All lectures are not created equal

In an educational environment that pressures new faculty to become effective and dynamic teachers there is a tendency to overuse and perhaps misuse the new cadre of information transfer tools as well as the lecture. In undergraduate engineering education lectures are commonly used to promulgate two levels of proficiency: Those that deal with basic skills and those that deal with synthesis of knowledge. These two learning levels are similar in that they must maintain the integrity of the lecture structure, but different in their content, complexity, and commission. Student success in skill-developing courses is absolutely critical if the metamorphosis from engineering student to the engineering intern is to occur. It is impossible to overestimate the value of these courses. It is also impossible to assure student success in these same courses if they are only lecture-based. Student success in the design, capstone, and/or integration courses is absolutely critical if the metamorphosis from engineering intern to engineering professional is to occur. It is impossible to overestimate the value of these courses. It is also impossible to assure student success in these same courses unless they include a significant lecture-based component. This paper will focus on the lecture's role for delivering material from either of these two extreme learning levels or an intermediate plateau. It will consider how lectures are properly and improperly employed in the various courses within an engineering curriculum. It will also illustrate the companion role that problems and projects play in the student learning experience.