Hi,

I'm sure many of you have this issue with your groups - 18 undergraduates and only 3 people will ever chirp up. I'm reluctant to go around in a circle and ask each student to speakl but what else do you do to get conversation going? In previous seminars I have virtually monologued for over an hour carrying the weight of the seminar....sigh....

Hi,

I read a book about leading group discussions recently which suggested this can happen if students think that a) when the teacher asks a question the teacher will answer it themselves if no one else does, or b) that there are a few students who will always answer so the rest don't have to. So, although it's really difficult, I think you need to try not to answer your own questions and go off onto a monologue.

2 things I have tried which have been quite successful are starting the seminar with some straightforward questions with an obvious answer - factual rather than conceptual. That way the students can ease into the dicsussion and get used to the idea of speaking, while not having to risk a personal opinion. Secondly, have some whiteboard oriented 'brainstorming' sessions where either the whole group shouts out suggestions and you write them on the board (has the advantage that each answer seems to carry the same weight so even someone shy can say something and see it written on the board as a 'valid' answer) or get them in groups of 2 or 3, set them a question and then ask them to choose a 'spokesperson' from each group who will report back. That way the confident people will still tend towards the 'spokesperson' roles but at least the quiet students get the chance to talk in their small groups while you're not listening.

If it's the same few people talking each time, you could try the old "thanks Jane, you've made lots of valuable contributions so far, can anyone else think of an answer?" chestnut.

Try not to get hung up on getting every single student to talk though - some people just seem determined not to speak, either because they are painfully shy, too cool for school, or just can't be bothered to engage their brains. I used to really stress about these students and think that I had to bust a gut getting them 'engaged' but there's only so much you can do. Plus there's the other extreme - I talked to a friend of mine about some quiet students in a group we both teach and he replied "I just pretend they don't exist"...

I have this problem, but have given up on the idea of getting everyone to speak, as I have groups of 30-35 students and there is a limit to what you can do in a 2 hour slot. It's quite a challenge to avoid just ending up doing a lecture, with no two-way dialogue. I tend to start the whole seminar series off with content that everyone has an opinion on, to engage them and get at least some of them talking - the students are drawn from across various courses, so many do not know each other either. It has to be interesting enough for them to come back the following week, as they are allowed to switch seminars after week 1 if it's a bit dull or they don't like you, or their friend's seminar sounds better.

Dividing them into small groups with a specific question or statement to discuss between them is a way of getting around shyness in large groups, or ludicrous class size problems. Leave them to talk about it for 10 minutes between themselves, then get one from each group to feed back to the class. You can walk around the groups and see how they're getting on with it while they're doing it. It's quite useful to vary the discussion topic/question slightly between groups, as together they all contribute something new to that day's seminar theme.

I also take things in to show them that they can pass around and examine, as it's a material culture seminar. Sometimes they bring their own stuff in, which also stimulates discussion. I've found that on group outings to relevant museums, some of the quiet ones become more talkative away from the classroom situation. Also some talk to me after the class, some quiet ones produce great essays and give good feedback after the seminar has finished, while some carry on to pursue the topic for their final year projects, so talking in class isn't the only indicator of a student getting something positive out of the seminar. I try different things each year though, it's more work for me but it's always worth trying to improve your teaching practice and I'm always open to suggestions!

Hi - thanks for the both of you for really useful comments/insight. I have developed a group activity for my seminar tmrw which requires group work and presentation to the group, so this should warm them up!

I suppose this is comming from the Undergrads point of view * (up) *, but I've found the topics I tend to find myself getting more involved in are those which involve less direct facts and more idealogical debate.

The problem I've found as a second year within my seminars is that there are certain students who know an astonishingly commendable amount of facts on a subject, and when the Seminar tutor tries to prop up an advanced question these people tend to dominate. I have no desire to say something in a seminar only to have my argument shot down (even worse when its infront of 15 silent people) humilatingly by somebody else who's studied a topic far more indepth than me. Broader questions tend to pick up the most interest in my seminars, certainly those where people can bring there own experiences into the debate. As an example we had a Seminar on the European Unions relationship with Russia, queue one far-right chappy who made a quick jibe about how he's so far right he doesn't believe in fairtrade, and then queue his tirade about how Russia should be crippled - suddenly 14 quiet people (many of them international students from Eastern Europe or states that have benefited from fairtrade) explode into a massive debate. Great stuff.

