Respectful dialogue in classrooms

Teachers must anticipate problems and be prepared to diffuse them quickly, writes John J Kennedy

Despite years of teaching experience, the classroom is invariably a challenging space for teachers. It is more so at the university level because students at this stage often exhibit streaks of rebellion, defiance and non-conformism. These are not negative traits. But they require appropriate guidance to convert them into productive and beneficial outcomes.

Towards this end, debates and discussions in the classroom must be encouraged, but at the same time, they cannot be allowed to become hostile and unhealthy quarrels. The teacher’s role here is extremely crucial.

The scope for disagreements is more in the arts, humanities and social sciences streams because one of the fundamental principles in these disciplines is the encouragement and promotion of multiple views and perspectives. The ability to view the world with myriad lenses and connect the disjointed, disparate, or even invisible dots are essential skills to excel in these domains. The claim that the whole world is their text is not farfetched.

Against this backdrop, teachers must learn to deal with occasions of arguments and disputes amicably, to enable mutually agreeable solutions, given that disagreement is integral to students’ learning. Students must be made aware that conflicts are natural and inevitable.

In addition, teachers must develop the required knowledge and skills to help students engage in respectful dialogue, even around contentious and sensitive topics. Creating and sustaining an atmosphere where thoughtful discord is viewed as a virtue may be arduous to establish but worthwhile.

Through these classroom contexts students learn to think critically and navigate conflict adroitly, persuasively express their viewpoints, build meaningful relationships with people with differing views, and shape their futures.

Ground rules to follow

Theoretically, all this may sound simple and easily achievable. In effect, it is not so. Hence, for practical realisation of these goals, here’s a list of ground rules to help educators for hassle-free navigation.

The first rule concerns using correct language while articulating one’s thoughts in an open forum such as the classroom. Is the language formal and appropriate for the classroom context? Is the vocabulary unambiguous and the tone respectful?

Sometimes, one wrong word could sabotage the whole exercise and stifle the atmosphere. We must remember that the type of words we use in our discussions affect and influence how they are received. While disagreement is a virtue, disagreeability should be shunned at all costs. By keeping away personal references, a cordial environment can be created.

Secondly, educators must strive to provide a classroom environment of trust rooted in empathy for learners to freely express their views with confidence, knowing they will be respected and valued regardless of the outcome of the debate. If not, students may refrain from expressing their opinions and engage in self-censorship to avoid conflict or trouble.

Alternatively, they may readily agree with one another to prevent friction. Both approaches do not help in learning. The guiding principle behind the discussions, we must remember, is ‘seek to understand’ and not ‘fight to dominate.’

Thirdly, the choice of topics for discussion could play a significant role in how discussions take shape. Discussing complex issues or analysing cases where obvious solutions are unavailable may be the right strategy. In such situations, because easy answers are hard to come by, students will be compelled to question and challenge their beliefs and ideas. Critical thinking, often considered an essential 21st-century skill, can be put to good use here.

Fourthly, to encourage diffident students who, despite all the coaxing, may still not open up, should be allowed to share their ideas anonymously, perhaps through a writing exercise. This helps educators acknowledge and appreciate the different types of learners inhabiting the classroom space. Multiple intelligences are recognised. Not all students may be comfortable with oral communication. For those who are not, more avenues are created.

Lastly, emotions can run high despite the teachers’ best intentions and meticulous preparations, and a volatile situation may emerge. Teachers must anticipate such problems and be prepared to diffuse them quickly. The use of the self-regulation method is recommended for the purpose. Teachers could use pause as a strategy and pose reflective questions about what caused the problem and how it could be resolved amicably using logic and reason, keeping emotions aside.

Structured and teacher-facilitated dialogue embedded in respect is a useful tool for long-lasting student development. When diverse opinions are presented, enough room to question one’s assumptions and core beliefs is enabled, allowing students to become critical and compassionate thinkers. Perhaps, in the profoundly polarised post-truth world we occupy, instilling the value of respect, empathy, and compassion in students is a supreme duty of all teachers.

(The writer is Professor and Dean at CHRIST University, Bengaluru).