Classroom teaching
The classroom teaching is meet a form of teaching, in which teachers and learners at the same time at a certain place. The opposite of classroom teaching is the distance learning or distance learning (distance learning). For example, face-to-face teaching has the advantage of social interaction over distance learning, whereas the low spatial and temporal flexibility in face-to-face teaching is a disadvantage.
Advantages of classroom teaching
The close proximity of the teachers and students promotes social interaction and communication between the participants. Thus, the direct communication of learning content and the resulting direct interaction represent an essential core component of face-to-face teaching. Learners develop a faster sense of belonging and improve their social skills . If learners work together in small groups on a topic (group tasks), trust-building within the group is promoted by the temporal and local proximity of the learners.
In addition, classical face-to-face teaching represents an established form of teaching based on years of tradition. That is the reason for the relatively high degree of acceptance of classroom teaching in the majority of all educational institutions. Although classroom teaching is often criticized for its cost inefficiency, the acquisition and construction costs, which are minimal or not incurred at all in contrast to alternative teaching concepts, can also be counted among its advantages. Apart from professional competence, there are no additional requirements for teachers and learners in classroom teaching, such as B. the acquisition of media skills in virtual or semi-virtual forms of teaching. It is questionable whether this property really represents an advantage of face-to-face teaching, but it is still perceived as an advantage by many teachers and learners and contributes to the high level of acceptance of the traditional form of teaching.
disadvantage
One point of criticism of face-to-face teaching is the lack of flexibility , which is primarily reflected in time and space restrictions. This can result in additional costs for both teachers and learners.
Furthermore, in the context of classic face-to-face training, learners can almost exclusively rely on face-to-face appointments to ask questions or clarify ambiguities. If problems and ambiguities arise between the on-site appointments, learners are largely dependent on themselves, as experts are difficult to reach or are not available at all during the time. A lack of support and guidance in the learning process, as well as the subjective perception of such a deficiency, could severely impair the motivation of the learners. The time in the face-to-face meetings is usually not enough to discuss all aspects of the given topics. As a result, learners are not sufficiently encouraged to deal constructively with the material and to think about alternative solutions to certain problems or receive insufficient feedback. The degree of interactivity in classic face-to-face teaching is reduced accordingly. Knowledge is not actively constructed in the joint cooperation of teachers and learners, but largely acquired passively by the learners. This creates the problem of "sluggish knowledge".
In addition, students have little or no opportunity to gain work experience during their face-to-face training. The disadvantages of classic face-to-face teaching are particularly evident in the case of working students, students with children or students whose place of residence and training facility are far apart. For some learners, the fact that they are bound to fixed attendance appointments can considerably limit the possibilities of combining training and work or training and everyday life. With face-to-face students it is often observed that face-to-face training becomes the focus of life and that even leisure activities ( hobbies ) and extracurricular activities are mostly related to the learning content.
Characteristics of classical classroom teaching
The face-to-face teaching is based on direct / immediate communication and interaction (face-to-face) and is carried out using natural forms of communication such as language and gestures. Both the teacher and the learner must be physically present. The most important differences between distance learning and face-to-face teaching are shown in the following comparison.
| Distance learning | Classroom teaching | |
|---|---|---|
| Characteristics General | Far away from each other and from the school location | Proximity to each other and often to the school location |
| work experience | often many years of professional experience | mostly nonexistent or limited |
| Function of training | studying on the side, means for other purposes | studying is the main occupation, often also the focus of life |
| financing | Self-financing, regardless of success | often outside financing, partly depending on the degree of success |
| Autonomy, self-learning skills | pronounced because necessary for the type of study | less pronounced, rather disadvantageous for the type of study |
A classic form of face-to-face teaching is the lecture , which can be supplemented by discursive forms of teaching such as exercises , seminars or internships , as well as examination-relevant specialist literature (including secondary literature ). The teaching content is presented in a primary form of exposure. The examination material mainly includes the learning content that is taught and covered by experts in the respective field on site. The teaching in the classroom teaching takes place as a classroom. Face- to- face lessons , group lessons , individual work or partner work are possible forms of face-to-face teaching. The following table shows a comparison of these four typical forms.
