Styles of lecturing: a study and its implications

Abstract

This article reports a study of styles of lecturing conducted at Loughborough and Nottingham universities. A random sample of academic staff were sent a self‐report questionnaire consisting of structured, semi‐structured and open questions. Two‐Hundred‐and‐fifty‐eight respondents returned completed questionnaires. The structured items were factor and cluster analysed. This revealed the existence of five distinctive styles of lecturing: the oral lecturers; the visual information giver; the exemplary; the eclectic; and the amorphous talker. There were significant differences between subject areas in the characteristics of lecturing, and styles of lecturing were strongly associated with subject areas but not with status or with experience. The oral lecturers were most common in humanities and the visual lecturers in the sciences. Exemplary lecturers were more common in the humanities and biomedical sciences, as were ecletics. Amorphous talkers were more common in science and engineering. Most lecturers liked lecturing as a method of teaching. In particular, they liked the challenge of thinking and organizing lectures, the personal satisfaction of giving a good lecture and helping students to understand. The common dislikes of lecturing were uninterested students, lack of interaction and Marge groups’. The most common weaknesses reported were saying too much too quickly, assuming too much knowledge, forgetting to provide a summary, not stressing major points and difficulty in timing. The most common advice was: speak clearly; plan, prepare and structure and make the lecture understandable; and watch for reactions and don't try to cover everything. The results of the study, its use of self‐report methods and cluster analysis are discussed. The implications of the study for recent policies of staff development and appraisal are discussed. It is argued that self‐report, with suitable safeguards, provide a useful data‐base of a groups approach to a task. The evidence collected in the project also provides a useful basis for developing training programmes to assist lecturers to develop and extend their styles of lecturing. The study, its results and the discussion are based upon the doctoral thesis of Dr M. Bakhtar and some publications arising from it, subsequent analyses of her data and discussions with colleagues in workshops and seminars on styles of lecturing.