 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
This section needs the reference cited. (I was cut short on time.) This is the online PDF from a reliable source--Brown University: |url=http://www.alliance.brown.edu/pubs/changing_systems/teach_to_student/ChalkTalk.pdf |publisher=Coalition of Essential Schools Aeroadam (talk) 01:47, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
At the time of this writing (May 2016), this article is embarrassingly bad! Worst writing I've seen since the early days of Wikipedia, honestly. Almost reads like something from Conservapedia.
I hope someone who sincerely cares about the subject happens by, takes pity, and smartens it up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rousse (talk • contribs) 23:22, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion of the "chalk and talk" teaching style seems only distantly related to the main topic of the article.
"Chalk and talk" is defined by the Collins English Dictionary as a sometimes derogatory term for "a formal method of teaching, in which the focal points are the blackboard and the teacher's voice, as contrasted with more informal child-centred activities."[1]
Given this definition, and the general thrust of the "Pedagogy" section, this does not necessarily have anything to do with the practice (speeches accompanied by rapid drawing) discussed in the rest of the article; it probably only become associated with this article because of the incidental similarity of the terms "chalk talk" and "chalk and talk." Is there a case for either deleting the "chalk and talk" material or moving it to some other article? 2605:A000:D40F:2300:99D9:EEC2:52C7:C062 (talk) 01:28, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Chalk talk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:23, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely worthless. Scrap it all and start over. Bueller 007 (talk) 18:41, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Someone before me here does NOT like this article as written! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alpine Joy (talk • contribs) 05:16, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This article is now significantly revised to focus on a specific type of illustrated presentation which had its heyday in the 19th and early 20th centuries. There is more to say about the great popularity of this type of performance, and its role in education, so the revision will continue. Along with chalk talks' relation to animation history, they also link to 19th century pedagogical techniques like "object lessons." Still looking for good sources to present this information clearly and succinctly.RovingLibrarian (talk) 20:58, 25 November 2019 (UTC)RovingLibrarian[reply]