| Characteristics | advantages | disadvantage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Frontal teaching | widespread, with tradition; The teacher is in the center of the action; Teacher-controlled learning | Organization easy; High acceptance | little activity by learners; social relationships are sometimes neglected |
| Group lessons | joint processing of tasks; working small groups | Learners learn to take responsibility; Development of social competence and a sense of togetherness; Creativity is encouraged | Coordination often difficult for learners; Risk of "free rider"; time consuming |
| Individual work | Tasks are processed individually | self-chosen pace and suitable learning style; Promotion of one's own possibilities / activity; Adaptation of the tasks to individual learning abilities possible | Isolation; Neglect of social relationships |
| Partner work | Tasks are worked on in pairs | Cooperation and dialogue; Social competence; Learn to represent your own point of view | Coordination difficulties and the risk of “free riders” less than with group lessons, but present |
Alternative concepts based on classroom teaching
The classroom teaching can be enriched with various e-learning techniques. This creates a new learning concept that has become known under the name of integrated learning (blended learning) and is increasingly being used in teaching. The concept has already proven itself in many areas, e.g. B. in personnel development measures, proven to be beneficial and enforced. By combining two different forms of teaching, the attempt is made to retain the advantages of both methods and to supplement them in a meaningful way. The disadvantages of both forms of teaching are largely eliminated. So z. For example, the time and space restrictions of traditional classroom teaching are reduced to a minimum, increasing flexibility and increasing efficiency through the use of potential cost savings. Other important points of criticism of classic face-to-face teaching such as B. the problem of "sluggish knowledge" can be successfully combated with individually tailored combinations of methods from face-to-face events and media use. In this way, the learning process can be individualized and a corresponding increase in effectiveness can be achieved.
A basic distinction is made between three teaching concepts, which are made up of elements from face-to-face teaching and virtual teaching : virtual, integrated and enriched. The virtual concept mainly includes virtual learning phases , with face-to-face events accompanying lessons at the beginning and at the end of a course / semester . The integrated concept is based on blended learning and consists of presence and distance phases which, depending on the learning objective , take on specific tasks in the training. Classical face-to-face events are the basis for the enriched concept, but are supplemented to a certain extent by virtual tasks and multimedia elements , again depending on the training objective.
Classroom teaching in practice
As a study carried out by Steffens and Reiss in 2008 shows, traditional classroom teaching is still the leading form of teaching in universities . The online survey comprised around 200 lecturers in the fields of economics and computer science . Two thirds of them worked in Germany and one third abroad. When designing the lessons, 85% of university lecturers used 70% or more pure classroom teaching in practice and only a maximum of 30% used alternative e-learning concepts. Furthermore, it was analyzed how far and in what way different forms of teaching are actually connected with one another. In this context, a clear combination pattern became clear: classic face-to-face teaching forms are primarily supported by downloading various teaching materials. Enriching face-to-face teaching with the option of using internet forums and chats to exchange knowledge is also of great importance in practice. The use of e-learning instruments for administrative purposes in classroom teaching, such as online registration, is very common in universities. However, this combination alone is not sufficient to characterize the teaching concept as blended learning.
According to Steffens and Reiss, the establishment of a new form of teaching (or the enrichment of an already established form of teaching such as classroom teaching with alternative concepts) takes place on three different levels - on the micro level (teaching unit), the meso level ( courses of study ) or the macro level (university). The study was only limited to the micro and meso level, since on the third level a fundamental distinction is made between face-to-face universities and virtual universities. In the context of individual courses (micro level), a large proportion of the lecturers surveyed (49%) make use of various combination options. However, there is also a large proportion of teachers who fundamentally reject blended learning concepts (30%). Even pure face-to-face events can be combined with blended learning courses within a single course. This happens at the meso level. Only 21% of the educational institutions in which the study participants taught offer such courses. In addition, the reasons for the decision would be determined whether the classroom teaching should be combined with blended learning concepts at a university. It turned out that cultural factors such as For example, the self-image of the educational institution was much more important than financial factors such as subsidies or cost-saving potential.
With regard to the possible interactions and interactions that result from enriching face-to-face teaching with blended learning concepts, the study shows that the majority of participants perceive at least one positive association effect. The richness of the media is mentioned most frequently (60% of the lecturers), followed by an improvement in the reputation of the educational institution (41% of the respondents). The study participants perceive potential didactic improvements such as increased learning motivation and personalization (individualization) of teaching as further positive network effects. A possible shortening of the study duration through the use of blended learning is mentioned by only 12% of the respondents.
On the basis of these results, Steffens and Reiss draw the conclusion that the majority of the teachers surveyed nevertheless did not see any significant potential for improvement through the enrichment of classic face-to-face teaching with blended learning elements. The results of the study are, however, due to a lack of or insufficient experience with such combinations in teaching and the absence of a systematic combination pattern and not to a general negative perception of the possibilities offered.
literature
- Norbert Thom, Robert J. Zaugg: Modern personnel development. Recognize, develop and promote employee potential. Gabler, 2006, ISBN 978-3-8349-1060-8 .
- Johannes Busse: Tübingen study texts for computer science and society. Instructor Handbook. Edited by Herbert Klaeren. 1999 ( online ).
- M. Dittler, G. Bachmann: Decision-making processes and accompanying measures in the selection and introduction of learning platforms. In K. Bett, Wedekind (ed.): Learning platforms in practice. Waxmann, Münster 2003, pp. 175-192.
- Dirk Steffens, Michael Reiss: Blended learning in university teaching. From the coexistence of face-to-face teaching and e-learning to an integrated blended learning concept. In: The higher education system . 57th vol., No. 4, 2009, pp. 115-123.