LECTURE and LECTURERS
While the ITEM is
Lecture, the performer –Lecturer, the position is LECTURESHIP; TOO OFTEN
MIS-SPELT and so, MIS-PRONOUNCED – LECTURERSHIP.
LECTURESHIP IS THE RIGHT WORD.
Well, these two terms –the title of the present write-up were
indeed mesmerizing to many and intoxicating to some and awe-inspiring to a few
in 1950s and was very much so, till late after 1970s, whereupon, a neo-trend
was set in motion more by political will than by any professional skill. The
years referred to above were actually Golden times in College education.
Yes, I am just not exaggerating; it was honestly so, for a
variety of reasons. An abrupt shift in
medium of instruction from vernacular to that in English was by itself a source
of awe. Suddenly, the fledglings in the entry level at the college had to
‘grasp’ ideas delivered through English terms. Just weeks before this phase all
instructions were through respective regional languages. Right from day One, teachers
used to deliver ideas through English.
Interestingly, the students were not disturbed by the language; rather
they faced the problem of ‘pace’ in lectures. Rapid-fire deliveries through
English were strange territories for entry level students in colleges. This
baffle was rather ephemeral in the sense that just after three months under
such a dispensation, students settled well with the English medium and got
themselves tuned to ‘follow’
instructions through English with the same felicity that they had had in their
school education.
In plain terms, there was no fear element among the then
learners as they were not deficient in basic grammar or parts of speech
prescribed for transaction In English. Lectures were orderly, properly
sequenced, information laid out in correct module to satisfy prescriptions in
syllabi for different subjects. Present day lectures suffer from penury of the parameters laid above.
FACTORS CONDITIONING THE LEARNERS
Teachers made it a point to stick to modalities OF USING
English ; They refrained from succumbing to the temptation of sympathy to
learners, for they were too sure that sympathy in imparting instructions
[fearing language difficulties for learners] was the surest mechanism of
‘spoiling’ the element of effort by learners.
In fact, in the final months in school, the school teachers used to
threaten us that “You are not attentive even if we try to teach you like what
we would do to parrots. You would later realize, when you join college that
there teachers would rush through their lectures and would show no mercy to
you. You fellows will realize our [school teachers’] worth only after joining
college”. There was enough justification to the modalities adopted by the two
segments- the school and the college. The volume of matter to be taught in a
session was far higher in college and the student ought to be familiar with all
terms prescribed for study. Any translation of terms into vernacular would
certainly have robbed us of the urgency and significance of familiarizing
ourselves with the right jargon.
Several Colleges then used to insist on liberal use of
English in classes as well as during general interactions. I NOW
REALIZE THAT THE RIGIDITY STUCK TO THEN has significantly enhanced our
functional skills for using appropriate terms –the most authentic way to
‘convey ideas as conceived by us’ leaving no room for lax interpretations.
In my understanding, collegiate learning then was more an
inculcation than any imparting of instructions. What do I mean by this is-
teachers used to make listening a comfortable exercise by very precise
articulation. All my teachers were just on the dot in precision and quite adept
in paraphrasing if needed.
Another conditioning factor that worked on us was their voice
by clarity and modulation, so as to sustain listeners’ attention. This was done
to perfection by not DIGRESSING FROM AN IDEA. Every now and then, they used to
quickly review [summarize] the idea so far presented. It cultivated in us the
habit of frequent review for personal understanding of the subject matter and
also to consider the prospect of any additional explanation for clarity. Such
intricate components of teaching presented to us while we were learners , later
helped us a lot in formulating the right nuances of presenting data/ details
and ‘feed the message’ to our wards with consummate ease. Needless to say -such
niceties have evaporated into thin air and I find a number of lecturers groping
for words and quickly reverting to vernacular more to save personal skin than
to make it genuinely clear to the wards. Horrible is the right word to
summarize the present day quality [In large segments of Tamil Nadu] of the
items of the day’s topic.
Prof. K. Raman
When I entered PUC class our Biology professor ‘s lecture was a little bit difficult to understand , may be because of Latin terms in the subject.Even today I use to remember my Chemistry professor for his usage of simple English.
ReplyDeleteNext comes my Logic professor for his simplicity in language.But we all found it difficult to understand our Physics professor’s lecture, May be because of the subject. He used to define Work, Mass, Energy, Inertia etc in a tough language in very high speed. Not somehow we managed to get through. Our English professor was holding only a BA degree but his lectures were wonderful.Of course switching over to English medium from Tamil was a bit difficult for two to three months. Those days English medium schools were very few, one or two to a city. So all who came to PUC class had this problem.
K.Venkataraman
Nice description of the shift in teaching styles from school to college. I have gone through preciely the same experience described here. The teachers were professionally competent to take through that enjoyable journey.
ReplyDelete