|
U N I V E R S I T Y O F P I T T S B U R G H |
|
| |
|
|
Volume XI, No. 3 |
March 2006 |
|
U N I V E R S I T Y O F P I T T S B U R G H |
|
| |
|
|
Volume XI, No. 3 |
March 2006 |
|
Classroom Conversation: Key to Engaging Students
By Lu-in Wang, School of Law Bain’s seven principles (see Page 1) collectively describe an environment in which students and teacher engage in a joint undertaking, recognizing and even relishing their mutual responsibility for and contributions to its success. Essential to that success is the teacher’s use of what Bain calls “good talk.” As Bain tells it, to use good talk is to approach communication both within and outside of the classroom as a “conversation” (which is not to suggest that it is not also a performance). Susan Wiltshire, a successful teacher cited by Bain, notes that it is “not unlike inviting students into exchanges around the dinner table” (p. 119). That comparison describes my classroom approach—I try to act not simply as the leader of the class, but also as its host. "Hosting the class involves focusing on the students the way one ideally focuses on one’s companions around the table: being attentive, responsive, spontaneous, and flexible." It means drawing each student into the discussion by eliciting questions and comments from a wide range of students, remembering and using the students’ contributions to further discussion, and adjusting the pace and focus of discussion to the cues from students’ words, facial expressions, and body language. It means recognizing and appreciating the various ways individual students can contribute to the conversation. It also entails some risk—not every student responds positively to the invitation to participate, and the opportunity for embarrassment (the teacher’s and the student’s) is always present. Some students make this conversation easy: They are engaged and eager to speak, and they provide focused comments and questions that naturally move discussion forward or help to illuminate points already made. But even those students who are more retiring or less focused can make positive contributions if the teacher is alert to opportunities to involve them and to channel and situate their comments. Sometimes nonverbal behavior—fidgeting, shifting in his seat, changing facial expressions—signals that a student is struggling with the question of whether to raise his hand. I try to be attentive to those cues, and might even point them out when I call on that student. This usually pays off: the student says something valuable and is glad that he did. Even comments or questions that seem irrelevant can be helpful, for they provide an opportunity to step back from the particular point and remind the class of the overall themes of the course—for example, to explain how the question or comment is relevant to another topic and how that topic relates (or doesn’t) to the current discussion. Far less comfortable, but no less essential, is acknowledging and responding to a student whose comment, question, or nonverbal expression suggests boredom, confusion, frustration, or even anger. Engaging this student presents greater risk, both pedagogical and social, but often is worth the rewards. I have learned not to assume that I know what lies behind a student’s negative appearance, for appearances can be deceiving, and often the student welcomes an invitation into the discussion. Even when the student truly is confused, bored, frustrated, or angry, engaging her can be an opportunity for me to learn of a problem with the class that other, less expressive students share. It also can open constructive, substantive dialogue by raising objections to basic concepts, principles, or assumptions that no one else (including me) had thought to question.
| |||||||||||||||||
|
A newsletter devoted to the support of teaching and learning at the University of Pittsburgh |
||||||||||||||||||
| Center
for Instructional Development & Distance Education |
||||||||||||||||||
