All of us who teach know that in every class, from graduate to first-year, some students talk a lot more than others. In most classes, there are a few students who dominate the discussion. Whenever you make a point and pause, and whenever you ask the class a question, those students have their hand up. These hands are insistent; even when you recognize somebody else, they stay up or squirm with the effort of waiting. Given the smallest opportunity, these students interrupt. Sometimes, they even disparage other students. They make you feel quite uncomfortable at times.
In an interesting blog post today, Rachel McKinnon addresses the problem. She writes, “Often we have a few students who dominate open discussion, with most students spending our classes in silence.” She’s right. What should we do about it?
A question we should ask to begin is this. Why is this minority so vocal? Why is the majority silent? Rachel hints at an answer that doesn’t accord with my experience: “some of us are particularly concerned about getting students from underrepresented groups to participate, especially in spaces where the dominant voices are typically (white straight cis) men.” The overly insistent students in my classes are just as likely to be (in no particular order) brown, women, head-scarf wearing, non-stereotypical with regard to their gender, or black.
The flip side is those who don’t speak. Should we assume that they “don't feel safe speaking in front of an entire class,” in Rachel’s words? Well, some may be shy. Is this the same as feeling unsafe? Should we force shy people to speak? (A difficult ethical problem that I don’t want to go into here . . . but my bottom line is no.) Then there are students who believe that speaking up is not, for them, the most productive way of learning. Here, perhaps, silence should not just be permitted but empowered. And then, of course, there are the distracted. They would rather be surfing the web or sending a text. What’s the best thing to do with such folk? For my part, I prefer to ignore them if they are not disruptive. I don’t feel I need to call out people who sit at the back and watch a movie. Let sleeping dogs lie! Rachel would make everybody speak (albeit in small groups). Her laudable intention is to empower the hesitant, but she runs the risk of intruding upon their right to be quiet.
In an earlier post, Rachel talked about how some students silence others by demeaning them or disparaging their credentials. And speaking of “taking turns” in the post to which I am responding, she says: “because students aren't allowed to interrupt (except for during the open discussion phase), it's structurally difficult for some students to dominate others and to use silencing techniques.” Honestly, I worry that here she is putting diverse phenomena into the same pot: silencing and domination are not the only causes of unequal participation. It is really important to treat the different causes of unequal participation differently. Confront the bullies: this is what Rachel suggested in her earlier post. But I would suggest that the line she takes in today’s post is too broad a solution to this problem.
Rachel solution is the method of “taking turns.” Students are divided into groups where each must speak for a fixed time without interruption. This is followed by open discussion in the group. I have several worries beyond those already stated. The first, as already indicated, is that students are not equal in their preparation or interest. What exactly is the value of giving somebody a minute to ask a question when she hasn’t prepared the question carefully? How often does a student just miss the point, and in so doing nudge others off the point. And what happens when a particular student’s question or comment is ignored in discussion? Students need to interact with their instructor in exercises like this.
Rachel writes: “My time is spent wandering around the room popping in and out of conversations, but rarely participating unless asked.” First of all, shouldn’t in-class discussion be open to instructor-input? Shouldn’t student preparation get instructor feedback? And second, shouldn’t the questions be graded, or at least checked for relevance and preparation? To what extent is autonomous and unchecked discussion valuable when students have differing levels of motivation? How do students learn from the effort they have put into their questions? We learn by doing, but we learn better if we are corrected and coached.
Recent Comments