What's Your Style?

[dimanche0829]

Just a random and curious Sunday Morning question: what's your style in class? Are you the type who's really agressive and outspoken in class, or are you more the silent type who saves your best thoughts for papers?

I tend to be on the aggressive side in classes that I enjoy, and have been known to insult classmates from time to time because I get carried away. One time, a professor had my class read aloud passages from our paper assignment and the rest of the class had to analyze it. I completely roasted this one girl about her poor structure, word choice, and abuse/misuse of quotes, and tried to give suggestions on how to make it better, not realizing the extent to which I came off as a pretentious jerk. Not my proudest moment, but I hated that everyone just kept telling everyone else how amazing their paper was, when their work clearly needed help. So yeah, I am pretty intense in class and take it a little too seriously - I especially have little tolerance for those who haven't read assignments.

I tend to be much more detailed, and nicer, in my writing.

[Two Espressos]

I am deadly serious when it comes to academics (especially in the humanities), but I'm quite reticent in class. I'll speak if I have something interesting and germane to offer, but this is even a rarity. I tend not to speak in class because--and this may reek of ostentation--there are a lot of dim-witted students in my humanities courses. These are students who never read nor understand what we're learning and brag about it. I am certainly not an academic prodigy, but I feel like I do bring up some high-quality ideas occasionally. This would be lost on 95% of the audience, barring me, the professor, and a few other students who actually give a shit about the course. Therefore, I like to speak to professors after/outside of the classroom, as I enjoy one-on-one conversation more. Plus it prevents me from looking like a pretentious prick in class.

Also, dimanche0829, I too hate students who constantly praise their peers' work, regardless of quality. Classroom camaraderie should not be an academic battleground, but it shouldn't be a self-help group either.

[bdon19]

This is an interesting topic, particularly because my style has changed quite dramatically through my three (almost four!) years of undergrad. Freshman year I don't think I voluntarily participated once in any of my English courses. I had tested out of the intro courses, so I was taking classes with students who were a year or two older, and I was petrified. The combination of older students and brilliant professors left me completely silent. However, as I started becoming more confident and more passionate about my English major, I started talking more, and now I'm at a point where it can be hard to get me to shut up, even in classes with less than 10 students!

However, I have the horrible problem of being one of the least articulate people in the world when I'm not fully prepared to talk about something. I'm great at public speaking when I have time to prepare, but when an idea just pops into my head, I end up being able to word vomit about half a sentence and then wait to see if other people catch on. Thank god I have writing assignments to show people I can, actually, develop an idea!

However, I have to disagree with the above posters. I have never found aggression towards other students to be productive in the classroom. I'm having terrible flashbacks to a moment gone horribly wrong when one student told another, "I think you're wrong." *Shudder.* I love a lively, intellectual debate as much as the next person, but I don't think the classroom is the right place, no matter how much another student's work "needs help," is the right place to "insult" the work of another student. It's all about balance. Just as we are expected to be mature enough not to bring personal problems into the classroom or workplace or whatever, we shouldn't bring the chips on our shoulders into it, either. I agree that, at times, students' work is not up to par, and still our peers don't want to critique it. That's the point of constructive criticism. Don't shut down someone's paper based on silly things like "poor structure, word choice, and abuse/misuse of quotes."

Heck, one time I had to do a peer review of a paper that talked about "Hemmingway" throughout the entire thing. Instead of shoving the paper back into the girl's face (which was, yes, my first instinct), I circled it, crossed out the extra "m," and went on to point out both the positive and negative aspects of her paper. It ended up not being half-bad! I've had to come to the realization that, while everyone's instincts may not always be as brilliant as mine (ha! I only rarely think that way anyway, but we're prospective English Ph.D.s, we must have our moments of pretension ), that NEVER, under any circumstances, means that I can dismiss someone's ideas based upon poor word choice or structure or something like that. Maybe I'm spoiled by going to a school where the majority of the population is pretty darned smart. But I've come to realize that the girl with the dumbest sounding voice and most disorganized writing in the class can have some of the most brilliant ideas.

