I am very interested in the answers so far.  David assumes in his Plan B that we can make creative use of what is already out there rather than making your own.  He also makes that sound like the most appealing option. I like that option, both as a teacher and as a sometime student.  
 
He assumes that as the practitioner becomes more experienced they can reduce the time. One of the reasons that I can see this happening is that as we search we find resources from a much wider pool than we need right now and we (or at least I) squirrel them away for 'later'.  We also note sources which are helpful and start crossing off our lists those that aren't, or those that don't suit.  When 'later' comes we can be to some extent prepared.  The cupboard is no longer bare.  Having nothing in the cupboard at all is perhaps the scariset thing for a new lecturer. 
 
Would we all agree that the second presentation of the lecture would be much quicker to prepare because we would reuse and update rather than starting completely afresh?  Not the same lecture, but if it worked the first time then the repeat would be closely related to the first.  If so, could we consider whether, at least sometimes, we could reuse what someone else has made?  
 
I ask this because I think that this - finding something suitable - could be the biggest shortcut.  For new teaching staff this could offer them some base from which to build.  The answers so far (apart from David's answer B) seem to assume that this lecture has never been delivered before.  Is starting from scratch really what we expect of new teachers?  If so there is an interesting gap in expectations between the learning technologists who are building repositories of reusable learning objects and gathering learning designs.  
 
This is not an argument for less time overall.  Twelve hours on average sounds fair enough for the Plan B approach for a first set of lectures.  This is a query about how we may expect new teaching staff to provide something different from what has gone before. Would the novice lecturer be better served by an expectation that they would draw influence from other practitioners and share what already exists?  
 
So to Anne Lee's list I would add 'Available, existing, reusable resources'. 
 
Chris
 
 
Chris Pegler
Intitute of Educational Technology
[log in to unmask]
http://iet.open.ac.uk/pp/c.a.pegler
01908 654015
 
OU Teaching Fellow (2004)
National Teaching Fellow (2004)

________________________________

From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development Association on behalf of Dr Anne Lee
Sent: Mon 31/07/2006 16:48
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: SEDA Digest - preparation time for lectures


It is indeed a good question.  Perhaps we need a formula which computes:

*	
	Complexity of topic
*	
	Newness of topic to the lecturer
*	
	Experience of lecturer
*	
	Purpose of the lecture

Presumably the less experienced lecturer will need more time, the more familiar the topic the less time the lecturer will need and the more complex the topic the longer the lecturer will need.
 
It also depends on the purpose of the lecture: if it is to motivate and inspire and get a central theme across (see Pickford and Clothier's recent paper to the July HE Academy Conference) then it will take a lot longer - but students will be queuing to get in!
 
Anne Lee

________________________________

From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Baume
Sent: 31 July 2006 16:39
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: SEDA Digest - preparation time for lectures


Fascinating question!
 
Two possible approaches:
 
Model A
1    Identify, from the course handbook, the main (say) 3 topics to be covered in the lecture - 1 hour
2    Read up on these topics and make notes - say 2 hours per topic - 6 hours
3    Write 15 minutes - say 2000 words - on each topic - say 3 topics @ 3 hours = 9 hours
4    Summarise the notes into PowerPoints - 1 hour per topic - 3 hours
5    Rehearse the lecture and revise - 2 hours
This gives 21 hours, but there is good scope for eliding stages 2 and 3, so your 16 hours could be about right.
 
Model B
1    Identify and clarify learning outcomes for the lecture and surrounding student work - 1 hour
2    Identify and select extracts from sources and resources available on-line; including journals and e-books; that cover the content appropriately. Put these on the VLE or arrange for them to be printed - 5 hours
3    Devise classroom activities that will help students use the sources and practise the outcomes - 2 hours
4    Make powerpoints that summarise each topic and present the learning activities - 2 hours
5    Rehearse and revise - 2 hours
12 hours. 
 
And, if I may add a personal note, I know (i) which lecture I'd rather go to and (ii) which will be the more effective!
 
Good luck with your quest. It will be interesting to see what colleagues suggest.
 
Very best
 
David
 
PS Planning a good lecture will quickly take less and less time, with practice and feedback. So these figures are for the first few lectures only.
 
+++++++++++++++++
David Baume PhD FSEDA
64 Princess House
144 Princess Street
MANCHESTER
M1 7EP

Phone 0161 273 6454
Fax 0161 278 6027
Mobile 07747 045 931

E-mail [log in to unmask]
 
>>>> Cooper, Alison <[log in to unmask]> 07/26/06 8:48 pm >>>
> Dear colleagues
> 
> Lancaster University and Colleges Union (LUCU) are trying to ascertain
> roughly how long it would take a PhD student/Teaching assistant to
> prepare a brand new 1 hour lecture. We need this information to try and
> establish an appropriate pay rate for such a lecture.
> 
> We are fully aware that one response is likely to be, 'well it all
> depends' or  'how long is a piece of string,' but this will simply leave
> us with no basis for action and, and we wish to avoid an arbitrary
> number being imposed. We are thinking in terms of a 1 hour lecture to a
> large (100?) audience, in arts, humanities social science.
> 
> Not to try and lead, but rather to try and encourage you to have a stab,
> my guestimate (after 16 years of teaching in HE) is that such an
> endeavour would take me around 15 hours - roughly 2 days.
> 
> We could really do with (preferably) an informed response backed by
> research or, if not, a guestimate from your experience as
> educationalists. Does anyone know of any studies on this? We would also
> be interested in how other institutions have gone about calculating a
> pay rate.
> 
> Thanks in anticipation - I really need responses before the end of July.
> 
> Dr. Steve Fleetwood
> 
> Please send replies to Steve Fleetwood, not to this list -
> mailto:[log in to unmask]