of the lecture format that is most often adopted
by supporters of the lecture. Many suggest that the lecture need not be limited in scope or
methodology and propose that it is possible to reimagine the lecture format in a variety of
innovative ways, including through the incorporation of dialogue, problem solving and
other interactive teaching approaches (Exley and Dennick 2004, 11; Hattie 2015; Light
and Cox 2001, 99; Penson 2012, 73). Exley and Dennick suggest that ‘by blurring the
boundaries between teaching formats it is possible to transfer many of the interactive
and more discursive teaching strategies to the lecture theatre and expand the range of
learning possibilities of the lecture format’ (2004, 11). Biggs and Tang (2011) provide a
list of practical techniques that can be employed within the lecture situation (and the
lecture theatre) that would resolve many of the problems identified by critics of the
lecture, including the use of concept maps, learning partners, work-along exercises and
minute papers. Penson argues that lectures need to be reconceived as ‘a learning event
in which one member of faculty interacts with a number of students’ (2012, 73). He
suggests that while the lecture may predominantly involve the lecturer talking, ‘it can
also include activities such as short discussions between students, question-and-answer
sessions, group work, and other “enhancements” usually associated with smaller class
sizes’ (2012, 73). As such discussions indicate, pedagogical designs of the lecture are
highly multifaceted and varied, resulting in diverse definitions of the lecture format.
The ambiguities and inconsistencies in characterisations of the lecture complicate argu-
ments both for and against the value of lectures and suggest that the two perspectives may
not be as polarised as they at first appear. Both perspectives recognise that teachers need to
do more than merely transmit information to their students via a didactic lecture format
and agree that active and interactive teaching approaches are crucial for learning and
knowledge retention. Those in favour of retaining lectures widely agree that lectures fre-
quently fail to engage students and that universities need to adopt innovative approaches
to improve them (Cowling and Brack 2015b; Dawson 2015; Gunderman 2013). Further,
both critics and supporters of the lecture acknowledge that there is an escalating
problem with poor lecture attendance rates by students. As Marnie Hughes-Warrington
observes, this decline in lecture attendance by students has a demoralising effect on aca-
demic staff who are increasingly lecturing to half-empty rooms (2015a). Academic staff are
losing the ability to interact with their students in lectures, which in turn might have a
detrimental impact upon the quality of lectures (and the lecture recordings).
646 S. FRENCH AND G. KENNEDY

4. Is there an argument to be made for the value of lectures?

While the fact that fewer students are attending lectures is not in dispute, the point of con-
tention is whether this problem can best be resolved by removing the lecture from the cur-
ricula entirely to focus on a combination of online instruction and small group interactive
teaching, or whether there is a way to re-think the delivery of the lecture to better engage
students and strengthen the lecture’s pedagogical value. For many, the fact that students
are not attending lectures serves as a primary reason to remove them from the curricula;
however, it seems questionable logic to attribute the waning attendance rates at lectures to
the teaching format itself. The circumstances impacting upon student attendance are
numerous and include factors such as family commitments, the need for students to
undertake paid employment and the travel time and distance to campus. Competing
demands on students, especially part-time work, is a key reason for poor attendance.
Another factor that impacts upon lecture attendance is poor assessment practices, in
which students are only expected to engage with one or two weeks of a subject’s
content for the purposes of assessment rather than with the subject as a whole. While it
is also clearly possible that some students are taking advantage of lecture recordings as
a study strategy not to attend lectures, as mentioned earlier this is only one contributing
factor, and data from empirical studies indicate that it may not be a particularly significant
one.
While studies suggest that students continue to value lectures (Gyspers et al. 2011;
Mitchell and Forer 2010), the decline in attendance suggests that they may be prioritising
other commitments over lecture attendance. If this is the case, removing lectures does not
address the core problem of why students are not turning up. Instead, solutions are needed
that highlight the value for students in attending lectures and viewing them as an integral
part of their learning. In order to achieve this, it is essential that the potential benefits of
lectures are better understood. If, as some suggest, lectures may soon be abandoned, what
do we stand to lose?
Arguments in favour of retaining lectures suggest that the lecture has particular peda-
gogical, practical and social benefits that are crucial to the student experience and not
easily replicated by other teaching methods (Charlton 2006; Charlton, Marsh, and
Gurski 2015; Cowling and Brack 2015b; Furedi 2013; Gunderman 2013; Penson 2012;
Wolff 2013; Worthen 2015). Drawing upon the recurring themes in the literature on
the topic, below we identify seven reasons as to why the lecture is valuable in higher
education.

