Bobbi Gentry is Associate Professor of Political Science at Bridgewater College and a youth voting scholar. Gentry is the author of, Why Youth Vote: Identity, Inspirational Leaders, and Independence and coedited Internships in Political Science. Her current work investigates youth identity development and intersectional identities and civic engagement through the lifetime.
Image Credit: Kirsten Pittman
Have you ever been bored by your class discussions? Did you ask a question and only one student would answer, resulting in the same give-and-take again and again? When I shifted my thinking about how I could engage more students in my class discussions, I took myself out of the center.
I wanted more engagement from more students and wanted students to learn from each other. I also wanted students to take ownership of what they were learning. In my rethinking, I changed my discussion structure and the text that I was using. If I wanted engagement, then I needed a structure in which students engaged with one another without fear of being wrong, asking questions, or learning from each other. I also needed a text that was engaging with stories, data, and relevant issues that matter to students.
Instead of the common give-and-take between the professor and a few students during class discussions, I shifted to a fishbowl discussion format. The room setup changes: there are five chairs in the middle of the room (the fish) and a big circle of chairs around the room (the bowl). There is always one seat open in the center so that students can hop into the conversation at any time. When one student fills the last seat, another student exits the center. With this discussion model, I saw participation between 80% and 90% of my class, whereas before I had only 10% participating. In these fishbowl discussions, students are encouraged to bring their thoughts, questions, and assessments of the material to class.
Students need to do the reading to be able to participate, and more students do the reading because they do not want to be judged by their peers. They are able to be curious about the material and ask questions of each other, which is less intimidating than asking the professor. Students can also bring to the class what they found interesting in the text and share it with others. By sharing, my students not only better understand the material, but they also discuss the consequences of the knowledge gained and apply this knowledge to other contexts.
For grading, I focus on student quality, such as directing the conversation, getting other students to think, or asking a substantial question. Students receive feedback throughout the semester on their participation grade, which can improve or decline throughout the semester. At the end of the fishbowl, I address any questions students brought up or areas of confusion or misunderstanding and give students a chance to ask me questions.
Classes between 15 and 35 work well for this activity, and smaller classes can utilize the think, pair, share model. A fishbowl discussion can also be done in an online learning environment where students are discussing synchronously. Students who are in the “center” turn on their cameras and discuss while others turn off their cameras; the host hides those with cameras turned off.
While the fishbowl format increased class participation, we know not all students like speaking up in class. I remember calling on a high-performing student to share their answer and they physically shook until I called on someone else; the attention was too much. The student had knowledge to share, but being the center of attention in class was not a successful way for that student to engage. Luckily, there are other ways to engage students in this increasingly digital environment. I post thinking questions for students such as “What is an interesting claim someone has made about the Constitution? Is it true?” This allows students to recognize their own knowledge and bring in their own story. Students then share and comment on each other’s posts, which allows us to build an online community and allows everyone to participate. This option brings more opportunities for student engagement with other students and with the material.
The text also matters. I use American Politics: A Field Guide because it grabs students’ attention and builds skills necessary for students to engage in the classroom and in their democracy. The stories at the beginning of each chapter capture the students’ attention and keep them engaged throughout the entire reading. In my classes, students get more out of the class when we balance information with skill-based learning. Students of American politics need to know how to evaluate information, including understanding when they are being persuaded, when information is being manipulated, and when information is being excluded.
In my classes, I tell my students that I will improve their built-in BS detector. Engaging readings draw my students in and help them apply the skills they are learning in my class, such as information literacy and quantitative literacy. My students are better able to analyze data and arguments by the end of the semester because we practice with the readings. I’m able to use the ebook to project a section of the reading, and we discuss what information is provided, their questions, and interesting findings. Outside of class, students can choose to boost their participation grade by completing the skill exercises at the end of each reading, which balance skills and knowledge gained from the chapter. An example includes the discussion of the U.S. map on abortion regulation by state in the segment titled “Can Government Regulate my Sex Life?”
These are just a few ways that I have rethought about engaging students and have seen students ask more questions, cite the material, and practice skills that will help them be better and more engaged citizens of democracy.