I said last week that I anticipated a lot of sitting and listening when we met in the University of East London for a day conference about outdoor education / learning: Lessons from Near and Far. It was, however, much worse than I feared. We began at 1000 and broke for lunch at 1340. In those 220 minutes, there were 7 speakers but only 10 minutes were given over to questions from those attending.
Whoever thought that was a good idea? Even the last session, which was supposed to be devoted to audience questions to the speakers, was dominated by a prepared talk by a moderator. It is shocking how often people, who usually bang on endlessly about the need for appropriate pedagogy, seem not to have the first idea how to do it.
There was a break in those 220 minutes (coffee etc), so we weren't sitting listening the whole time, but that's beside the point. The people attending mattered as much as the speakers, but we were treated like a theatre audience, just there to listen, inwardly absorb and clap; we were even told we need not take notes because the slides would be provided. But we were not an audience, and it was not a theatre, even though we dutifully sat in a lecture 'theatre'. As it turned out, we were mostly non-participatory participants in our own attempted learning. Such a shame as the group attending was both diverse and experienced. As such, we had a lot to contribute to what the speakers were saying, but no one on the organising team appreciated that. So thoughtless.
It was much the same in the first part of the afternoon, with speakers dominating. The moderator of the small group I was in tried to insist he controll the questions to speakers thereby preventing discussion amongst the rest of the group. We were having none of it.
Then, finally, there was another plenary, and I did manage to squeeze a question in. I had to leave before the end (although this was 15 minutes after the scheduled end-time); as I did, the morning moderator was still going strong. All that said, there were bits I found of value – inevitable, of course with such a topic, and the range of speakers. There was also much to confuse and puzzle, which really needed a better forum for discussion. I'll try to write about those when I've recovered from the day.
My final point is that this sort of stand and deliver pedagogy is not only disrespectful to those attending, but also to those presenting because, they have limited chance for interaction with everyone there who have their own perspectives and ideas to share. We all know that this exchange is important – or at least I think 'we' do.
Responses
Firstly, I look forward to hearing about what you did learn. On the point of questionable pedagogy, I entirely agree with this. I have been subject to the same approach in the past. In one set of presentations that I attended we were given the opportunity to feedback to the speakers via bits of paper (supposedly anonymously). When I commented on the lack of opportunity for comment and the disrespect that this showed for the audience the speaker actually came to tell me about how much she had still left unsaid! I was astounded. PS I have found the comment button again!