4.1. Lectures can provide context and structure for a subject

Lectures are often used to develop the overarching view of a subject, providing students
with a structure or framework for the material and a ‘disciplinary context for the topic
under discussion’ (Furedi 2013). Penson argues that lectures play a crucial role in the
higher education curricula because they offer a ‘grand-view,’ forming ‘the backbone of
the university learning experience, from which all other elements of learning emulate,
and by which they are supported’ (2012, 73). Thus, lectures might be especially important
at the beginning of a course to facilitate an understanding of the learning aims, as well as at
the end to summarise the content and prepare students for assessment. Lectures can also
 TEACHING IN HIGHER EDUCATION 647

provide an ongoing structural element for the subject as a whole. Bruce Charlton argues
that ‘the proper unit of educationally-valuable lectures is a course of lectures, not a one off
talk’ (2006). Unlike the single seminar, lectures can be used to develop a narrative logic
and a sequential, structured learning path across the weeks of the semester.

4.2. Lectures can allow the lecturer to offer a sustained argument and narrative
When designed and delivered expertly, one of the most important features of the lecture is
its capacity to build a sustained and complex argument. The temporal nature of the lecture
potentially facilitates the development of an idea which can progress in complexity over
the hour. Engaging lecturers do not merely present factual information; they develop a
narrative around the subject matter. The lecture format provides a unique opportunity
for the lecturer to engage students in a step-by-step approach, taking them through the
various perspectives on a topic and highlighting the questions and problems that
emerge. Lectures that require students to follow a line of argument or reasoning also
have the capacity to promote deep engagement by asking students to persist with layers
of detail and analysis over time. However, such lectures also require concentration and
effort from the students.
While the assertion that the attention span of students declines after 10–20 minutes is
frequently cited in arguments against the lecture (Clark 2014; Khan 2012; McKeachie
1999), others have argued that there is little evidence to support these claims and that
they fail to account for individual differences in attention (Wilson and Korn 2007;
Dawson 2015). Bligh’s 1971 study suggests that although lecturers do face psychological
limitations in relation to the attention span and memory capabilities of students, concen-
tration can be stimulated with enthusiasm from the lecturer, by motivating students
through social interaction and activity, and by ensuring that the material being commu-
nicated is relevant and meaningful to the students. Thus, it might be argued that the
capacity of students to concentrate for the duration of an hour long lecture is influenced
less by the attention span of students than by the ability of individual lecturers to engage
their students in different activities over a sustained period.

4.3. Effective lecturers can motivate, stimulate and challenge students

Well-designed and well-presented lectures can play a central role in motivating students to
learn. Lectures have the capacity to enthuse and inspire students through their liveness
and the physical presence of the lecturer in real time and space. Drawing upon student
statements in a survey conducted at the University of Sydney that compared face-to-
face and online lectures, Gyspers et al. note that ‘comments most often indicated students
perceive that they learnt better, engaged more and even enjoyed themselves more when
attending lectures in person’ (2011, 25). They further found that students ‘revealed an
emotional attachment to this mode of teaching’ and ‘were passionate about retaining lec-
tures’ (25). One of the key reasons that students like attending lectures, they suggest, is the
potential to be motivated to learn as a result of the group dynamic in the lecture setting
and the presence of the lecturer (26). Lecturers have a strong capacity to generate enthu-
siasm for the topic through their own passion and interest. However, the lecturer’s skill
and commitment have a significant impact on their capacity to motivate students and
648 S. FRENCH AND G. KENNEDY

poorly delivered lectures are clearly likely to deter students. The need for staff training and
development of lecturing techniques is therefore a key issue for universities.