Sorry if I sound like I'm attacking you, dimanche! That's definitely NOT what I'm trying to do. But, maybe your self-proclaimed "aggressive" classroom tendencies are something to think about? Personally, I sure wouldn't like to have to work with too many aggressive types in grad school! I tend to shut down when the class gets too tense!!

Edited August 21, 2011 by bdon19

[Sparky]

I love class discussion. Always have.

Anybody who thinks I am a lead-brained lunkard for spouting the occasional sentence of gibberish that barely passes as coherent English is not a person whose opinion I care about.

Anybody who thinks I am a huge dork for asking a lot of questions and having the occasional good idea is also not a person whose opinion I care about.

Edited August 21, 2011 by Sparky

[dimanche0829]

Sorry if I sound like I'm attacking you, dimanche! That's definitely NOT what I'm trying to do. But, maybe your self-proclaimed "aggressive" classroom tendencies are something to think about? Personally, I sure wouldn't like to have to work with too many aggressive types in grad school! I tend to shut down when the class gets too tense!!

Not feeling attacked at all! I only brought up that particular instance to illustrate how I can get carried away sometimes and wind up with my foot in my mouth. I never had any intention of being downright insulting to her - I would never tell someone that an idea or thought is stupid, for example - but the more that I tried to "help" her with suggestions on improvement, the more I realized I was coming off like a jerk - in part because everyone else was so nice and complimentary. Thankfully, that incident happened a while ago and I have since made a more conscientious effort to keep more of a balance, but I don't think I'll ever stop being the first one to raise my hand or initiate debate

I will, say, though, that structure, word choice, and use of quotes is crucial to the success of any paper - abuse/misuse of any of these can dramatically alter the message of the paper - and students at the university level should know their function and use.

I currently take grad courses as an undergrad and am happy that my classmates have all been aggressive and big on debate. Every class has been incredibly lively and informative, and it's great to see everyone's interests come to light. I cannot wait to be on their level.

Edited August 21, 2011 by dimanche0829

[dimanche0829]

Anybody who thinks I am a huge dork for participating often in class and having the occasional good idea is not a person whose opinion I care about.

Here here!

[Timshel]

I am a firm believer that if you aren't engaging, you aren't learning.

With that said, no one likes a know-it-all. You can be helpful without being condescending. I think it's more important to just point out what could make it stronger rather than telling them what they did wrong. That has worked for me as both a student and a teacher.

[dimanche0829]

I am a firm believer that if you aren't engaging, you aren't learning.

With that said, no one likes a know-it-all. You can be helpful without being condescending. I think it's more important to just point out what could make it stronger rather than telling them what they did wrong. That has worked for me as both a student and a teacher.

That's what I thought I was doing...until I realized that she really wasn't going for it (when everyone else in the class talks about how perfect it is, it's tough to take the one person who disagrees seriously). My downfall was that instead of just shutting up, I kept talking to try and fix the damage, which only made things worse. On the plus side, a lesson was learned.

[Timshel]

But I will say that as a student, I am very passionate about what I do and what I read (not to say that those who are quiet are not as passionate), so there is NO WAY I could sit through a class without saying anything. That just isn't who I am. I'm like one of those people who will burst if they don't give their two cents. That's why I enjoy the field so much. I love to discuss, analyze, and debate interpretations and texts.

[Alephantiasis]

I've always been the silent type. It was difficult to attend seminars in which 20 to 25% of the grade is based on participation. Engaging with others may be the best way to learn, but it's certainly not the only one. What matters the most to me is the text itself: while others get carried away discussing their respective interpretations, I keep my focus on the text. That's the only way I can come up with something innovative. To me, big debates in the classroom are a little hollow and not necessarily entail good papers, not to mention good articles.

[runonsentence]

I've always been the silent type. It was difficult to attend seminars in which 20 to 25% of the grade is based on participation. Engaging with others may be the best way to learn, but it's certainly not the only one.

I think it's important to remember that engaging doesn't only mean speaking in class. At least, I tell my students this when I talk about the requirements for their participation grade. I also try to reward thoughtful listening.

