Lawrence Stone once remarked that you *could* argue that education had not caught up with the printing press: the lecture (a mode at which he excelled) was no longer necessary if you could just read the books. Like so much Stone, it was an argument. #twitterstorians /1

Though Stone's lectures were highlights versions of his books, he showed us how he got there, helping us learn to think. When I lecture, I draw on more books and articles than I'd assign.
I've been thinking about this as I plan how to teach remotely in the fall. /2

The printing press allowed students to read books at home. The internet gives access to podcasts, youtube videos, etc. But the important part of teaching history is not the facts; that's easy. It's what they mean, how they fit with other facts. /3

The printing press didn't render the lecture obsolete, it changed its purpose. It was no longer the recitation of the classic texts, but became interpretive. When I "lecture", it's a demonstration of how I think through X historical issue./ 4

It's not the whole class- it's usually a 5-10 minute discourse/dialogue. I can figure out many ways to do lots of the work I do in the classroom asynchronously & remotely. But not this. It's in the moment, with students, and changes each time I teach. /5

I know you can construct a good online course; we're not doing that, though; we're adapting a f2f course temporarily for remote instruction.
It's the teaching that's *not* rendered irrelevant by the printing press or the internet that is what I care about. /end