4.4. Lectures potentially promote skills in listening and note-taking to enhance

learning
A number of recent articles suggest that lectures play an important role in developing
skills in listening and note-taking which are thought to enhance the learning process
(Charlton 2006; Palaima 2014; Parsons 2015; Worthen 2015). Palaima (2014) argues
that ‘the art of listening is essential for learning,’ and suggests that listening to lectures
personalises the course, making it a shared learning experience. Parsons (2015) uses the
phrase ‘critical listening,’ in contrast to the notion of passive absorption, to describe the
type of listening that potentially occurs in lectures. The notion of critical listening
involves thinking, questioning and evaluating and is therefore suggestive of some of
the ways in which lectures might facilitate learning not only through interactive engage-
ment but through the act of listening. These claims are generally speculative rather than
evidence-based; however, lectures do provide one of the few instances in university cur-
ricula in which students are encouraged to listen for a sustained period of time. Thus,
lectures might offer a rare opportunity for students to develop the ability to think
through and synthesise ideas.
The capacity for lectures to develop listening skills is often discussed in conjunction
with the practice of student note-taking, which many suggest has an important peda-
gogical function (Charlton 2006; Crook 2015; Hattie 2015; Mueller and Oppenheimer
2014; Worthen 2015). Bruce Charlton argues that lecture notes enable students to more
readily remember the content of the lecture than handouts or slides. He suggests that
‘as well as increasing immediate attentiveness, lecture notes also make the lecture into
an active mode of learning because note-taking requires “deep processing” forms of
memorizing, by imposing a requirement to understand, abbreviate and re-structure
in-coming information’ (2006, 1263). The purpose of taking notes in lectures is not
so much to create a record (since the speed of lectures is generally too fast to allow
for verbatim transcription), but to allow students to synthesise the information as
they listen.
The benefits of note-taking also potentially extend beyond synthesising content in a
given course. Learning to take good notes is an important skill in itself, and a transferrable
skill that is likely to be useful, if not essential, for students in the workplace. A range of
different career paths require the ability to report on meetings, conferences and briefings
in both oral and written forms, necessitating the skills to listen discriminatingly and take
accurate notes. However, effective note-taking is a skill that may be difficult for all students
to master. Positive educational outcomes may be reliant upon students having the ability
(or being taught) to summarise and synthesise information as they take notes rather than
merely transcribing the content of the lecture. Moreover, the ways in which students utilise
their notes after the lecture might also be important. John Hattie argues that ‘it is not the
taking [of notes] but the review that matters’ (2015, 84). Drawing upon a meta-analysis
conducted by Henk and Stahl (1985), Hattie notes that ‘students taking notes improved
their learning modestly (d = .34), but reviewing those same notes increased learning dra-
matically (d = 1.56)’ (84).
 TEACHING IN HIGHER EDUCATION 649

4.5. Lectures provide the opportunity for academics to present up-to-date

research and model behaviour
For Biggs and Tang, ‘the best defence of the lecture’ lies ‘in exposing students to the most
recent developments in the field, and to the ongoing workings of a scholarly mind’ (2011,
138). Through their research, the lecturer potentially has access to the most current infor-
mation and can guide students through the developments and debates in the field. One of
the advantages of the lecture format is that it integrates the lecturer’s role as a teacher and
as a researcher/scholar (Light and Cox 2001, 98). The lecturer can function as a model for
the students, illustrating to them the way an expert approaches the topic. As an expert on
the subject matter, the lecturer has the capacity to summarise material from different
sources, demonstrate their own reasoning, help students to interpret and analyse the
content and assist them in the construction of their own knowledge. An important
feature of the face-to-face lecture is the capacity for lecturers to monitor students and
determine their level of understanding. This may be more difficult to achieve in large lec-
tures with hundreds of students than in smaller group lectures. Nevertheless, through eye
contact and observation in the room, it is generally possible to detect whether students are
following the logic of the lecture. Thus, the lecturer can potentially adapt the lecture in real
time to ensure that it is being taught at an appropriate level and is being understood by the
group as a whole.

