Books prevail over public dialogue, despite their suckiness

Reading.
Some love it.
Some hate it.
Some, unfortunately, don't know how.
You do, though, so let me tell you a story and maybe you can help me resolve some questions I have about the subject...


     I recently read a chapter in a book for my Communicating Science class that described and analyzed public dialogue (the inclusion of the general public in meetings for the purpose of discussing science).  The chapter made me realize how effective public dialogues are at communicating science to the public, compared to scientific lectures or other forms of telling the public about science.  Public dialogue does such a good job to help the audience learn about science because it includes the audience in the discussion.  Thus, the audience has to pay attention and really think about the issue if they are going to contribute to the dialogue.

     This kind of event personally reminds me of one of the courses I took last year.  That course's professor informed the class that he would ask them difficult questions and continue to pursue the student until they worked through to the answer themselves.  "I don't know" was not a good enough answer for him.  Many in the class were afraid of being called on for this reason.  The class was forced to pay attention in an attempt to avoid embarrassment and the appearance of incompetence when called on (which was sure to happen anyway...).  The main point to take away from this anecdote is that including the audience during a learning session makes the audience absorb information, more so than if you simply let their minds wander.

     I learned a lot in that course.  But not all courses are like that one.  In fact, those kinds of courses - the ones where the professor makes the students teach themselves in front of their friends - those are a rarity.  Most courses I have taken consist of taking notes as the instructor lectures, but then resorting to textual references to really nail down concepts and answer clarifying questions. These courses seem less effective to me than courses that have a dialogue aspect to them.  I think it has something to do with how reading science textbooks seems... difficult... monotonous... often confusing... and sucky in general.

     Which brings me to my main point:

If public dialogue (incorporating the audience in scientific talks) causes the audience to learn more than the "deficit" method of teaching (telling the audience and expecting them to absorb the information), then why is it a rarity... in schools and in general?  Why are there more books being released every day than can possibly be read by any individual (see Wikipedia page)?  Think back to your grade school days when your locker had books for every class in it, and each one had to have a book cover so that next year's group could use those oh-so-important books.  Why have books remained a major source of information for kids when schools are paying for teachers in addition to providing the books?... When there are so many different and possibly more productive ways to teach children nowadays?

     Perhaps the answer lies in the teaching methods employed by those teachers.  Or maybe kids actually do learn a lot from books as opposed to teachers' lectures.  If this is the case, then what is it about books that works?  After all, don't books tell the reader what is what, for the most part?  In my experience, textbooks have a knack for this exact kind of "deficit" teaching.  Yet some readers... my roommate, for instance... find books to be so much more valuable than notes that could be taken during lectures (he doesn't waste his time taking notes).  Others find reading so rewarding that they read "a Book a Day, Every Day!"

     I am not one of these reading fanatics.  As I said before, I learn so much more when I participate during a class than I would reading a sucky textbook.  Public dialogue is, to me, the winner among teaching methods.  But why do some people, like my roommate, disagree?

     To get a better idea of the subject, I would like to encourage everyone who reads this post to participate in the poll at the right side of the blog.  Let me know how you learn best.  If there isn't an option that describes your favored method of learning, then comment on this post to tell me about it.  That way, I might better understand how to make my posts interesting and effective for my audience.

And just to clarify, I don't find all books sucky.  Typically just the ones that feel like work to read.  There are many, many great books out there.  Even some textbooks, like my laser physics textbook, can stimulate the audience by asking them think about issues before revealing the answer.