[Jbarks]

I think it's important to remember that engaging doesn't only mean speaking in class. At least, I tell my students this when I talk about the requirements for their participation grade. I also try to reward thoughtful listening.

I completely agree. When I began college, I was the reticent type. As I became more confident in my abilities, I participated much more; it was definitely a process of growth for me. However, I always try to find a balance between listening and speaking. Sometimes active listening is the best form of participation. I also have found that I learn more from my classmates who rarely speak than those who speak often. The former take time to listen and then formulate a compelling and well articulated argument. I'm not saying that the latter don't, but in my experience, their active listening to others comments and opinions is sometimes lacking.

[runonsentence]

Yes. Listening is an important component that makes seminar a dialogue. Which should be the goal.

[indalomena]

usually I'm rather shy and quiet at the beginning of a seminar, and then around halfway through I start really getting into the swing of things and making a big contribution. I don't have a remotely aggressive personality though, so I never get into debates or arguments -- it's always more about trying to find the common ground rather than concentrating on the areas where I disagree with others. This isn't necessarily the best way -- debate tests your convictions and strengthens arguments -- but I feel it's crucial to work in a friendly and supportive environment. It's important to be very aware of who you're working with -- sometimes there are people in a group who are very quiet and timid but have great ideas, and just need to be in the kind of environment where they feel comfortable expressing them.

Also I think it's important to contribute your ideas, even if they're a bit shaky and not very well formed -- the reason seminars are such wonderful research opportunities is that you get to throw ideas at many different people with different scholarly priorities. Though your point may, in your head, sound stupid, to someone else it could provide incredible illumination! This has happened to me on a few occasions -- a completely throwaway remark has changed my thinking in a profound way.

[Two Espressos]

I also have found that I learn more from my classmates who rarely speak than those who speak often.

I'd like to believe that that is the case with me.

One of the great things about the university is the dialogic exchange of ideas between peers. Though I'm quite reserved, I would speak more often in class if the discussions were worthwhile. In my experience, they haven't been most of the time (due to the vast majority of students not doing the readings and not caring, etc).

Example:

I took an Intro to Ethics course last year. I find ethics to be fascinating; I was extremely excited for the course. Unfortunately, that fervor died completely after a few weeks into the semester: students laughed about not doing assignments; they complained about philosophy being "hard" and "stupid." Their incompetence was exacerbated by the instructor, who essentially allowed the students to dictate the course. Needless to say, I learned little to nothing. We were reading (or, at least, I was reading) great works by great minds, but classroom discussions were debased to the level of laundry-list terminology and skeletal arguments--truly frustrating. Granted, it was an intro course, but it was like junior-high ethics, which shouldn't be the case.

For instance, students' views were held to no standard. In upholding Divine Command Theory, a student remarked: "Well, that's what I've always been told is true, so..." That's poor reasoning--an appeal to authority, a logical fallacy. This was not challenged. We weren't even taught logical fallacies (the horror!).

Wow, I've really digressed.

Point being, so far my courses have not had meaningful in-class discussions. I'm taking more seminars this fall, so I'm hoping that that changes. I'll still speak little and listen often, but I will be more inclined to share things in-class.

Anyways, I've enjoyed this discussion. I like the idea of "active listening": I make that a priority every day!

Edited August 22, 2011 by Two Espressos

[indalomena]

I took an Intro to Ethics course last year. I find ethics to be fascinating; I was extremely excited for the course. Unfortunately, that fervor died completely after a few weeks into the semester: students laughed about not doing assignments; they complained about philosophy being "hard" and "stupid." Their incompetence was exacerbated by the instructor, who essentially allowed the students to dictate the course. Needless to say, I learned little to nothing. We were reading (or, at least, I was reading) great works by great minds, but classroom discussions were debased to the level of laundry-list terminology and skeletal arguments--truly frustrating. Granted, it was an intro course, but it was like junior-high ethics, which shouldn't be the case.

Some of my most distressing intellectual moments were in undergraduate philosophy seminars

[Alephantiasis]

Yes. Listening is an important component that makes seminar a dialogue. Which should be the goal.

