Active Listening and the Learning Optimisation Problem
As an economist, I tempt in facing some situations as “constrained optimisation problems”. There are economic models, where a “central planner” exists and makes decisions on how the consumer’s time will be allocated between labor and leisure so as the latter’s utility to be maximised. The constraint planner faces is the time endowment of the consumer. In the same way a teacher should think how to plan activities to maximise learning outcomes, by making appropriate usage of students’ limited time. Examples of inefficient usage of available time are the following: think of a seminar leader who merely repeats what has been referred during lectures with students listen passively, without allowing for any kind of interaction. On the other side, think of a rather silent seminar leader with an excessively “eager” to discuss group that eats up all the available time in pointless discussions. In both situations many of the benefits of seminars, such as the deepening and expansion of understanding and knowledge as well as encouragement of active participation, are lost. In order students to reap the benefits of participation in small groups, the teacher should act as a “central planner” who cares about students’ maximization learning under the time constraint. This learning optimization problem imposes what Welty (1989) calls “active listening”. “[…] Teachers can learn much from the […] process called active listening. In that process, you as teacher must communicate what is important to you, […] so that you and the student can work together to take some action – to learn, in this context” (Welty, 1989). He continues by underlining the importance of interaction in classroom through questioning, listening and response activities, which shape the discussion towards the learning outcomes planned by the teacher. At a next level and in a more advanced economic setup as a general equilibrium is, a decentralized economy with competitive agents with optimising behaviour that interact with each other could be considered.
References Welty, W. M., (1989), “Discussion Method Teaching: A Practical Guide”, To Improve the Academy, Paper 183
Division in Small Groups or Pairs: A Beneficial Teaching Technique for Both Sides
Back in the 5th-century China, Confucius is reported to have said “Tell me and I will forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I will understand”, but after so many centuries can Confucius’ thoughts be of any value for organizing our small-groups teaching?
It appears that Confucius’ words are in accordance with modern pedagogy, from L.S. Vygotsky and to S. Griffiths and P. McCroire, to mention only but a few, all have underlined how beneficial engagement is for students, in order to achieve learning. Student participation is not only valued as a very basic feature of a student-based approach in teaching and learning, it is also of vital importance according to student feedback.
However, how can we take advantage of these observations and apply them to a one-hour seminar? How can we incorporate the beneficial aspect of student engagement without compromising our aims and objectives, the material we have to cover and our time-management? One way would be to divide our students to pairs or small groups.
As far as students are concerned, they become more engaged. In this way, they can think of and discuss the material with one or two of their peers. This can enable the more self-conscious to share their ideas or views, since they feel less exposed, and are not put on the spot. Secondly, by engaging with their pair or group they can not only develop a sense of appliance, critical thinking, teamwork and communication skills, but also they may achieve learning more automatically, because they could link the material with some kind of emotional tag. Thirdly, the class environment becomes less stressful and more comfortable, and the students eventually more willing to participate in other activities as well.
From the teacher perspective, this technique allows for a more rewarding role to be assumed. Instead of being the ‘Mind’ responsible for transferring knowledge to passive spectators, he/she can transform to a coach, who monitors, aids and encourages his/her team to reach its goal. This undoubtedly makes the teaching process less stressful. Secondly, division in pairs or small groups can be diversified and used in addition with other techniques. For instance, the teacher can assume different roles as to how he monitors or engages with the pairs, he could be a ‘neutral chair’, a ‘consultant’ or a ‘commentator’, in addition he/she could also diversify his questioning techniques or the way in which he/she asks from the students to share their results with the rest of the group. In this way the teacher gains valuable experience in different approaches and has a chance to keep the attention span of his students, using these alternations. Finally, a pair or a small group will engage with the material and the raised questions quicker than an individual who is put on the spot. This enables for more group discussion afterwards, or allows more time for conclusions and evaluation of learning. References:
Griffiths, S. (2003). ‘Teaching and Learning in Small Groups’. In: H. Fry, S. Katteridge and S. Marshall (eds.), A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: Enhancing Academic Practise, 2nd Ed. London: Kogan Page.
Jaques, D. (2000). Learning in Groups: A Handbook for Improving Group Work, 3rd Ed. London: Routledge.
McCroire, P. (2006). Teaching and Leading Small Groups, Edinburgh: Association for the Study of Medical Education.
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education, London & New York: Routledge.
