Blog Entry #3

This week's readings are all from "Teaching Tips," which may be the least engaging of the three texts we use in class, but does contain much useful information, as well as thought-provoking commentary. This week's chapters center on the roles that lecture, discussion, and the textbook play in the classroom. The relationship among the textbook, in-class discussion, and lecture is a fascinating one and one that means different things to different people--both students and teachers.



In 8th grade world history class, I very quickly realized that the daily lecture (and lecture is the only thing I recall the teacher ever doing in that class) was exactly the information from the textbook. Nothing was added or subtracted. The teacher had an outline of the text's chapters--paragraph by paragraph--written out on a plastic scroll attached to an overhead projector, and he would let us see one line at a time while we copied the outline in our notes. He might briefly elaborate on items from the outline, but there was not one instance wherein he told us something that was not written in the textbook.



I said "while we copied the outline," but the truth is that after the first few days, I stopped copying. I would sit and listen silently to the lecture, usually following along in the book as a form of review, as I had consistently read all the assigned readings. I was the only student not to take notes, which bothered the teacher considerably. I know this because on at least 3 occasions that I can recall, he all but commanded me to take notes. He did this even after I consistently earned the highest marks on all the exams.



I compare this experience to two history courses I took as an undergraduate, in which the lectures and the assigned readings were quite divergent. For example, in my Native American history course, in the assigned reading we might learn about white settlers' successive violations of US-native treaties, and then in the lecture hear about how natives were portrayed in 19th century American literature, such as the novels of James Fenimore Cooper. Neither questions nor comments were ever invited. As a result, students often felt overwhelmed by the sheer volume of information they felt they needed to memorize. Even I scribbled furiously, knowing that if I didn't get all the lecture into my notes, I would likely have little or no way to get the information later.



In my teaching, and I think this is what McKeachie is advocating, I try to be somewhere in the middle of the two extremes I've described above. This balancing act was mentioned in "First Day to Final Grade," too. Students paid money for the textbook, so they ought to be able to read it and know it will be the source for at least some of what the teacher expects them to have learned for exams, papers, etc. Morever, as McKeachie says, because there is evidence suggesting that students can learn more from reading than from listening to a lecture, class time needs to add value to the reading and not replacee the reading.



I think a fine example can be found in the COMM 112 course I co-teach, or at least assist in. The course is about the role of the mass media in society. In the lectures, Rich Lodewyk and I do our best to enhance the textbook readings by providing additional examples or even alternative points of view to what's in the text. Unfortunately, most often this material is simply supplementary to the text, as there's rarely much discussion in the classroom, though I try to initiate some when I'm leading the class.

McKeachie says the relationship between what's brought up in class and what's in the text should be "interdependent," meaning that students must know what's in the book in order to understand what's discussed in class, and they must attend to lecture and participate in classroom discussion because it will help them better comprehend the information from the textbook. I agree that this is exactly the balance every teacher should strive for.



The challenge for graduate teaching assistants, like those of us in COMM 702, is that it takes a lot of time and energy to create a lesson of discussion and lecture that achieves this interdependent relationship with the text. And if the assistant doesn't have any or much teaching experience, it can seem an especially daunting task. Teachers of COMM 110 have a leg up, perhaps, in that the COMM 690 graduating teaching seminar provides them with sample lesson plans, activities, and other tools to help. But assistants in the other disciplines seem to be left to their own devices most of the time.



Apart from lectures, McKeachie writes about the pedagogical value of classroom discussion. My favorite courses from my undergraduate days were those in which discussion was a fixture. As most of these courses were in the communication field, perhaps it's no coincidence that I decided to make communication one of my majors.



McKeachie offers a number of useful ways for launching classroom discussion. For one such way, introducing a controversy, he cautions about the dangers of playing "devil's advocate," saying it may lead some students to lose trust in the teacher. This is curious, as I think there are a number of ways in which a teacher can provoke students and challenge their viewpoints without making the student believe that the positions the teacher raises are his or her personal beliefs. Apart from stating explicitly that the teacher is playing devil's advocate, the teacher can also simply preface an argument with something like, "There are those who would argue that..." etc. The best example I've seen of this was in a large introduction to politcal science course I took at the University of North Dakota. I later learned that this teacher was a Democratic state legislator, but in class she managed to always seem non-partisan.



In my estimation and experience, the greater danger with this kind of discussion is that students may become so embroiled in a controversy that they are unable to move on. When this happens a discussion can spiral out of control and lead to animosities among students. A later section of the chapter, Handling Arguments and Emotional Reactions, recognizes this. McKeachies suggests perhaps asking students to switch sides and argue the opposing viewpoint, but in practice I think this approach would likely not work, as young students often are unable to distance themselves intellectually from their personal views to see another perspective as equally rational.



In such circumstances, the greater value, then, of discussing a controversy may be less in trying to help students craft arguments on both sides, and more in helping students perceive the difference between what may be objectives facts and the often subjective interpretation of facts. In other words, the value may be in helping students develop critical thinking skills.



The most effective and lively discussions are those in which most, if not all, of the class is participating. In thinking about how one might get unresponsive students to participate more in class discussions, I wonder if technology can help. It used to be that if listeners to a radio talk show wanted to join an on-air discussion, they had to get through on the phone. This is usually very difficult, as popular shows (especially nationally broadcast programs) will likely have hundreds if not thousands of people trying to call in at the same time. The most common alternative is for listeners to e-mail questions and comments.



In the classroom setting, students may be shy or unable to get a word in, especially if there is a discussion monopolizer (other than the teacher). What if students were invited to share questions and comments with the teacher via e-mail or even SMS during class? Such an invitation would bring its share of pitfalls. If you invite students to use their computers and cell phones in class, much of that use may very well have nothing to do with your class. But in certain circumstances and certain types of classes, it could be one way for even the shyest students to participate. An added advantage is that students could ask potentially embarrassing questions (e.g., "I didn't understand that definition. Could you please go over it again?"). The teacher could answer these questions without identifying the questioner or even without acknowledging that a question was asked.


McKeachie asks at the end of chapter 6 whether students should take notes. You'll recall my writing at the beginning of this blog entry that I didn't take notes in my 8th grade history class. To review for a test, I simply re-read the chapters and the chapter summaries in the textbook. I didn't take notes in that class because the lecture provided nothing new or different than the text. But even now, I only take notes when I sense that the lecture or discussion is raising points that aren't in the text.


When I'm teaching, and I see students writing furiously, I actually get a bit frustrated. I agree that note taking is beneficial for students, but too often students are concentrating so much on writing down what they see and hear that they're not listening. I often muse that I could stand at the head of a class and simply state obvious facts known to any first-grader ("The sky is blue," "Dogs have four legs," etc.) and students would still scribble furiously.


I found a list of tips for improving classroom lectures. It was written by a professor at Allegheny College in Pennsylvania (see the link below). One of the pointers he gives is about wearing a costume to give a lecture. This can generate more laughter than anything else, if not done properly, but I've seen professors dress as a famous philosopher or historical figure and then try to be that figure during class. Professors can role play (allowing them, I suppose, to take positions without necessarily revealing their own personal opinions) and students can ask questions. It wouldn't work for everyone, but would be fun to try sometime, and can be a very effective way to teach students about the historical figure and his or her writings, philosophy, etc.




http://webpub.allegheny.edu/employee/e/epallant/coursehome/New%20York%20Times%20-%20FS101/how%20to%20lecture_files/lect2.ms.9jan96.pdf