4.6. Lectures are a cost-effective and efficient method for teaching at scale
While the efficiency of lectures is not related to the pedagogical considerations outlined
above, the need to be more efficient and cost-effective are realities facing contemporary
higher education that need to be taken into account in any discussion of approaches to
curriculum and pedagogy. Universities are experiencing increasing pressures due to a
range of factors that include rapid increases in student numbers and rising costs combined
with reduced funding levels. Higher education institutions face the difficult challenge of
needing to simultaneously reduce costs, cater to large student numbers and ensure that
quality teaching is retained or improved. While online courses such as MOOCs provide
one potentially viable cost-effective method for teaching at scale, lectures also remain
one of the most pragmatic and cost-effective methods for teaching to large student
numbers.
However, the capacity to facilitate active and interactive approaches undoubtedly
becomes more difficult on a large scale, leading to concerns that large numbers of students
in lecture theatres may impact upon the quality of teaching and learning. In developing
more innovative approaches to lectures then, the issue of scale is a key consideration.
Many scholars suggest that there are a range of effective strategies that can be employed
within large-group lectures (Hattie 2015; Hornsby 2015; Light and Cox 2001; Penson
2012). For example, David Hornsby recommends properly structuring moments of inter-
action, integrating problems into the lecture and deviating from the standard teaching
approach through the use of YouTube videos and podcasts (2015). One of the advantages
of the lecture over other formats is its unique capability to combine live face-to-face
contact with large student numbers. As Light and Cox observe, while face-to-face teaching
can be done well in tutorials, and large student numbers can be potentially be catered for
650 S. FRENCH AND G. KENNEDY

efficiently online, only the lecture combines both (2001: 98). They suggest that by reposi-
tioning the lecture ‘within an intersubjective (or dialogical) model,’ it is possible for lec-
tures to ‘take advantage of the tremendous potential of the live plus large group
experience’ (2001, 99).

4.7. Lectures are social events that produce and reproduce a sense of community
and a shared communal understanding
Many scholars argue that the value of the live lecture lies predominantly in its status as a
social event with the capacity to produce a sense of community that promotes learning
(Bates 2014; Charlton 2006; Cowling and Brack 2015b; Wolff 2013). Attending lectures
provides students with an important opportunity to make connections and build relation-
ships with peers. It also transforms the act of learning into a collective experience that can
facilitate a shared communal understanding among students. Although the social nature
of the lecture might be viewed as a peripheral benefit, many argue that these social
elements have tangible pedagogical outcomes. For example, Bruce Charlton argues that
‘the real-time, human-presence of a lecturer and the social context of a formal lecture
makes it easier for most students to remain alert, focus attention and remember what is
said than when students are required to work alone’ (2006, 1262). Attending lectures
also increases the opportunities for students to benefit from informal learning and
engage with the broader campus experience.
As discussed above, lectures are increasingly becoming large-scale events and while this
mass-scale aspect of lectures is usually viewed in critical terms, Light and Cox (2001)
suggest that the ‘largeness’ of lectures (along with their liveness) potentially enhances
their capacity for engagement. They suggest that for students ‘that feeling of sharing in
large numbers can provide a wonderful feeling of intellectual security and exhilaration,
of being part of a broader dialogue, a higher intellectual conversation that extends substan-
tially beyond me into an extensive and inclusive network’ (2001, 100). This notion of a
broader dialogue suggests that lectures facilitate a form of discursive interaction that
enhances the sense of being part of an intellectual community of scholars.

