The lecture-tutorial pedagogical model used in universities is called scholasticism and dates back to the middle ages. Books were very expensive, so in the lectures, the lecturer would just read out the relevant text for students to copy down, word for word. (In the more prestigious English universities, lecturers are still called 'Readers', and students say that they're 'reading' History or Computer Science rather than 'studying' it.) Once the students had their copies of the text, they would go away and read them, and then go to a tutorial where they would discuss what they'd read. This is where the real learning - and the creation of new knowledge - would happen.
The author mentions 'flipped learning': this is the modern equivalent of scholasticism. Read the text in your own time, and then have an in-person discussion or practical or workshop, depending on the nature of the subject matter.
> In the more prestigious English universities, lecturers are still called 'Readers'
At least in the University of Cambridge, a Reader is a specific academic role that is distinct from a lectureship and typically has very few teaching duties. It's often a stepping stone on the path to professorship. See e.g.
> The intention was to allow senior academics more time for research, lightening their load of routine teaching.
University of York also seems to focus mostly on scholarship over teaching:
> To become a Reader, you must demonstrate substantial intellectual distinction with a sustained contribution in research and scholarship, bestowing considerable external recognition on yourself and the University.
Well, lector literally means "reader" in Latin, and lectio means "a(n act of) reading". It's exactly what it says on the tin.
The thing is, reading the textbook on your own, then discussing the material with the teacher (in a group) is still quite an efficient way to obtain knowledge even though it's not most efficient on an individual level. This knowledge, of course, still needs to be turned into practical skills.
Long time ago when I was a student, some teachers tried what now has fancy name "flipped learning". The usual result was that only few students done the reading and what not before the class. They usually put in only so much effort so that they can get point for participation, but not enough for discussion or workshop to not effectively amount to first encounter with the topic.
That was also my experience with that experiment, as a professor, about a decade ago. Educational ideas always work in the ideal (imagined) environment, but not so well in the (actual) classroom.
> (In the more prestigious English universities, lecturers are still called 'Readers', and students say that they're 'reading' History or Computer Science rather than 'studying' it.)
Both of these are getting pretty outdated. Most of the top English unis have renamed senior lecturers/readers 'associate professors' because the North American naming conventions are becoming standard. I also haven't heard the "I'm reading X" way of putting it in at least a decade. It would be more common to say "I do X".
I have always wanted a tutorial ONLY environment for my future Physics study.
I believe I can grind through the textbooks by myself but I need some tutor, preferably a PHD to answer my batched questions and guide me through exercises I cannot figure out.
Do PHDs of good universities do this kind of things? What hourly rate should I expect?
To grossly oversimplify, this is the teaching model of Oxford and Cambridge. The primary method of instruction is the tutorial/supervision, usualy one tutor to two undergrads.
Yeah I'm trying to figure out a good price for both sides. I'll probably try locals first. We do have a couple of good universities -- definitely not MIT/Berkeley league but I don't need it.
There are one-to-one tutoring services that target university students, and I doubt they'd have any problem with a paying customer who wasn't a student. Some of them offer tutors who have PhDs.
From what I can find on Google, prices range from "affordable for a student" to "affordable for a student with rich parents if they only need a few hours".
This is how typical courses in eg physics are supposed to work. You read the material before a lecture, the lecture gets everyone on the same page and hopefully answers some or all of your questions, then you solidify by a) doing all the exercises and b) attending the tutorial and/or office hours to resolve questions you still have.
The author mentions 'flipped learning': this is the modern equivalent of scholasticism. Read the text in your own time, and then have an in-person discussion or practical or workshop, depending on the nature of the subject matter.