Sometimes, it sounds like an almost endless chatter filled of nonsense and drivel more than a smart conversation between expert readers. One of my friends, who is working at the CERN, often says that 90% of what researchers are saying there is nonsense and that groundbreaking ideas come out of this chaos. However, he's talking about potential Nobel Prize winners, not your typical grad-students. I'd save the conversations for the conferences and prefer the students to ask questions in class rather than giving opinions.

[dimanche0829]

Sometimes, it sounds like an almost endless chatter filled of nonsense and drivel more than a smart conversation between expert readers. One of my friends, who is working at the CERN, often says that 90% of what researchers are saying there is nonsense and that groundbreaking ideas come out of this chaos. However, he's talking about potential Nobel Prize winners, not your typical grad-students. I'd save the conversations for the conferences and prefer the students to ask questions in class rather than giving opinions.

I see your point, and agree that most class discussions are filled with nonsense, but I also think most lecture-based courses on modern literature are counterproductive. There can be any number of interpretations and people should learn how to formulate and discuss their ideas.

Edited August 22, 2011 by dimanche0829

[Two Espressos]

Some of my most distressing intellectual moments were in undergraduate philosophy seminars

Yes, I can certainly relate. That ethics class was one of the only ones that I hated attending: I'd think of any excuse to stay at home!

[ecritdansleau]

This is an interesting topic, particularly because my style has changed quite dramatically through my three (almost four!) years of undergrad. Freshman year I don't think I voluntarily participated once in any of my English courses. I had tested out of the intro courses, so I was taking classes with students who were a year or two older, and I was petrified. The combination of older students and brilliant professors left me completely silent. However, as I started becoming more confident and more passionate about my English major, I started talking more, and now I'm at a point where it can be hard to get me to shut up, even in classes with less than 10 students!

^^This! I was the same way as I progressed through undergrad. As a freshman, I was intimidated; but over time, I got the jist of things and could no longer restrain myself from making comments, especially when no one else had anything to say--these were often shocking moments for me (The thought that no one has anything to say about Gertrude Stein's poetry style? About Milton's portrayal of Eve in Paradise Lost? Of art in Portrait of a Lady? AAHH! haha).

Sometimes, though, I actually wanted to avoid saying certain things in class because I was already planning on including the same string of ideas in a paper, and I guess I'm attached to the idea that I am surprising a professor the first time they read a paper I've turned in. I guess I also sometimes worry that someone might take the idea, but I guess that's a little paranoid. But I can actually maybe see this happening when I take grad seminars in the future...--? If I'm workshopping an idea, I'd rather talk with a professor one on one about it.

I wouldn't call someone out for not speaking much because I think this is how the richest and most complex ideas are developed. But one of the most surprising things about participating so much after not having always done so is how much I can actually learn from sharing my idea in order for it to be tested, or even completely shot down. I realize other angles to my idea that I may not have thought of on my own, at least not so quickly as another person's first reaction to my observation. Ultimately, though, there is something to be said for listening. Ever since I found my voice, so to speak, I find that I am slightly less willing to patiently listen to others' comments because I am so intent on sharing my own dare-I-say "brilliant" insights with everyone . It's great to find a good balance though.

[runonsentence]

Sometimes, it sounds like an almost endless chatter filled of nonsense and drivel more than a smart conversation between expert readers. One of my friends, who is working at the CERN, often says that 90% of what researchers are saying there is nonsense and that groundbreaking ideas come out of this chaos. However, he's talking about potential Nobel Prize winners, not your typical grad-students. I'd save the conversations for the conferences and prefer the students to ask questions in class rather than giving opinions.

I disagree. Of course class shouldn't be filled with endless chatter, and that people should speak up for speaking's sake. But under expert guidance, some of my most challenging and rewarding moments in class have been after hearing my peers say really, really smart things or participating in a dialogue with them. But, to each their own.