Whether or not to call on shy students to increase their participation Student-centred learning theory stresses the importance of student participation and involvement for a student's learning process (O'Neill and McMahon, 2005). In order to facilitate student participation one can organise small-group discussions and debates. However, in every class, there are usually a few shy students who can be withdrawn from such discussions and debates. Practitioners have suggested different techniques for increasing the involvement of shy students, such as the use of ice-breakers or dividing up the small group into even smaller groups (Exley and Dennick, 2004). Another commonly suggested technique is simply to call on shy students in class (Exley and Dennick, 2004; Salemi, 2005). However, this latter approach is slightly contentious. Reda (2009), for instance, points out that “being put on the spot is decidedly not the same as being part of a conversation” (Reda, 2009, p.102). She further warns that although calling on individual students may encourage some shy students to take part in the discussion, it may be experienced by others as repressive, alienating them from the discussion. However, in this post I argue that, when the right precautions are taken, calling on shy students can be an effective method for improving student participation. Shy students usually have as much to contribute to a discussion as talkative students. Unfortunately, they are inhibited by their shyness or by their fear of saying something unintelligent. Calling on these shy students provides them with an opportunity to voice their often well-prepared position and to develop confidence in participating in the seminar. Given that the teacher creates an environment in which every contribution, whether right or wrong, is valued, calling on individual students can facilitate the realisation among shy students that they have the ability to make a contribution to the discussion. Indeed, during my own seminars I noticed that those students which I had previously had to call on, were soon taking initiative and engaging in the discussions without my encouragement. This is not to deny the fact that calling on individual students is likely to cause some degree of discomfort. Indeed, one forces students to get out of their comfort zone. However, there are some precautions that can be taken so that the the degree of discomfort is minimised and so that shy students do not shut down altogether. First of all, the teacher should make sure that he or she calls on students randomly – that is, he or she shouldn't just call on the students who are shy. This would prevent shy students from feeling like they are being picked on. Second, the teacher should create an environment in which every contribution, whether right or wrong, is valued. This environment is to prevent shy students from shutting down after being called upon and not knowing the “correct” answer. Thus, when done right, calling on quiet students can be an effective tool for improving student participation. Although calling on shy students is likely to cause some discomfort, the discomfort can be minimised by calling on students randomly and by creating a 'safe' and encouraging learning environment in which student contributions are valued. References Exley, K. and Dennick, R. (2004). Small group teaching: Tutorials, seminars and beyond. Routledge. O’Neill, G., & McMahon, T. (2005). Student-centred learning: What does it mean for students and lecturers. Emerging issues in the practice of university learning and teaching, 1, 27-36. Reda, M. M. (2009). Between speaking and silence: A study of quiet students. SUNY Press. Salemi, M. K. (2005). Discussing economics: A classroom guide to preparing discussion questions and leading discussion. Edward Elgar Publishing.
As an economist, I tempt in facing some situations as “constrained optimisation problems”. There are economic models, where a “central planner” exists and makes decisions on how the consumer’s time will be allocated between labor and leisure so as the latter’s utility to be maximised. The constraint planner faces is the time endowment of the consumer. In the same way a teacher should think how to plan activities to maximise learning outcomes, by making appropriate usage of students’ limited time. Examples of inefficient usage of available time are the following: think of a seminar leader who merely repeats what has been referred during lectures with students listen passively, without allowing for any kind of interaction. On the other side, think of a rather silent seminar leader with an excessively “eager” to discuss group that eats up all the available time in pointless discussions. In both situations many of the benefits of seminars, such as the deepening and expansion of understanding and knowledge as well as encouragement of active participation, are lost. In order students to reap the benefits of participation in small groups, the teacher should act as a “central planner” who cares about students’ maximization learning under the time constraint. This learning optimization problem imposes what Welty (1989) calls “active listening”. “[…] Teachers can learn much from the […] process called active listening. In that process, you as teacher must communicate what is important to you, […] so that you and the student can work together to take some action – to learn, in this context” (Welty, 1989). He continues by underlining the importance of interaction in classroom through questioning, listening and response activities, which shape the discussion towards the learning outcomes planned by the teacher.
At a next level and in a more advanced economic setup as a general equilibrium is, a decentralized economy with competitive agents with optimising behaviour that interact with each other could be considered.
References
Welty, W. M., (1989), “Discussion Method Teaching: A Practical Guide”, To Improve the Academy, Paper 183
Division in Small Groups or Pairs: A Beneficial Teaching Technique for Both Sides
Back in the 5th-century China, Confucius is reported to have said “Tell me and I will forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I will understand”, but after so many centuries can Confucius’ thoughts be of any value for organizing our small-groups teaching?
It appears that Confucius’ words are in accordance with modern pedagogy, from L.S. Vygotsky and to S. Griffiths and P. McCroire, to mention only but a few, all have underlined how beneficial engagement is for students, in order to achieve learning. Student participation is not only valued as a very basic feature of a student-based approach in teaching and learning, it is also of vital importance according to student feedback.
However, how can we take advantage of these observations and apply them to a one-hour seminar? How can we incorporate the beneficial aspect of student engagement without compromising our aims and objectives, the material we have to cover and our time-management? One way would be to divide our students to pairs or small groups.
