An intriguing question that I often wonder about myself.
Cambourne's research found that learning requires engagement,
which means it depends on how engaging the lecture is to the
learner. I clicked on the link hoping for some clarity. I was
disappointed. Here is a sampling from Paul E. Peterson’s
article, Eighth-Grade Students Learn More Through Direct
Instruction, reviewing the research: As an instructor myself,
I’ve had trouble making up my mind. I can cover a lot of ground
in classes where lectures consume about two-thirds of the time.
But those classes get less enthusiastic student evaluations than
some smaller classes where students are encouraged to solve
problems through discussion. I, too, like those problem-solving
classes. They require less preparation and are easier to teach.
Before we more on, here are my reactions to this portion of the
article. The first is nit-picky, but when Pererson says, “I can
cover a lot of ground” it is a red flag for me. I, too, cover
more material through lecture, but