What I don't recommend, only from my own personal experience in one of my Political Philosophy seminars, is to force people to speak. I could never get my head around Political Philisophy in the first few months of my course, and when forced to speak I absolutely made a fool of myself in a seminar - I don't particularly enjoy being publically humiliated and it certainly made me feel very uncomfortable about talking in any seminars within the following weeks.

Personally if I ever make it onto a Phd I'm going to be humiliating every cowaring student in the room - take that, Karma!

http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/archive/CL1/CL/doingcl/DCL1.asp

Great website on how to structure interative ( they call it collaborative) learning, ie getting students to participate. It requires some structure and thought but can work wonderfully if you try these structures, rather than posing questions and hoping students chime in, or calling on people.

What is working so far for me is a structure that asks students to take about 60 seconds to think or write down their idea/answer/whatever....then in a small group, 2-3 share ideas, take the best of all ideas for a group answer ( stressing that it is also OK if the group disagrees, they can have more than one answer) and then pick a person to share the group answer. The group work is fast, usually under 5 minutes. Then go around the room, ask for group answers, lecture from there, for about 5 minutes, to tie concepts together, then, move to the next point of the lecture, 60 second think, small groups ( some times extending to about 10 minutes but never more) and then back to lecture for about 5 minutes to tie points together. As this goes, the class starts to participate voluntarily.

Why does this work? The reading I have done says the time for someone to compose thoughts in the beginning is important for some sorts of thinkers. The group answer means there is safety in numbers, and no one has to feel called out about a wrong answer they had as an individual. The inevitable people who don't prepare end up in groups with people who did. I prepare worksheets for the groups, so it prompts them about the points we will look at. I also use the whiteboard as I lecture, to give a wide variety of visual and aural prompts--I repeat points, talk slowly on the ones they need to get, etc.

Interactive learning prompts better recall for the student. I told them upfront that was why we were doing these sorts of sessions---there was a reason! I remind them of that every so often so they know why. At the start of each class, I do about five minutes outlining what is going to happen, summarising the concepts from the time before, talk about the concepts we will go over, and how they fit together, sort of a roadmap of the concepts so they can see where each piece fits.

I am all carrot and no stick. Sometimes people have turned up woefully unprepared and without their materials. I just let them borrow mine for the session, and point to the page where we are trying to work from. I encourage any answer, all answers, and just try to build from them. No one ever gets shot down for a wrong answer--I just try to say yes, thats good, now let's take that and keep going......etc.

Its tiring for me. It takes prep to know where and what points are, and to be able to rapidly move from group to lecture to cover things. I circulate between groups as they work, to keep them focussed and on task, and sometimes have to guide answers. I try to keep a high level of enthusiasm and energy as I go.

The bit of feedback I have from students is that its working for them! And that is what matters. (up)