5. The future of the lecture

Just as many criticisms of the lecture might be applied only to ‘bad’ lectures, it is important
to emphasise that many of the benefits of the lecture identified above will only be effec-
tively realised in lectures that are well designed and delivered. It is not possible to quantify
the percentage of ‘good’ or ‘bad’ lectures and anecdotal evidence is highly contradictory. It
is also not possible to ascertain to what extent lecturers currently employ innovative and
creative strategies to develop active learning or whether the majority of lectures conform
to the traditional idea of the didactic monologue. Tom Palaima suggests that while ‘the 50-
and-75 minute mandatory lecture has long been the basic tool for education’ in the United
States, in recent years, it has become ‘an increasingly interactive tool’ (2014). Similarly, in
an Australian context, Phillip Dawson suggests that if you ‘walk into a modern lecture,’
‘you’ll be unlikely to find a 60 minute monologue.’ For Dawson, this is ‘more a caricature
than a common practice’ (2015). On the other hand, many argue that the practice of deli-
vering lengthy uninterrupted instructional speeches to a group of passive students remains
 TEACHING IN HIGHER EDUCATION 651

the dominant mode of lecturing (Clark 2014; DiPiro 2009; Tickle 2014). If this is the case,
it is imperative that lectures are improved to include more engaging, discursive and inter-
active techniques that actively engage students in tasks such as problem solving and critical
thinking.
Improving lectures is a challenging task that for many academics may require funda-
mentally rethinking the way they teach and the way that students learn. It is also a signifi-
cant challenge for institutions as it necessitates a commitment to investing in the
development of teaching practices and providing staff professional development to
ensure high-quality teaching. Superficially, it might seem that it is easier to remove lectures
than to improve them, yet the potential benefits of the lecture identified above suggest that
the lecture remains a valuable pedagogical tool that with improvements could offer even
greater value to students. The capacity to improve lectures might depend upon a stronger
recognition of their capacity to integrate active and interactive techniques.
While improving lectures might assist in altering student and staff perceptions and
developing their pedagogical benefits, there remains a potential problem with the heavy
reliance on the lecture format at the expense of other valuable teaching methods.
Bligh’s 1971 argument that the place given to the lecture is often too prominent continues
to be an issue in contemporary higher education. The use of lectures varies across univer-
sities and disciplines, but in Australian universities it is most common for undergraduate
subjects to include between one and three one-hour lectures per week. Typically, the more
lectures that are scheduled in a given subject, the less time there is available for tutorials or
other classes. It may be problematic when teaching hours are predominantly dedicated to
lectures, allowing little time for collaborative, active and interactive teaching and learning
approaches. In many courses, the number of lectures might need to be reduced to accom-
modate a greater use of other teaching methods, including more interactive sessions as
well as more web-based learning activities. Ultimately, the lecture is an effective teaching
and learning method that is most effectively used in combination with a diversity of other
complementary pedagogical approaches.
In this paper, we have proposed that lectures offer some important pedagogical, prac-
tical and social benefits that support their continued presence in the university curricula.
However, if lectures are to be retained, it is vital that both staff and students have a stron-
ger understanding of their purpose and value. Thus, in addition to improving the delivery
of lectures and better integrating them with other teaching methods, universities face the
challenge to more effectively articulate the role of lectures in the curriculum. A stronger
statement about the benefits of lectures for both staff and students is needed to ensure
they are viewed as having a pedagogical value.

Acknowledgements
Thank you to Professor Richard James, Emeritus Professor Peter McPhee and Dr Abi Brooker at the
Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education for their helpful comments and suggestions
on drafts of this paper.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
652 S. FRENCH AND G. KENNEDY

