Utsa Mukherjee
Within the course ‘Introduction to Sociology’ I did a seminar on gender. One of the challenges of doing an everyday topic like gender in a sociology classroom is that students bring with them certain pre-conceived notions. As a preparation for the seminar, students had done their theoretical reading on how gender is a social construct and on the difference between sex and gender. But I wanted to make these theoretical ideas more relatable and lucid. Moreover, I believe in critical pedagogy and found discussions on gender to a good platform to make my students aware of gender inequalities and make them pay attention to questions of power and representation.
After concluding some initial discussion on the theoretical contents, I played a video of the drag queen Panti Bliss’s short speech at the Abbey Theatre. In that 10-minutes speech, Bliss shares personal anecdotes of abuses in public spaces and how it relates to Bliss’ gender performance. The anecdotes and the general thrust of that speech gave real-life examples of what everyday gender performance entails and the ways in which the heteropatriarchal order retaliates when someone subverts those norms. As the video was playing, I went to the end of the classroom and watched the reaction of my students, who were all watching it with rapt attention. That video and its human appeal was able to engage with the students and teach them more about ‘sociology of gender’ than abstract ideas could.
I am committed to ‘critical pedagogy’ that draws on the work of the Brazilian educator Paulo Freire (1970). It can be broadly understood as pedagogic practices that aim to affect positive social change (Fobes and Kaufman, 2008). With forms of gender discrimination and violence around the world, there is a dire need to affect positive social change in that respect, and learning ‘sociology of gender’ cannot be disentangled from that larger process. Using the first-hand narrative of Panti Bliss, who epitomises gender fluidity, opens up new pathways in my classroom to engage with different aspects of gender and sexuality. Students were able to see the real-life implications of the things they were studying and some of them even shared their own anecdotes and ideas.
Fobes, C. and Kaufman, P. (2008) ‘Critical Pedagogy in the Sociology Classroom: Challenges and Concerns. Teaching Sociology, 36(1), pp.26-33.
Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Marie Steinbrecher
I am teaching the English legal system to first year bachelor students in Law. One of the core skills for Law students is speaking fluently. It is important that students know as early as possible how to conduct client interviews that not only help them to get all necessary information about the case, but also assure the client of the lawyer’s professionalism and competence. To this end, fluent speech is fundamental. According to Suryani, roleplay significantly improves students’ ability to speak fluently.
I thus used roleplay in several seminars to teach students interview and speaking skills. Prior to that, they had to learn the ethical code for solicitors in the UK. They then had to make lists of the points that they need to talk about as solicitor and the aspects they need to ask questions about. In the roleplay seminars, students first watched one or two short videos. These were mostly ironic, such as from The Office or Friends, in order to break the ice and familiarise the students for instance with body language.
Afterwards, the students were divided into groups and received their cases. In some seminars, time was sufficient to swap cases, so that students had the opportunity to work with different scenarios and challenges. In all seminars, the student had to play the role of solicitor and client, thus orientating them to the different perspectives. This ensured that everybody was the solicitor during each seminar. At the end, students gave peer feedback.
Suryani, L. (2015) The effectiveness of roleplay in teaching speaking. Eltin Journal Volume 3(2).
Very interesting way of conducting roleplay in classroom, and it fits in so well with the topic. I do not use roleplay so often in my class, mostly because it’s time consuming but with a topic like this I would be tempted to use it more often. Utsa Mukherjee
I designed a seminar on ‘criminal law defences’ for law students - law, by its very nature, requires students to remember large volumes of information concerning cases, precedents and statutes. Early in the term I realised students were attending seminars with extensive notes but during discussion were unable to easily articulate/summarise answers. This made me consider to what extent students had synthesised, ‘understood and applied’ the areas of law covered, going beyond surface learning (Bloom et al 1956). I wanted to demonstrate that students could prepare for seminars in a way that allowed them to synthesise, interpret and organise information. Importantly, I wanted to make this different to traditional rota learning techniques used in law, whilst accounting for varied learning styles (see Fleming 1992).
Students were set pre-reading on criminal law defences together with four seminar questions. In the seminar students were allocated to tables, to work in groups of 4/5, each table had A3 card, colouring materials and relevant reading materials. Each student took an A3 sheet of card and split it into 4 sections and during the seminar dedicated each quarter to a seminar question, designing a mini revision card/poster. They could do this however they wished but the exercise required them to organise, evaluate and condense the material down to fit within the quarter. Once all 4 questions were completed students could cut the card into the 4 pieces and staple this together creating a mini revision booklet.
Allowing each student to create their own booklet ensured each designed it in a way that suited their learning style. The seminar also had the benefit of VLE materials (PowerPoint) for those requiring additional guidance, reading materials were provided and the opportunity to engage in group discussion was also encouraged – accounting for varied learning styles. In future seminars, it was evident that students had a better understanding of the areas and they had prepared excellent summaries to bring to class which assisted them with this. Student feedback noted that it helped them organised and learn material in an enjoyable way, advising they will now utilise this technique going forward.
Bibliography
Fleming, N. D. and Mills, C. (1992), Not Another Inventory, Rather a Catalyst for Reflection, To Improve the Academy, Vol. 11, 1992.
Bloom, B. S.; Engelhart, M. D.; Furst, E. J.; Hill, W. H.; Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company.
The ‘talking chips’ technique (Barkley et al., 2014) is something that I found quite useful when having a group discuss a topic that is controversial and that generates heated debate (e.g., capital punishment). The technique is similar to others that aim to improve group discussions and make students more aware of their communication style. It works well when the groups are not too big (e.g., 10 students); with bigger groups, you can simply organize students in subgroups. After choosing the topic and before starting the discussion, the teacher will give each student 3-5 pieces of something (e.g., candy; it can be any sort of small object that will serve as a token, but with candy they can eat it afterwards!). The rules are that each time a student participates they will have to put one of the tokens in the centre of the table, and once they finish all of them they will not be allowed to talk until everybody runs out of tokens as well and they can start over. This usually results in students thinking more about what they are going to argue, and “saving” their opportunities to take part in the discussion. It also helps when there are clashes among group participants or students that are domineering.
Implementing this technique in my discussions resulted in more participation from quieter students and helped domineering students to be more aware of their contribution. I tried it with master students of forensic psychology in another university during their introduction week, together with other similar activities to improve discussion skills. This one stood out as it was not too anxiety-provoking for shy students and the discussion was still engaging, but also more organized and equal in terms of participation. If you want to make students more aware of their discussion style, you can introduce it after a “normal” discussion and have them reflect on the different dynamics and how they felt.
Barkley, E. F., Cross, K. P., & Major, C. H. (2014). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Silvia Fraga Domínguez
I have not heard of this technique before, but I like it. Getting the balance right between quiet and active students can be challenging and it might not always be the right approach to prompt students directly.
Marie Steinbrecher