PUBLISHED:BY THE NATIONAL INSTIFUTE:FOR STAFF AND ORGANIZATIONAL ns aters a. iF Oa ade ao ats re
WITH SUPPORT FROM THE W. K. KELLOGG FOUNDATION AND THE SID W. RICHARDSON FOUNDATION

VOLUME XI, NUMBER 27

6 INNOVATION ABSTRACTS

Improving Classroom Communication

The teacher’s life, however fulfilled, however stimu-
lating, has days R. J. Yeatman must have been thinking
about when he wrote, “For every person wanting to
teach, there are at least 30 not wishing to be taught.”
Students sometimes fall asleep in class, read the campus
newspaper instead of the lecture outline, talk when they
should be quiet, refuse to speak up when they should,
and respond to the instructor’s most profound ideas
with, “Is this going to be on the test?”

When the worst of times invade the best of times, or
when the mysterious slump pervades days or weeks of
classroom interaction, we tend to oversimplify causes.
It’s either our fault or it’s the students’ fault; and if
everyone would only try harder, things would be
perfect. In our more lucid moments, we acknowledge

@. complex of factors which may be operating in

ncert to sabotage course objectives, realizing that a
bad day might be the consequence of a particularly
difficult course topic, the aftermath of a treacherous
exam, the morning after spring break, rampant flu
virus, or the malfunctioning air conditioning. Still, the
evaluation of our teaching effectiveness often proceeds
in a more or less random fashion with little in the way
of systematic examination on making weak classroom
communication better or successful interaction even
more effective.

Elements of Proof

One way of scrutinizing communication effectiveness
is to think of classroom presentation as a collection of
“proofs.” Each of us has available three types of proof
to use in persuading students to understand, accept,
and/or act on the ideas we present. This three-part
conception of the speaker's potential means of persua-
sion was detailed in Aristotle’s The Art of Rhetoric and
remains applicable these many centuries later. Perhaps
its greatest merit lies in acknowledging the sometimes
undervalued role played by the second and third
elements of proof.

Logos, the first type of proof, consists of logical
reasoning backed up by factual/expert opinion evi-

nce. When we think of the substance of a lecture or

iscussion topic, we are most likely thinking of logos.

A logical unit of proof contains three elements: some-
thing claimed or asserted, something to back up this
claim, and something in the middle to provide the
inferential link between the claim and the evidence—
i.e., the reasoning. Although there are cases in which
the reasoning may be self-evident and not explicitly
stated, the evidence should be presented along with the
claim. Otherwise, of course, what we have is just an
assertion or what someone once called “a vagrant
opinion with no visible means of support.”

This is an area to consider carefully, if only because
of the complacency we develop over time about our
subject matter. When a course concept has been cov-
ered again and again over a span of many years, the
temptation to regard it as common knowledge grows.

It is so firmly embedded in our own academic reper-
toire that we lose sight of the student for whom the idea
is brand new and may be received as something fresh
and exciting or something vague and unsubstantiated.

Pathos, or “emotional” proofs, form the second
element of proof. Emotion seems more traditionally
viewed as an irrelevance, even an impediment to
instruction, rather than the benefit it actually is. Some
of us do a disservice to ourselves and our students by
submerging emotion so effectively in the name of
scholarship and dignity that we imbue our subjects with
sterility. We are tco afraid to laugh, to show unhappi-
ness, to exult in the frequently exciting aspects of our
work—to have fun in the classroom. “Star Trek’s” Mr.
Spock, with his calculating Vulcan side tempered by his
more vulnerable earthling side, is an instructive ex-
ample of the power of emotion as well as logic in
compelling interest and acceptance.

Ethos is the third clement of proof. The credibility of
the speaker held in the minds of the listeners is the most
powerful of the three types of proof we use to advance
our ideas. It is, ironically, the least credited of the three
in terms of its power to attract or repel student interests.
No matter how brilliantly a class session may be
structured and no matter how much the instructor
chews on the scenery while presenting it, if the person
expressing the ideas is regarded as incompetent,
untrustworthy, and insincere, the message will not get

 

‘a

AY

  

EDB 348, Austin, Texas 78712

THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR STAFF AND ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (NISOD)
Community College Leadership Program, The University of Texas at Austin