References
Bajak, A. 2014. “Lectures Aren’t Just Boring, They’re Ineffective, Too, Study Finds.” Science, May
12. Accessed November 25, 2015. http://news.sciencemag.org/education/2014/05/lectures-
arent-just-boring-theyre-ineffective-too-study-finds.
Bates, T. 2014. “Why Lectures Are Dead (or Soon Will Be).” Online learning and distance education
resources. Accessed October 23, 2015. http://www.tonybates.ca/tag/lectures-teaching-and-
learning/.
Ben-Naim, D. 2012. “University Lectures Are a Legacy of our Pre-digital Past.” The Sydney Morning
Herald, July 11. Accessed December 22, 2015. http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/university-lectures-
are-a-legacy-of-our-predigital-past-20120710-21t8w.html.
Bhatia, A. 2014. “Active Learning Leads to Higher Grades and Fewer Failing Students in Science,
Math and Engineering.” Wired, May 12. Accessed November 25, 2015. http://www.wired.com/
2014/05/empzeal-active-learning/.
Biggs, J. B., and C. Tang. 2011. Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 4th ed. London: Open
University Press.
Bligh, D. A. 1971. What’s the Use of Lectures? Middlesex: Penguin Education.
Bongey, S. B., G. Cizaldo, and L. Kalnbach. 2006. “Explorations in Course-Casting: Podcasts in
Higher Education.” Campus-Wide Information Systems 23 (5): 350–367.
Charlton, B. G. 2006. “Lectures are Such an Effective Teaching Method Because They Exploit
Evolved Human Psychology to Improve Learning.” Medical Hypotheses 67 (6): 1261–1265.
Charlton, B., S. Marsh, and N. Gurski. 2015. “Are Lectures the Best Way to Teach Students?” The
Guardian, Higher Education Network. March 31. Accessed October 23, 2015. http://www.
theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2015/mar/31/are-lectures-the-best-way-to-teach-
students.
Clark, D. 2014. “Ten Reasons Why We Should Ditch University Lectures.” The Guardian, Learning
and Teaching Blog, May 15. Accessed October 23, 2015. http://www.theguardian.com/higher-
education-network/blog/2014/may/15/ten-reasons-we-should-ditch-university-lectures.
Coleman, J. N., D. J. Kinniment, F. P. Burns, T. J. Butler, and A. M. Koelmans. 1998. “Effectiveness
of Computer-Aided Learning as a Direct Replacement for Lecturing in Degree-Level
Electronics.” IEEE Transactions on Education 41 (3): 177–184.
Costin, R. 1972. “Lecturing Versus Other Methods of Teaching: A Review of Research.” British
Journal of Educational Technology 9: 36–47.
Cowling, M., and C. Brack. 2015a. “How “digital natives” are killing the “sage on the stage.” The
Conversation, May 7. Accessed October 23. http://theconversation.com/how-digital-natives-
are-killing-the-sage-on-the-stage-39923.
Cowling, M., and C. Brack. 2015b. “Let’s not Abandon the Humble Lecture Theatre Quite Yet.” The
Conversation, July 15. Accessed October 23, 2015. http://theconversation.com/lets-not-abandon-
the-humble-lecture-quite-yet-44501.
Crook, C. 2015. “Should All University Lectures Be Automatically Recorded?” The Conversation,
April 8. Accessed November 18, 2015. http://theconversation.com/should-all-university-
lectures-be-automatically-recorded-39158.
DaRosa, D. A., P. Kolm, H. C. Follmer, L. B. Pemberton, W. H. Pearce, and S. Leapman. 1991.
“Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Lecture Versus Independent Study.” Evaluation and
Program Planning 14 (3): 141–146.
Dawson, P. 2015. “Will the University of Adelaide’s Lecture Phase-out be a Flop?” The
Conversation, July 3. Accessed November 18, 2015. http://theconversation.com/will-the-
university-of-adelaides-lecture-phase-out-be-a-flop-44074.
DiPiro, J. 2009. “Why do we Still Lecture?” American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 73 (8),
Article 137: 1.
Dodd, T. 2015. “University of Adelaide is Phasing Out Lectures.” Financial Review, June 28.
Accessed December 22, 2015. http://www.afr.com/technology/apps/education/university-of-
adelaide-is-phasing-out-lectures-20150625-ghxgoz.
 TEACHING IN HIGHER EDUCATION 653

