i feel like most ppl in theory agree that the lecture is a dead pedagogical tool and yet every conference i go to still plays the ‘important person on stage’ vs. ‘listeners in seats’ game
i’m curious who’s experimenting with new interior design for new types of conversation
Conversation
Replying to
I’ve been hearing the tired slurs against “sage on a stage” model for 20+ years. Only leftist education ideologues with more abstract ideas than communications experience take them seriously. Person on stage is just a method like any other. Good for some things, not for others.
3
5
47
I like the FooCamp / BarCamp unconference model the most personally. Anything with less interaction shouldn't be focused on speakers, but booth oriented (CES, etc.) or a series of lightning talks.
1
4
My theory is that it's usually about sponsors buying stage time as an advertisement and conference producers needing that money to make the model work.
1
Aaron’s original comment referenced the “dead pedagogical tool” view... that’s a big tent including everything from K-12 and units to church sermons. Business/industry conferences are a narrow slice. Pay-to-play quasi-sponsor talks etc are an even narrower one...
Frankly for any deep topic where I know little , I’d rather shut up, stay in my seat and listen to someone on stage who knows what they’re talking about. Which is not to say I don’t also like other formats for other things.
1
2
Show replies
I'm pretty close to Aaron's view though. I think the big talk as knowledge transfer is pretty dead. Teachers, etc. survive because of interaction, which is why the "flipped classroom model" is being tried.
1
I’ll take that long bet 🙂
Person on stage is lindy
3
I think its major relevance should be in true oration, but that's a pretty dying art anymore - especially in the stale American political scene.