As far as students are concerned, they become more engaged. In this way, they can think of and discuss the material with one or two of their peers. This can enable the more self-conscious to share their ideas or views, since they feel less exposed, and are not put on the spot. Secondly, by engaging with their pair or group they can not only develop a sense of appliance, critical thinking, teamwork and communication skills, but also they may achieve learning more automatically, because they could link the material with some kind of emotional tag. Thirdly, the class environment becomes less stressful and more comfortable, and the students eventually more willing to participate in other activities as well.
From the teacher perspective, this technique allows for a more rewarding role to be assumed. Instead of being the ‘Mind’ responsible for transferring knowledge to passive spectators, he/she can transform to a coach, who monitors, aids and encourages his/her team to reach its goal. This undoubtedly makes the teaching process less stressful. Secondly, division in pairs or small groups can be diversified and used in addition with other techniques. For instance, the teacher can assume different roles as to how he monitors or engages with the pairs, he could be a ‘neutral chair’, a ‘consultant’ or a ‘commentator’, in addition he/she could also diversify his questioning techniques or the way in which he/she asks from the students to share their results with the rest of the group. In this way the teacher gains valuable experience in different approaches and has a chance to keep the attention span of his students, using these alternations. Finally, a pair or a small group will engage with the material and the raised questions quicker than an individual who is put on the spot. This enables for more group discussion afterwards, or allows more time for conclusions and evaluation of learning.
References:
Griffiths, S. (2003). ‘Teaching and Learning in Small Groups’. In: H. Fry, S. Katteridge and S. Marshall (eds.), A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: Enhancing Academic Practise, 2nd Ed. London: Kogan Page.
Jaques, D. (2000). Learning in Groups: A Handbook for Improving Group Work, 3rd Ed. London: Routledge.
McCroire, P. (2006). Teaching and Leading Small Groups, Edinburgh: Association for the Study of Medical Education.
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education, London & New York: Routledge.
Whether or not to call on shy students to increase their participation
Student-centred learning theory stresses the importance of student participation and involvement for a student's learning process (O'Neill and McMahon, 2005). In order to facilitate student participation one can organise small-group discussions and debates. However, in every class, there are usually a few shy students who can be withdrawn from such discussions and debates. Practitioners have suggested different techniques for increasing the involvement of shy students, such as the use of ice-breakers or dividing up the small group into even smaller groups (Exley and Dennick, 2004). Another commonly suggested technique is simply to call on shy students in class (Exley and Dennick, 2004; Salemi, 2005). However, this latter approach is slightly contentious. Reda (2009), for instance, points out that “being put on the spot is decidedly not the same as being part of a conversation” (Reda, 2009, p.102). She further warns that although calling on individual students may encourage some shy students to take part in the discussion, it may be experienced by others as repressive, alienating them from the discussion. However, in this post I argue that, when the right precautions are taken, calling on shy students can be an effective method for improving student participation.
Shy students usually have as much to contribute to a discussion as talkative students. Unfortunately, they are inhibited by their shyness or by their fear of saying something unintelligent. Calling on these shy students provides them with an opportunity to voice their often well-prepared position and to develop confidence in participating in the seminar. Given that the teacher creates an environment in which every contribution, whether right or wrong, is valued, calling on individual students can facilitate the realisation among shy students that they have the ability to make a contribution to the discussion. Indeed, during my own seminars I noticed that those students which I had previously had to call on, were soon taking initiative and engaging in the discussions without my encouragement. This is not to deny the fact that calling on individual students is likely to cause some degree of discomfort. Indeed, one forces students to get out of their comfort zone. However, there are some precautions that can be taken so that the the degree of discomfort is minimised and so that shy students do not shut down altogether. First of all, the teacher should make sure that he or she calls on students randomly – that is, he or she shouldn't just call on the students who are shy. This would prevent shy students from feeling like they are being picked on. Second, the teacher should create an environment in which every contribution, whether right or wrong, is valued. This environment is to prevent shy students from shutting down after being called upon and not knowing the “correct” answer.
Thus, when done right, calling on quiet students can be an effective tool for improving student participation. Although calling on shy students is likely to cause some discomfort, the discomfort can be minimised by calling on students randomly and by creating a 'safe' and encouraging learning environment in which student contributions are valued.
References
Exley, K. and Dennick, R. (2004). Small group teaching: Tutorials, seminars and beyond. Routledge.
O’Neill, G., & McMahon, T. (2005). Student-centred learning: What does it mean for students and lecturers. Emerging issues in the practice of university learning and teaching, 1, 27-36.
Reda, M. M. (2009). Between speaking and silence: A study of quiet students. SUNY Press.
Salemi, M. K. (2005). Discussing economics: A classroom guide to preparing discussion questions and leading discussion. Edward Elgar Publishing.