Exley, K., and R. Dennick. 2004. Giving a Lecture: From Presenting to Teaching. London:
RoutledgeFalmer.
Furedi, F. 2013. In Praise of the University Lecture and its Place in Academic Scholarship.” The
Guardian, Higher Education Network Blog. Accessed October 23. http://www.theguardian.
com/higher-education-network/blog/2013/dec/10/in-praise-of-academic-lecture.
Gibbs, G., S. Habeshaw, and T. Habeshaw. 1992. 53 Problems with Large Classes: Making the Best of
a Bad Job. Bristol: Technical and Educational Services Ltd.
Gosper, M., M. McNeill, R. Phillips, G. Preston, K. Woo, and D. Green. 2010. Web-Based Lecture
Technologies and Learning and Teaching: a Study of Change in Four Australian Universities.”
ALT-J 18 (3): 251–263.
Gunderman. 2013. ‘Is the Lecture Dead?’ The Atlantic, January 29. Accessed November 26, 2015.
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/01/is-the-lecture-dead/272578/.
Gyspers, V., J. Johnston, D. Hancock, and G. Denyer. 2011. “Why do Students Still Bother Coming
to Lectures, When Everything is Available Online?” International Journal of Innovation in
Science and Mathematics Education 19 (2): 20–36.
Hattie, J. 2015. “The Applicability of Visible Learning to Higher Education.” Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning in Psychology 1 (1): 79–91.
Henk, W. A., and N. A. Stahl. 1985. “A Meta-analysis of the Effect of Notetaking on Learning
from the Lecture.” Accessed December 19, 2016. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
244958471_A_meta-analysis_of_the_effect_of_notetaking_on_learning_from_lecture.
HILT. 2014. “Lecture attendance research: Methods and preliminary findings.” Harvard Initiative
for Learning & Teaching, November. Accessed June 29, 2016. http://hilt.harvard.edu/files/hilt/
files/attendancestudy.pdf.
Holbrook, J., and C. Dupont. 2009. “Profcasts and Class Attendance – Does Year in Program
Matter?” Bioscience Education 13 (1): 1–4.
Hornsby, D. 2015. “What It Takes to Teach a Large Class - and Do It Well.” The Conversation, July
16. Accessed December 19, 2016. https://theconversation.com/what-it-takes-to-teach-a-large-
class-and-do-it-well-44167.
Hove, M. C., and K. J. Corcoran. 2008. “If you Post it, Will They Come? Lecture Availability in
Introductory Psychology.” Teaching of Psychology 35 (2): 91–95.
Huggins, C. M., and J. P. Stamatel. 2015. “An Exploratory Study Comparing the Effectiveness of
Lecturing Versus Team-Based Learning.” Teaching Sociology 43 (3): 227–235.
Hughes-Warrington, M. 2015a. “That Sinking Feeling: Counting the Cost of Live Lectures.”
Accessed November 18, 2015. http://missunitwocents.tumblr.com/post/123364615920/that-
sinking-feeling-counting-the-cost-of-live.
Hughes-Warrington, M. 2015b. “Not Going, Not Listening Either: Lecture recording did not Kill
the Live Lecture.” Accessed November 18, 2015. http://missunitwocents.tumblr.com/post/
132791490035/not-going-not-listening-either-lecture-recording.
Kangari, H., A. Alipor, and S. M. Tabatabaee. 2007. “A Comparison of the Learning Outcomes of
Traditional Lecturing with That of Computer-Based Learning in two Optometry Courses.”
Journal of Medical Education 11 (3–4): 63–66.
Khan, S. 2012. “Why Long Lectures are Ineffective” Time. October 2. Accessed November 26, 2015.
http://ideas.time.com/2012/10/02/why-lectures-are-ineffective/.
von Konsky, B. R., J. Ivins, and S. J. Gribble. 2009. “Lecture Attendance and web Based Lecture
Technologies: A Comparison of Student Perceptions and Usage Patterns.” Australasian
Journal of Educational Technology 54 (4): 581–595.
Lambert, C. 2012. “Twilight of the Lecture.” Harvard Magazine. March-April 23–27. Accessed
November 26, 2015. http://harvardmagazine.com/2012/03/twilight-of-the-lecture.
Larkin, H. 2010. “"But They Won’t Come to Lectures … " The Impact of Audio Recorded Lectures
on Student Experience and Attendance.” Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 26 (2):
238–249.
Light, G., and R. Cox. 2001. “Lecturing: Large Group Teaching.” In Learning & Teaching in Higher
Education: The Reflexive Professional, 97–114. London: SAGE.
654 S. FRENCH AND G. KENNEDY