[truckbasket]

I’ve modeled much of my own pedagogy on my experiences as a student working with different professors, picking up tips that seemed effective along the way. One of the most pertinent points I picked up related to class discussion -- specifically participation grading. Whereas virtually all syllabi I've ever come across address the problem of not engaging in discussion, some have also addressed vocal monopolization and regularly taking the class hostage, noting that excessive commenting could in fact negatively affect your grade.

Although I’ve found that most classes tend to have a higher contingent of the lethargic rather than engaged, I’m sure we’ve all experienced the student who simply adores the sound of his/her own voice and cannot help themselves from blessing everyone present with his/her opinions on everything, at any opportunity, every single week – relevant or not. As an instructor, I’ve found that not only do I have to conduct on-the-spot manipulations to goad the silent, but I also have to occasionally tame the domineering. And as a student, I've found that I often have to grind my teeth and just hope that the professor will politely quiet the more overbearing participants and repeat offenders.

But as a student in seminars -- in which supportive, yet challenging participation and mutual progress are far more important than showing off -- simply maintaining an awareness of these pitfalls (and the need to strike a balance between them) has helped me immensely. Whereas I naturally err to the side of the super-engaged, I’m very cognizant that there are in fact other students present and that my voice isn't the only one in the room. And even if I have the tenacity to think that my ideas are brilliant, I can also recognize that they don’t need to be spouted at every single session. Instead, I've found it to be a good practice to focus my own comments on other people’s observations as a method by which to prompt them to delve further. Essentially, my participation now has less to do with seeking ways to make my own voice heard, and more to do with finding ways to amplify the voices and ideas of others or furthering the discussion's direction. By doing so, people seem to take a genuine interest in what ideas I might actually have to offer. Not to be all hippie-monkish or faux-zen or anything, but I do find the practice of self-restraint in these situations beneficial to keeping my (potentially volatile) academic ego in check.

In addition, I’ve been fortunate to be a part of several workshop style seminars that have allowed me to focus on the most productive methods of in-class critique. And once more, they call for a very specific kind of self-restraint and diplomatic approach in which any criticism should be presented as further questions or devil’s advocate style goading. My goal, as a fellow student and colleague (whether or not deep down I think I’m somehow better than or less than those around me -- another balance that needs to be closely monitored) is to make my criticism so transparent that nobody would even recognize it as criticism. And as the OP has discovered (in what sounds like a very unfortunate way), roasting somebody or tearing apart their work in front of others does nothing but stoke one’s already engorged ego, and such destructive behavior simply has no use in a place of learning. These, however, are all things that I’ve learned over time through repeated trials and practice, and I'm sure that I'll be continually tweaking my "style."

Interestingly, academics do tend to pull these kind of ego inflating stunts on one another (and sometimes their students) publicly trashing fellow academic's work in journals and whatnot -- often without mercy. But to a degree, their actions can be understood (yet not forgiven) in that many of them have never set foot outside of their academic bubble and haven't experienced much in the way of 'normal' human interactions that one might find say in an office or communal environment where egos play a lesser role. (Trust me, I've been on committees; I've seen it firsthand.) Furthermore, I've also witnessed a professor (and a very famous author who shall remain nameless) literally tear up a student's work in front of the whole class. Now the only thing productive about this sort of behavior is that the author may have been able to feel momentarily superior, albeit at the expense of the student who undoubtedly won't be forgetting that particularly dark moment anytime soon. In other words, diplomatic and thoughtful approaches to critiquing anything in a place of learning is one of the key components, not just of being a good, effective teacher -- but also a good, effective fellow student.

Again, and to lift the OP’s term, I personally lean toward the 'aggressively' engaged side; but I’ve found that an attenuation of that approach is so much more productive for everyone involved, and it allows me a further level of empathetic insight that I probably wouldn’t have access to were I to remain under the illusion that every single one of my supposedly brilliant thoughts should be broadcast to all. Showing some humility in the classroom is a big big deal for me and speaks volumes about a person, but I've found it's something that I have to practice and keep continuously working at.

Hoping this doesn't sound all preachy or domineering, as that would undermine my whole approach. But just as I try to practice in the classroom, I've been watching these responses and holding off from throwing my $0.02 out there until I got a satisfactory idea of where the conversation was headed. For better or for worse, I find myself tightly wound regarding this topic.

