Lecturing does not improve students’ understanding in mathematics

“the use of the lecture format has been the subject of heated debate among scholars of university education for many years. Although some mathematics education researchers (e.g. Alsina, 2001; Mason, 2002) have expressed scepticism about the value of the traditional lecture, the harshest criticism of the lecture as an effective mode of teaching has been voiced by general education scholars (e.g. Biggs & Tang, 2011; Bligh, 2000).  Bligh, drawing on various empirical studies, identifies four distinct kinds of objectives a lecture might have: The acquisition of information; the promotion of thought; changes in attitudes; and behavioural skills (Bligh, 2000, p. 4). He concludes that lectures are as effective as other methods for transmitting information, but less effective regarding the other objectives. On the other hand, some scholars, both of mathematics education (e.g. Pritchard, 2010; Rodd, 2003) and of general university education (e.g. Friesen, 2011; Jones, 2007) have argued the continued relevance of the lecture format. It has also been claimed, for instance by Neumann (2001), that much of the criticism of the lecture format fails to consider differences between academic disciplines. As remarked by Pritchard (2010), this tends to make this criticism less relevant to university mathematics education. However, the above debate is rarely informed by empirical research based on observations of actual lecturing.” (Viirman, 2021, p.  467)

Viirman, O. (2021). University mathematics lecturing as modelling mathematical discourse. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 7(3), 466-489