Marchand, J., M. L. Pearson, and S. P. Albon. 2014. “Student and Faculty Member Perspectives on
Lecture Capture in Pharmacy Education.” American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 78 (4),
Article 74: 1–7.
McKeachie, W. J. 1999. McKeachie’s Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research, and Theory for College and
University Teachers. 10th ed. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
Mitchell, P., and P. Forer. 2010. “Blended Learning: The Perceptions of First-Year Geography
Students.” Journal of Geography in Higher Education 34 (1): 77–89.
Moodie, G. 2014. “Gutenberg’s Effects on Universities.” History of Education 43 (4): 450–467.
Mueller, P. A., and D. M. Oppenheimer. 2014. “The Pen is Mightier Than the Keyboard:
Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking.” Psychological Science 25 (6): 1159–1168.
Palaima, Tom. 2014. “Open Ears, Hearts and Minds: The Art of Listening Is Essential for Learning.”
Times Higher Education September 11–18. Accessed December 19, 2016. https://www.
timeshighereducation.com/features/the-lost-art-of-listening/2015604.article.
Pale, P., J. Petrović, and B. Jeren. 2014. “Assessing the Learning Potential and Students’ Perception
of Rich Lecture Captures.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 30 (2): 187–195.
Palmer, C. 2012. “Lecture Theatres to Go the Way of the Dodo.” The Conversation, October
1. Accessed November 18, 2015. http://theconversation.com/lecture-theatres-to-go-the-way-of-
the-dodo-9893.
Parsons, K. M. 2015. “Message to My Freshman Students.” The Huffington Post, May 15. Accessed
November 18, 2015. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/keith-m-parsons/message-to-my-freshman-
st_b_7275016.html?ir=Australia.
Penson, P. E. 2012. “Lecturing: A Lost art.” Currents in Pharmacy Teaching & Learning 4 (1): 72–76.
Prince, M. 2004. “Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research.” Journal of Engineering
Education 93 (3): 223–231.
Symonds, M. R. E. 2014. “Lecturing and Other Face-to-Face Teaching – Too Much or Too Little?
An Assessment Based on Student Feedback and Fail Rates.” Higher Education Research and
Developments (HERDSA) 33 (6): 1221–1231.
Tickle, L. 2014. “Have Big University Lectures Gone Out of Fashion?” The Guardian, April 8.
Accessed December 19, 2016. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/apr/08/university-
lectures-blended-learning.
Traphagan, T., J. V. Kucsera, and K. Kishi. 2010. “Impact of Class Lecture Webcasting on
Attendance and Learning.” Educational Technology Research and Development 58 (1): 19–37.
Veletsianos, G. 2014. “Why Replacing Teachers with Automated Education Lacks Imagination.”
The Conversation, August 30. Accessed November 18, 2015. http://theconversation.com/why-
replacing-teachers-with-automated-education-lacks-imagination-30842.
Wilson, K., and J. H. Korn. 2007. “Attention During Lectures: Beyond Ten Minutes.” Teaching of
Psychology 34 (2): 85–89.
Wolff, J. 2013. “It’s Too Early to Write off the Lecture.” The Guardian, June 23. Accessed
November, 18, 2015. http://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/jun/24/university-lecture-
still-best-learning Accessed November 18, 2015.
Worthen, M. 2015. “Lecture Me. Really.” The New York Times: Sunday Review, October 17.
Accessed November 26, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/18/opinion/sunday/lecture-
me-really.html.