I was very interested in Brookfield's analysis of the architecture of a discussion. He indicated that exploring various points of view and debating them is an important skill to learn. This is something I have mixed feelings about, possibly because I grew up with parents immersed in the Marxist culture of the 1930s where "discussion" was used as a weapon (I was born in 1950, but they were still living in that culture, the only difference being that the locus of these discussions - thanks to Senator McCarthy - had shifted from meeting halls to dinner parties.) I definitely believe that my parents and their friends abused the whole concept of discussing. They would try to entrap people into saying something "stupid" and then skewer them with an argument. My mother carried her love of this sort of discussion into stores, restaurants, the back seats of taxis, anywhere where someone would listen. I learned early on that most conversations between people are exactly that. Conversations. If someone says they liked a movie that's really all they're saying. They don't expect to be grilled about it. It's just pleasant afternoon chatter.
I spent most of my life trying to avoid controversial topics. I have political points of view but rarely talk about them. I'd rather talk about opera, pets, or fashion.
So getting back to Brookfield, I wonder if knowing how to engage in these sorts of discussions is a skill everyone really needs. Certainly if you're going to be a lawyer or if you're going to teach a subject like history or political science. But to work in most corporate environments I would say getting into this mode could be a liability. Usually people want you to agree with them, or if you're going to present an opposing point of view, to sneak it in somehow so they don't notice. And unless you're the CEO, it's also a good idea to know when to cede victory.
So my question is: Do you think it's essential for students to engage in these kinds of (heated) discussions, or should the environment in the classroom be more live and let live?
As someone who hates confrontation, if I had my way I would vote for any option that would help me avoid conflict (but that's not the sole reason for my opinion that this type of discussion is not critical for growth in the classroom). I think some people really enjoy heated discussion, but I don't know that it always leads to the expansion of students' ideas or opinions. Some people just like hearing themselves speak, or place a higher priority on "winning" the argument than learning from those types of discussions. If the instructor is comfortable guiding the discussion so it does not devolve into something that isn't beneficial, it can be productive and should be welcome in the classroom. However, I think a lack of heated debate is not a deficiency that necessarily needs to be addressed.
ReplyDeleteYou put it perfectly.
ReplyDelete