“On the 23rd of November 2006 cosmonaut Mikhail Tyurin broke the record for the longest drive in the history of golf when he teed off from the international space station.”
Even for those least interested in science, engineering and space this opening line leads to intrigue and it would appear the same is true for the 30 or so mixed-discipline engineers who had just sat down for their first lecture of SESA-2006 (Computational Methods). What our lecturer had successfully achieved in this first sentence was to not only capture our interest and quieten down what is notoriously a less than calm gaggle of engineers, but to get each of us, independently, to pose engineering problems in our heads “How?”, “Which direction?”, “Could it come back?”, which lead to us to think back to previous modules “Conservation of momentum…”, “Orbital mechanics…” What followed was a course with a remit to “enhance the students understanding of the use of computational methods for problem solving within engineering”, but which in reality allowed us to bring together a collective knowledge from multiple disciplines to solve self set and inspired real world engineering problems.
So, if I were to teach an engineering lecture, what would I do? Aside from refraining from death by PowerPoint and fixing that speaker with the annoying buzz, I would ensure that whatever material I delivered in my lecture would cause as many questions as answers. There is a certain truth to the old adage that a lecture is "The process by which the notes of the lecturer become the notes of the student without passing through the mind of either", however when an intriguing problem is posed, and the right tools provided it is natural drive of most of us who found ourselves striving for that MEng, BEng or MSc to try and solve that problem to the best of our ability.
There is, of course, a need to learn those derivations and to ingrain that weird attribute that makes every undergrad smile when they finally see that after half a page of crossing out, but if the reward is no more than formula you had already learnt then the incentive is a little lost.
In addition to posing intriguing problems with real world solutions which allow students to learn by doing, I would seek to encourage learning by teaching. After all who knows a subject better than those who are teaching it? I have found that group work, especially that which involves multiple disciplines, is possibly the most effective way of allowing students to clarify ideas and share their knowledge. I’ve had the privilege of being involved in design projects not only with engineers from different disciplines, but with physicists, geographers and even politicians – from both my university and others. This experience allowed me impart my knowledge, encouraged me to further my knowledge when questioned about my subject area, as well as allowing me to see the constraints and ideals placed on the designs from other areas.
If I were to find myself behind that lectern in front of 200 knowledge hungry/clock watching/texting under the desk engineers, its possible I would find myself wanting to begin a drawn out derivation - after all, I’m the lecturer and I know what needs to be taught. Or perhaps I would find myself tending towards that entertaining lecturer who tries to bring the students onside with humour or an exciting demonstration. I’m sure it’s the latter whom many students would prefer to have after seeing those course feedback sheets with “more demonstrations, less maths” and I’m not discouraging the use of in-class demonstrations or light-hearted lecturing, it all has its place. Nothing has aided my understanding of angular moment more than watching a lecturer spin on a home-made rotating platform while wielding a rotating bicycle wheel!
I can be fairly sure that what I wouldn’t find myself doing is giving a detailed account of me and my life’s work, students really do respect industry/research experience but the aim of the lecture is not impress or to gain respect with regard to myself, if I was a good lecturer the students would already know - reputation moves quickly. Likewise, if I were the leading researcher in my field, they would find out - students have an uncanny ability to search out a lecturers experience, and respect is best earned quietly. Likewise I can be sure I wouldn’t be that lecturer who starts the lecture with a game-show style game or introducing Professor Ted the course bear. Engaging the audience is key, participation is important and feedback and communication is what makes a course really effective, but treating a room of undergraduates like a class in high-school will not lead to an effective lecture. Students are proud of their subject, and are often quick to point out how much harder/relevant/important it is than their peers’ and, although seemingly innovative approaches may be a welcome break at first, my teaching methods and real experience would be questioned sooner or later.
In all, placing yourself in the shoes of a lecturer possibly isn’t as easy as many students first think. There are those who are quick to comment on what is wrong with the lecture but provide little more than sarcastic comments on the feedback forms. I think that the real key to lecturing is allow the students to learn: learn by doing, learn by teaching and to encourage a pride in their subject and an inspiration to solve problems, not set by me, but by themselves. It’s not the funny lecturer nor the hardened mathematician that can teach you the most, they only have one or two hours to teach, its those who can continue to teach outside the lecture theatre.