Edited August 23, 2011 by truckbasket

[truckbasket]

I especially have little tolerance for those who haven't read assignments.

I totally feel the same way, but one thing I've found to combat this is to quit worrying about what other people are doing or not doing and just focus on what I, myself, should be doing. It's really none of my business how others do (or don't do) their work.

I will, say, though, that structure, word choice, and use of quotes is crucial to the success of any paper - abuse/misuse of any of these can dramatically alter the message of the paper - and students at the university level should know their function and use.

Again, this is true. But once more, the best way to combat this is to make sure that your own diction is solid and stop worrying about other people's. Focus on their content, and if the writing is unclear due to structural problems, ask them to clarify what they are trying to convey -- it's often much clearer when spoken. If egregious structural errors are a serious problem, the professor will address them personally outside of class. Plus, there can be other reasons for such problems in a student's work that you're not privy to (such as learning difficulties etc). While students at the university level should know their function and use, some don't for a variety of reasons and it's important to remember that.

There can be any number of interpretations and people should learn how to formulate and discuss their ideas.

Be careful as there may be several people in your classes thinking the exact same thing about you. Not everybody articulates or writes in the same manner or at the same level. In fact, one of the most important things to consider as a teacher is student diversity -- not just for recognizable characteristics, but the way that students learn and respond in very different ways.

Like bdon19 stated on p.1, I hope this doesn't seem like an attack as I'm sure you're genuinely trying to be helpful (you wouldn't be here otherwise), but trying to be mindful that not everybody thinks / acts / writes in the way that you do allows you to be more open minded and effectual as a fellow student and, eventually, a teacher.

[dimanche0829]

I totally feel the same way, but one thing I've found to combat this is to quit worrying about what other people are doing or not doing and just focus on what I, myself, should be doing. It's really none of my business how others do (or don't do) their work.

I mostly agree and have never verbally announced my feelings about the issue (recognizing that there may be mitigating circumstances beyond a student's control that account for the lapse in assignment completion), but it is difficult to avoid worrying about others' non-participation in a class discussion when it reaches the point of disrupting a class discussion. I have been in more than one class where the majority of students consistently and, in some cases proudly, fail to complete class assignments - something that becomes obvious to the professor, who then spends 20 minutes of class time lecturing us on the importance of reading. This is where my patience runs low...quietly low.

Be careful as there may be several people in your classes thinking the exact same thing about you. Not everybody articulates or writes in the same manner or at the same level. In fact, one of the most important things to consider as a teacher is student diversity -- not just for recognizable characteristics, but the way that students learn and respond in very different ways.

I'm not sure you read my statement in its intended context. I wrote the statement in response to another poster, to indicate why I think discussion-based courses are more productive than lecture-based - meaning: because there are so many possible interpretations, and to help students develop an ability to formulate/support their ideas (which I personally believe is incredibly important), I don't find lecture-based courses to be particularly effective. I recognize, of course, that I am in the same boat as everyone else and, therefore, must also strive to develop my own communication skills.

I certainly appreciate your feedback and recognize that there will always be room for personal growth and development; however, I was hoping to keep this topic on track with learning more about everyone's class style rather than an open critique and analysis of my own personal style. Part of the reason why I shared my initial story was to demonstrate that an overly aggressive demeanor can create negative consequences. It's something that happened quite a long time ago, though, and I have since continued to make strides to be more accomodating and constructive toward my peers.

Edited August 23, 2011 by dimanche0829

[anachronistic]

Well, I usually intend to speak up at least once during a class period. I'll comment if I truly think that my contribution is worthwhile. I do make an effort to participate, but I hate to add further superfluous posturing. I do not mind openly disagreeing with other students, but I'm not interested in engaging in a lengthy debate. I had a few 'debates' with professors as an undergrad, but these were few and far between. I'm very non-confrontational in general, but I can be a bit blunt, therefore I'm usually considerate of my cohort's feelings.

My question is: Do professors ever look down upon more reticent students?