Due to the different teaching styles of each teacher, our experiences vary. It is undeniable that some teachers have unique styles, deep insights, and detailed arguments, while others merely recite from textbooks, making it a habit.

I have encountered both of these teaching styles. Generally speaking, courses with unique styles, deep insights, and rich arguments are often taught by middle-aged individuals, while those who recite from textbooks are mostly older teachers. The former may only be associate professors, while the latter are often full professors. This also reflects the different educational experiences of people from different generations.

For the latter group, they were mostly university students in the 1980s, a time shortly after the reform and opening up, when the college entrance examination had just been reinstated for a few years. Although the exam papers at that time might have contained only a few questions, the emphasis on exam performance was absolute. As long as one truly mastered the course content and could apply it flexibly, they could stand out among thousands of candidates.

At that time, university students were revered by many. Once they entered university, they hardly had to worry about future job prospects because the state almost guaranteed job placements, unlike now when one has to take public service exams and undergo various selections.

Therefore, university teachers at that time were likely to be those who recited from textbooks. This does not mean that such an approach cannot cultivate excellent students; rather, it suggests that some students are adept at taking the initiative, studying hard, and ultimately standing out. Thus, university teachers' lectures are more like a way to inspire students.

However, the influence of teachers is subtle. After long-term exposure, students come to understand that all their teachers teach in a rote manner, which also affects their own approach when they eventually enter university classrooms, leading them to replicate the same rote style.

When they enter university classrooms, a group of young lecturers also becomes their colleagues. These young colleagues are likely graduates from the 21st century, caught in the wave of educational reform, becoming the main practitioners of this reform. They are not satisfied with rote teaching and believe that such an approach reflects a lack of ability. Therefore, they prefer to express their individuality, capturing students' attention through entertaining methods, allowing students to internalize knowledge subtly.

I remember several teachers telling us before their lectures that they would not teach according to the textbook, so there was no need to look at it; we just needed to follow their line of thought. Their teaching materials were more like multimedia presentations, filled with rich images, extensive arguments, captivating stories, solid data, and thought-provoking truths behind events. Coupled with the teachers' expressive delivery, it instantly sparked students' thinking and imagination, creating a dance of thought.

However, some teachers would start the class by reading materials to us, often mumbling their words. Many students could only frown and listen, then look at their slides, which were just a pile of text, and then listen again as the teacher read through the PPT without any images, vivid stories, or even the need for critical thinking, resulting in a completely rote teaching method.

Out of politeness, no one interrupted the teacher's lecture, but many students lowered their heads to play on their phones, or lay on their desks to sleep, and some even sneaked out. These behaviors reflect their basic attitude towards the teacher's lecture.

Today's young people, including some from the 80s and 90s, tend to have more active thinking, enjoy the clash of ideas, or extended thinking, and are generally not interested in rote teaching. If they have to face such a situation, they will choose to replace this tedious process with other methods.

So, can these rote-teaching teachers change?

In fact, this is a very difficult thing. As I mentioned earlier, the reason they have developed such a style is that they experienced it this way in the past. They believe this method is very normal and does not need to change; they think the most important thing is the students' comprehension, not their teaching method.

They find it hard to accept new teaching methods and see no need for them because, at their age, not making mistakes is an achievement. Sticking to the past correct methods, which are verifiable and reliable, allows them to retire smoothly in a few years. In contrast, stepping out of their comfort zone to explore the unknown may lead to mistakes, which could negatively impact their future careers. If a serious teaching accident occurs that affects their retirement, it would be a loss.

They no longer need to compete with younger teachers; they have already obtained the titles they deserve and the benefits they have fought for. Innovation is no longer their first choice.

On the other hand, for young teachers, they still need to obtain higher titles, strive for better benefits, and be recognized as advanced or skilled. For them, being forced to teach in a rote manner would undoubtedly undermine their competitiveness. Therefore, they will think of ways to keep up with the times, make classes exciting, influence students' applause, and align with the spirit of educational reform, making it easier for them to be recognized as advanced and become beneficiaries of future interests.

These practical reasons are key objective factors influencing whether they stick to conventions or continuously innovate. Therefore, I believe it is unnecessary to criticize their respective teaching styles. This is a normal human response.

Of course, in addition to the above objective reasons, there is also an important subjective reason: whether the teacher shows a liking for the course they teach. Some people purely enjoy the courses they teach, so they hope to showcase their teaching abilities more brilliantly. This way, they gain a sense of fulfillment in teaching, and the process of sharing knowledge is not only about teaching students but also about their own further sublimation. For teachers who are filled with passion, this process brings them happiness and a sense of achievement.

Therefore, when a person does what they love, they will give their all and perform even more brilliantly. Although students' applause brings joy, they seem to no longer care about it; they immerse themselves in the experience and feel happiness. It seems like they are performing alone, yet also leading a group in performance, with everyone immersed and forgetting the long duration of the teaching.

In contrast, if the teacher is teaching in a rote manner, people will pay more attention to the time and feel that it drags on, as many people's thoughts are in a defensive and aversive state, making the sense of time feel prolonged.

Sometimes, even if the teacher spends an extended time lecturing, we still feel that time passes too quickly, as if it is much faster than usual. This may indicate that when we feel happy, we experience a rapid illusion of time, always thinking it goes by too fast. Conversely, when we constantly feel pain, we experience a slow illusion of time, always thinking it goes by too slowly.

This also reflects a characteristic of human nature: people tend to seek pleasure and avoid harm. When in a position of benefit, time feels fast; when in a position of harm, time feels slow. People like happiness and dislike pain, which seems to be an unchanging truth.