This is all very interesting, particularly as I am planning on being a GTA next year too. You sound like really lovely tutors to have. Over my BA years I had many different kinds - the harsh ones, the sweet ones, the ones who didn't seem to know what the heck was going on, one who couldn't speak English very well and would ask us to translate things (not sure how he got through the selection process!)
I think, from a student perspective, knowing that you couldn't get away with stuff was helpful. We had one lecturer who was course director (and is my supervisor now) who would ask who had read what, the first week people enthusiastically said what they'd read, then after he'd gone around the group he smiled sweetly and asked each in turn what they felt about the author's feelings on xyz and their position - it certainly worked, people read from then on!
What I hated was when you were put on the spot though - particularly if you didn't 'get' a theory - I was one of the shy and quiet ones, and was made to feel very stupid a few times by the mouthy ones. It damaged my confidence to such an extent that my poor sup is STILL trying to bring me around and is always saying that my biggest problem is my confidence and I need to understand that I'm not thick etc, that my opinion is worthy and that I need to push myself forwards lol (I'm sure it will work at some stage).
The best way to get people talking and keep them talking imo is to ensure that nobody is savaged at any point. To be completely approachable, one of the group whilst still maintaining control, to turn around a misunderstanding with something along the lines of 'yes, that's a really good point, how about though if we consider this or that' - that's when the eureka moments happen. I had a fantastic graduate tutor in my third year, he was funny, friendly, you didn't feel you were in a class most of the time, but omg he taught us so damned well. I got a first in that class and I was absolute rubbish at social theory lol - he made it all make sense and removed the mystique - then you wanted to talk. As soon as the tutor gets stroppy (which I don't think for a second any of you do) its gone, probably for the entire course. My personal fave was another graduate tutor who, when we were really struggling as a group with some reading she asked us to discuss, asked if we were being deliberately obtuse, or whether we were actually just stupid.....

======= Date Modified 20 Nov 2008 12:22:37 =======
I just had to reply to this, as a currant undergrad in my second year, this is still causing me annoyance!!

I'm one of those that will talk, no matter what, just to avoid that horrific silence after a tutor asks a question. Perhaps it's because I'm a mature student and couldn't care less if people think I'm an idiot. I get hung-up about this because in some of my classes I'm the 'talking one' so people know they don't have to speak because I probably will. I always look around the class to see if anyone else looks like they're gonna speak first, before I have a go myself.

Generally, I've been lecturing my friends that really, you can get so much out of a seminar (from understanding the topic when you don't, to practically getting a tutor to answer a set essay question for you), and tutors just love it when you start engaging in the seminar.

Lucky (well, for some), we get a lot of seminars where only 4 people will turn up. Less students almost always has a positive impact on class participation and people who never speak will often chirp up as its more intimate.

My only help in this regard is that I'd learn students names and pick on a different person each time, weed out the completely silent (just hope that they're taking it all in) and encourage the talkative that it's ok to have a go at answering a question.

Edit: I'd also second the point about creating an atmosphere where all answers are good answers (even if they're wrong), so students feel comfortable in working through problems and issues. One of my tutors starts off the seminar by asking what people thought of the lecture, if they understood everything, then she'll go into points she found interesting or difficult.

Humility is a great way to break down the silence barrier.

U/grads often believe YOU know everything and they know nothing. Start with something like "ok I want to learn from you and you will all learn more from each other than you will from me or the textbook! We all lose out if you won't share your ideas with us all" or words to that effect. This is not a false invitation, it is a genuine request and a genuine belief for me. How many other venues can you think of where you may have dozens of different nationalities, ages, languages and personal experiences all communicating with each other (allbeit non verbal in some cases).

Seminars or tutorials are more intimate and less intimidating than lectures and should be more rewarding for both tutor and student.

There are of course some cultures where 'speaking up' is not endorsed and where challenging authority figures is frowned upon but you could always ask direct questions because not replying when asked is also not seen as commendable in many cultures.

good luck

hi Chrisrolinski  - During my teacher training they taught us about creating an atmosphere and an environment conducive to discussion. I always begin my module teaching with an exercise in which the students chat to the person next to them, find out a few things I ask them to such as name, where are they from, what they do or don't like about their subject/university/home town, what they hope to get from university life etc and then introduce the person they've been chatting to with that person's answers. I then expand the discussion picking up points I genuinely find interesting or funny. This means by the end of the first session each person in the group has spoken, but about someone else, which is always easier. I've been teaching seminars for 3 years now and have not had a problem with people not speaking. I think if you do this exercise with them early on and are relaxed, friendly and confident in your interactions with the students then you shouldn't have a problem. Teacher training is well worth it - makes life so much easier. Good luck! Also just relying on unstructured discussion for every session will result in dry spells so it always pays to have an alternative up your sleeve such as group exerises (very good for the shy students for reasons which I think were given above).