Are there too many lectures?
Page 76
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE MAIN PLANK in the programme of all the local centres of transport institutes and societies is a set of lectures usually given at monthly intervals. The aims of these monthly meetings are impeccable. Different speakers give talks—or, more often, rather formal lectures or papers—on widely differing topics so that members can be kept abreast of new developments and ideas.
This is especially important in road transport where rapid technological change, the effects of new ideas in economics and incessant political activity keeps the scene constantly moving. The meeting also provides an opportunity for members to exchange views informally and to ask the speaker questions.
But looking through the programmes of many local centres of institutes and societies, I cannot help asking myself whether this particular method is not rather over-played. Lectures are the monthly staple diet to such an extent that I sometimes wonder if they become indigestible. Some "lectures", moreover, are really very formal papers and they are frequently read word for word, the actual script being issued to the principal officers.
I have always been a little baffled by this particular practice— surely it would be easier to duplicate more copies of the script and distribute them to the assembled gathering rather than spend time reading it aloud? The informal type of talk is always more valuable, an occasion when ideas can be thrown out so that the question time session can be more lively. The speaker who uses a word-for-word script is quite seriously best advised to leave the script at home! In the formal lecture, too, the question period is often patchy with random observations being made with little opportunity for pursuing an aspect in depth because of the lack of time.
There is room for variation in a local centre's normal programme. Debates, especially if they are formalized, are a little dated in concept. Imparting of information is usually of secondary importance to skill in presenting a particular line of argument. Quiz sessions, with slides included, are interesting evenings on the lighter side but hardly become a replacement for a serious lecture.
Having had experience during the past two years of open discussions (I prefer this term to the American, "teach-in"), I would plump for this method as the best line of variation from the set formal lecture. To gain the best from this open discussion method, careful preparation is needed plus the services of an experienced chairman.
Open discussions usually follow the form of appointing leaders (either as guests or chosen from the membership) to make opening statements for the various sections of the discussion. If the leaders can be really controversial and backed by a skilful chairman to pilot the discussion, the evening can be really invigorating with nearly everyone in the audience airing their views and presenting different shades of opinion.
I have taken part in a number of enlivening open discussions on dealing with the various sections of the Transport Bill. Especially stimulating were the discussions which looked at the proposed Passenger Transport Authorities and the quality/quantity licensing proposals in road haulage. On both occasions, I certainly learned much more than if I had heard a "straight" lecture on these problems.
The open discussion method is excellent, perhaps twice a year, and well worth the effort to bring variation in the programme of formal activities.