I had one lecturer in my 4 years at university that only used a chalkboard, and most pupils despised him because the pace as which he wrote far surpassed the rate at we we could sensibly copy notes. We wrote it out, but it gave little time to actually consider the concept we were learning. The rest of my lecturers all used PowerPoint presentations for the most part, in conjunction with print-outs so we could follow along on a projector and write notes/annotations on the provided sheets.
In my eyes, a hand-out + computer notes (which can later be emailed to the pupils) is by far the superior teaching method for most students. This is of course just personal preference, but I much prefer simply sitting and listening to the teacher while occasionally asking questions - taking in as much as I can, then copying up the notes later using material provided by the lecturer so as to commit it to memory. Frantically writing out the notes during the lecture, then going home and trying to eek out some sort of understanding from them just never sat well with me.
The optimal teaching approach may depend on the level of the material, too. Slides & notes mailed to students may be a great option for "routine" math courses, things taken by a ton of different majors, where the paths are ground so smooth by the millions of feet traveling it that the entire class can be called in advance by even a fairly green instructor, almost down to the questions they're going to get.
As you get into higher math, though, the chalkboard becomes more important, because it's a lot more like working it out in front of the student. The class is far more likely to ask questions that are going to consume a couple of boards of scribbles to answer, and the professor may not be able to anticipate it all in advance. Trying to do this on a slide is very inconvenient and I'm still yet to see a computer interface in common use that can pull it off at all.
Many of those classes I took were actually hybrid; there was a core set of projected slides that could be mailed out (though they weren't always) that set the agenda and gave the basics and results, but there was a lot of chalkboard use as well, since as long as the room is even modestly large, there's no particular need to use just one or the other.
Graduate-level graph theory in particular used the chalkboard pretty heavily for what were essentially impromptu animations, between the numbers being added to a diagram as whatever algorithm we were learning about progressed, and the gestures being used by the professor.
That certainly makes much more sense. My experience was primarily undergraduate, plus a years masters. I will admit, during the MSc chalk-board work was valuable during the seminars and labs, where it was much more design based.
I found the exact opposite when learning math. I need to write it down, and when presented with Power Point I have to transform it into something I can understand, and that means I don't have enough attention left to really listen to the lecturer.
On the other hand, the lecturers that used a blackboard at my uni all had prepared the lecture, what they wrote was meant to be written in a notebook. They wrote it at a pace that could easily be followed. This allowed me to go over proofs as I wrote them down, and I could then ask right away if there was anything unclear.
I also found several typos (usually a sign error or a missing term) this way, something which would probably have confused me a lot if I didn't catch it until I got home.
So, for me, well-prepared blackboard lectures is preferable, at least for math heavy stuff.
I also need to write it down, but not immediately upon hearing it per-se. I find that when I write, I often zone out and leave my muscle memory and a slight sub-consciousness to do the work - nothing actually goes in. If I just listen, it forces me to focus and it gives me time to build a framework of the concept in my head, that I can fill in later. I suppose it's similar to the methodology used in "How to Read a Book: The Ultimate Guide" by Mortimer Adler. He uses 4 steps-
The first 2-3 are covered in the lecture. The time at home can then be spent putting it to paper, applying it in practice (usually in MatLab or some other form of programming), then summarising. That's why I like the lecturers electronic hand-outs, as it can fill the gaps of knowledge that have formed between lecture and study. My background is in EE however, so assumedly this type of learning might not apply as well to pure Math/Physics!
Shouldn't you be paying full attention instead of taking redundant dictation during lecture?
If you weren't stuck with following a chalkboard, typos could be fixed once and for all time at the source, instead of reappearing at random in every lecture.
But that's the point, I was paying full attention. By writing things down, I had time to process and think about what I wrote. I had time to fully follow the derivations. And that's in addition to the reinforcement effect that the act of writing has (at least for me).
Merely sitting there passively listening would not be paying full attention.
Of course, this required the lecturers to write in a suitable tempo.
As a TA when I was up there it felt like it was taking forever and that I might be losing peoples attention which forced me to speed up (likely making more mistakes and making it less legible to boot).
In this day and age why not pay attention to what the prof is saying, take scarce notes and use a phone to take a snapshot of the blackboard and rewrite it later for better comprehension. One could also use audio or even video.
The act of taking notes is where at least half the value of notes are. Review latter is useful, but you can review the book. I cannot read my own writing, I still find I learn better when I take notes.
For the better, take notes afterwards while listening to a recording and looking at the blackboard snapshots. However, I understand that this cannot be a regular practice due to time constraints but maybe this could be used for the classes that spark most interest, the knowledge crystallizes better with a few passes
I'm not sure if that is actually better. I seem to recall (but can't be bothered to look up) a study that showed students who read the book twice do no better that those who read it once. Which is to say the first time you see material in some format is when you get the greatest gain. Taking notes the second time through probably isn't worth it, though taking notes from a different source of the same material might be.
I personally used this practice and it helped me tremendously. It freed me from following the blackboard word by word and let me take briefer notes, sometimes incomplete, only to return and redo all the notes comprehensively. It felt like take attending the course twice. However, I only did this for the classes that I was very interested in. For all the others it can easily turn into a waste of time.
You are speculating without justification. Re-reading having no/lesser benefit (a highly-suspect conclusion, given the massive sucess of spaced repetition), says nothing of the benefit of reading once + writing once.
Recording and retaking the notes from the audio/snapshot is actually reinforcing the knowledge twofold, one is recalling the info and then rewriting it. I don't know if this is for everyone (most likely not) but it did work well for me.
Many of us did just that, and we had one classmate who recorded the lecture using a high-def camera to replay later, but all it took was one difficult to read segment and the notes became illegible. The lecturer also got incredibly aggravated when people didn't write notes, which didn't help matters also.
A lot of people, myself included, commit things to memory through writing. A lot of good lectures go beyond the books, so content can easily be forgotten. I even took notes while reading the books, lest I forget what I read.
In my eyes, a hand-out + computer notes (which can later be emailed to the pupils) is by far the superior teaching method for most students. This is of course just personal preference, but I much prefer simply sitting and listening to the teacher while occasionally asking questions - taking in as much as I can, then copying up the notes later using material provided by the lecturer so as to commit it to memory. Frantically writing out the notes during the lecture, then going home and trying to eek out some sort of understanding from them just never sat well with me.