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...
3
1
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
I'd rather watch them + motion graphics on a video at home. If I go to a conference, I want to talk with people. If I go to school, I want to talk with people.
1
You have preferences. We all do. They are only one factor among many.
1
1
Does something about them on stage add to your experience or is a video of the same talk just as good?
1
Depends. Live and recorded are two sub-media that are apples and oranges for me. Farther apart than say twitter and Facebook
How do you experience the major differences?
1
Show replies


