First Meeting: Rapport

Our first reading was "Establishing Rapport: Personal Interaction and Learning", by Neil Fleming. It can be found online at:
http://www.idea.ksu.edu/papers/Idea_Paper_39.pdf

What follows is a brief review of our discussion. The Almanack does not contain information on the practical details of teaching, and in graduate school, there is seldom discussion about effective teaching practices, so this series of meetings would like to fill in with some discussion on pedagogy.

Today’s discussion was about “rapport”, which means “establishing connection”, so it’s all about student interactions and dialogue. It is thought that the potential for that dialogue is helped when the teacher uses inclusive language, such as saying “we” or “us”, rather than “you”. The article had a good suggestion in recommending that students call on other students. We also thought that in group work, such as we do in our classes, students answer their own questions, and that is good for them, as it encourages students to take responsibility, rather than always looking to the teacher for answers and being too reliant.

How do we create rapport? We thought it’s good to try to establish rapport from the first day of class, especially in terms of learning names and majors. One participant even said that on the third or fourth class, it’s “Candy Day”, and if he doesn’t know the name, correct pronunciation of that name, or major of a student by then, that student gets candy! Another idea for creating rapport is, as the teacher, to make oneself available and accessible outside of class, as in responding to e-mails or talking after class. Getting to know students very well, and personalizing their educational experience as much as possible is beneficial.

How important is humour in the classroom? We decided that group laughter is good, as it creates community, but of course it needs to be handled sensitively. One participant mentioned how last semester she had two classes, and they were so different from each other. One laughed at everything she said, and the other did not. So she made a paper ball and tossed it over her shoulder, and whoever caught it had to speak. Then the students started to throw the ball around between themselves, and so called on each other. It was agreed that it can be nice for a teacher to stand back sometimes, and let students interact and exchange ideas.

What should we do if there is silence and no one wants to respond? If a teacher asks a question and no one answers, it is often uncomfortable for the teacher to be met with this silence, so the teacher provides the answer. But it is better if the teacher rephrases the question or waits a little longer, as maybe students just need some more time to find the answer.

What are some class activities which might generate enthusiastic response? One participant said her class was discussing Krakauer, so she set up a competition as to whether or not Candless was a fool. When students decide this for themselves, they get more out of the reading, than the teacher telling them. Another participant said she sometimes organizes discussion as if they are producing a TV show. Today, for example, the students were looking at two authors in the Environmental research course, so she split the class into each of the authors, and gave them some time to work in their pairs formulating ideas. Then they had to come up, one pair at a time, and be “on TV” answering questions as to the state of the environment. It was an “interactive TV program” as the audience could ask questions, as did the teacher, as the moderator of the show. We agreed that role playing is good, as the students are not themselves, but can take another point of view. They get to try on different ideas that they might not have agreed with before. Variations on this would include playing Devil’s Advocate, or holding mock trials about controversial issues that are being read. In fact, we think, all these things – role playing, debates, games – create the stage for exchange, and therefore rapport.

One participant wondered whether full participation might be unrealistic. Even though we, as teachers, would like all our students to be engaged, he asked whether enforced inclusion is right. Some students might be uncomfortable. Another responded that she starts her class with a “brain teaser”, such as “Define Happiness” and ask them all what they think as that loosens them up. Generally speaking, though, that’s where personalizing education is so important. We get to know the individual personalities of the students, and try to engage them on their own terms. That’s also where Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences is so true, since there are many different learning types, and also a wide variety of experiences that students bring into their learning.

What should we do about the student who monopolises discussion? One participant said one male student was always interrupting a female student when she spoke. She had to cut him off and tell him to let her finish. In general, with the students who talk a lot, she tells them that they are saying good things, so she is pointing this out in positive terms, but that they should let others have a chance to speak. Another idea is to take the dominant student aside and talk to him or her privately.

We realized that the reason some of us were talking about problem students is that they are the monkey wrench in establishing rapport. We wondered how to what extent the perceived rapport that the students experience affects teaching evaluations. There is no question on the evaluation sheet about rapport, but there is one on teaching effectiveness. A discussion ensued as to what teaching effectiveness means, and it was suggested that teaching effectiveness can be seen if we put on the syllabus what the goals of the course are, and then each student can see to what extent he or she has accomplished these goals. That would say something about the effectiveness of the teacher.