James, thanks for this reprint...as well as the last one you sent about
constructivism.
I found the line about instructors talking 70-80% of the time
disturbing. How do we expect students to develop necessary communication
skills for the jobsite when we silence them in the classroom. I'm
interested in hearing what other people on the listserv do to encourage
students to have more voice and power in the classroom. What do you find
as effective methods at this level?
One method I've been using this semester is small-group inquiry
workshops. They have been very successful in encouraging teacher
candidates to collaborate with each other, share opinions, and take
charge of their own professional growth.
Cindy Lassonde
-----Original Message-----
From: Teaching Breakfast List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Greenberg, James ([log in to unmask])
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 9:20 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Talkers and Listeners - Posted to TB List by Jim Greenberg
Tbers,
The posting below looks at how to increase seminar participation among
all
students. It is by Mano Singham, Case Western Reserve University, and is
number 22 in a series of selected excerpts from the National Teaching
and
Learning Forum newsletter reproduced here as part of our "Shared Mission
Partnership." NT&LF has a wealth of information on all aspects of
teaching
and learning. If you are not already a subscriber, you can check it out
at
[http://www.ntlf.com/] The on-line edition of the Forum--like the
printed
version - offers subscribers insight from colleagues eager to share new
ways
of helping students reach the highest levels of learning. National
Teaching
and Learning Forum Newsletter, Volume 13, Number 2, (c) Copyright
1996-2004.
Published by James Rhem & Associates, Inc. (ISSN 1057-2880) All rights
reserved worldwide. Reprinted with permission.
TALKERS AND LISTENERS
When running seminar or discussion classes for undergraduates, the major
issue instructors face is unbalanced participation, with some students
dominating the discussion while others remain silent. While there are
ways
to force more widespread participation (such as calling upon people,
basing
grades on participation, using tokens, allowing people to speak only a
limited number of times, etc.), all these techniques involve coercion to
a
greater or lesser degree. They run counter to the basic idea of the
seminar/discussion as a continuing conversation, similar to the ones
that
one might have with friends and neighbors. One cannot imagine using
coercion
there. <http://www.ntlf.com/html/ti/images/v13n2a.jpg>
No Coercion
Since my own teaching philosophy has evolved to the point where I
believe
that the best learning occurs under conditions that aren't coercive, I
tried
a promising experiment this semester that focused on improving
discussion
without coercion. The course was on the "Evolution of Scientific Ideas."
The
class was comprised of 17 sophomore students. At the beginning of the
very
first meeting, after brief introductions all around, I spoke for a few
minutes, saying that the class would function best if everyone
participated
in the discussions. Of course, all instructors say this, and it usually
has
little effect.
But then I said that in semi-formal groups such as this, each one of us
had,
over time, developed a preferred, or at least customary, role. We saw
ourselves as either "talkers" (people who volunteered to speak and did
so
frequently) or "listeners" (people who preferred to stay silent and
rarely,
if ever, joined in the discussion unasked). I asked each person to
self-identify, with me beginning and identifying myself as a talker.
(This
should be no surprise. McKeachie reports that the most common cause of
unbalanced discussion is the instructor who typically talks about 70-80%
of
the time!)
Which Are You?
Six students identified themselves as talkers, while eleven said they
were
listeners. I then said that both talking and listening were essential
skills
and that we needed to develop both aspects of our personalities. I then
asked all the talkers to sit together in one part of the room, the
listeners
to group in another part, and to discuss amongst themselves the
following
questions: What made me become a talker (listener)? How can I develop my
listening (talking) skills? How can I help listeners (talkers) talk
(listen)
more?
The two groups spent about 20 minutes discussing these questions. The
talkers group (which I naturally joined), although half the size of the
listeners, made much more noise, talking and laughing as they discussed,
with people jumping in with ideas and comments. The listeners group was
much
quieter, with only one person speaking at a time, but even there the
conversation never died down. The two groups then reported to each other
at
the end of the time period.
Listener Characteristics
The listeners said they listened and did not talk much because they felt
that their ideas must already be obvious to everyone; that there was
usually
no pause in the discussion for them to insert their ideas; they liked to
take in information; they took time to formulate their ideas and by the
time
that happened the discussion had moved on to something else; they did
not
feel themselves to be experts and did not want to waste other people's
time
with their unformed or poorly articulated views. To overcome these
feelings,
they felt that they should force themselves to talk more.
Talker Characteristics
On the other hand, the talkers said that they felt compelled to share
whatever ideas they had; that they thought their ideas were good; felt
compelled to correct ideas they believed were wrong; were uncomfortable
with
silence and felt obligated to break it; and sometimes felt they would
explode if they kept silent. They also said that this behavior had
developed
over years as they realized that they liked the attention talkers
received,
they were noticed in class by teachers and hence did better, and were
often
expected by teachers to respond to questions. To overcome this, they
felt
they should force themselves to listen.
An important realization by the listeners was that the talkers did not
need
to think their ideas had to be very original or carefully phrased before
they expressed them. Talkers said they often thought things through
while
they talked, rather than before. Listeners realized that their own ideas
were not inferior to those of the talkers. In their private journals to
me
for that first week, students said they were totally surprised by the
exercise, but that they enjoyed it because they had never before thought
carefully about why they adopted their particular roles.
The whole class felt that we should try and create the conditions under
which everyone got to participate. It was agreed that this
responsibility
should be shared and that the instructor should not have to play the
role of
arbitrator or be the focal point of the discussion. The class as a whole
would try to develop good seminaring skills as we went along, monitoring
the
discussions so that they were not dominated by a few people.
Silent Running
I was apprehensive as to how this early discussion would influence
subsequent classes. The next few classes were not promising, with low
levels
of participation and discussion. But what I then learned from their
journals
was that a few of the talkers (who are the kinds of students who keep
discussions going) had decided to take a vow of complete silence in
order
not to dominate the discussions and to allow space for the listeners!
They
said they felt discouraged that the listeners had not immediately picked
up
the slack. I replied that they had to be patient, and that it is much
harder
for a listener to talk than for a talker to decide to listen. I
suggested
that they strive for a balance between domination and silence.
Conversation
The discussions got much better as the semester progressed, with the
distinction between the talkers and listeners getting blurred but not
eliminated. Almost all the listeners seemed to feel much more at ease in
speaking and one or two of them even started talking to such an extent
that
they were accused (in good humor) of having "crossed over" to the
talkers.
In a review discussion at the end of the semester, students said that
this
initial discussion had had a major impact on how they viewed their role
in
the seminar. It had made them more self-reflective and conscious of how
their actions influenced that of others. They wished that it would be
done
in other classes as well.
Contact:
Mano Singham
Associate Director, UCITE
University Center for Innovation in Teaching and Education
Case Western Reserve University
Cleveland, OH 44106-7025
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
|
