METAPHILOSOPHY Vol. 22, No. 4, Octobcr 1991 0026-1068 $2.00

THE PHILOSOPHER AS TEACHER

ASKING QUESTIONS: WAYS TO PROMOTE (OR DESTROY) CLASS DISCUSSION

JOHN IMMERWAHR

Many philosophy instructors see class discussion as a desirable method of teaching.’ Educational research supports this by showing us that while lectures may be better for conveying information, class discussion promotes rocess-orientated goals such as problem solving and “critical thinking.”- But the goal of promoting class discussion can be as frustrating as it is desirable; the common rooms of Philosophy Departments echo with lamentations of failed class discussions: “My 9:30 class is great, I sneeze and five hands jump up with refutations. The 10:30 group are zombies. I suggested that we sterilize everyone with an IQ below 110 and no one said a word.”

rp

Praxis makes perfect In what follows I offer some schemes for understanding how class discussion works and does not work, and some rules that may help. Despite this dogmatic presentation of rules, my own view is that teaching is largely a matter of virtue-ethics rather than a question of following rules. My goal is not to legislate rules for discussion leaders but to sensitize some readers to the pressures and possibilities that exist in a college classroom.

To put it another way, the essay that follows offers techniques. But we all know that teaching is more than technique, and that technique exists within a broader context. If an instructor has nurtured a good environment in the classroom, virtually any technique will work. In a destructive context, any technique will fail.

Questions and Class Discussion

In the classroom, questions are the royal road to discussion. When students enter a classroom, their assumption is that the teacher holds

’ This paper was developed from workshops presented both at Villanova University and at the meeting of the American Association of Philosophy Teachers at the University of Indiana in August, 1990. 1 am deeply indebted to those who shaped my own thinking through their comments and observations. 1 am also indebted to Teresa Nance, Nancy Hensler, and Janice Kamrin for comments on earlier drafts.

* See Wilbert J. McKeachie, Teaching Tips (Lexington: D.C. Heath, 1986), chapter 5, for a discussion of some of the advantagcs of discussion-oriented teaching methods.

364

THE PHILOSOPHER AS TEACHER 365

the floor and has a right, whether exercised or not, to an uninterrupted monologue. There are only two gateways for students to enter the dialogue. One is by answering a question asked by the teacher; the other is by asking the teacher a question.

This contrasts with the world outside of the classroom, where questions are by no means the only path to discussion or even the primary one. Social conversation sometimes includes questions, but is often a dialogue where each party makes assertions. Even in related fields such as counselling, therapists are sometimes encouraged to avoid questions, and to enhance client talk and thoughtfulness by other means.3 But in the classroom, the question is sovereign.

Questioning is often a problematic interaction and evokes power relations where a person in authority interrogates an i n f e r i ~ r . ~ But the centrality of the question as a gateway to class discussion is invariably where we start as college teachers; too much has already been learned to bypass it. Questions are our main tool, but they bring with them certain baggage that needs to be understood.

Student-Teacher Questions

In most classrooms, teacher-generated questions far outnumber student-generated questions. One study of secondary schools found that teachers asked 80 questions per hour, while students asked only two questions per hour. Ironically, those who already know the answers ask all the questions. Those who are there to learn ask few. When we look at the process of a student asking a question, however, we begin to see why student questions are few and far between. (In discussing questions asked by students, I include many student comments or assertions, which are often phrased as questions. In the politics of the classroom, a student who wishes to say something will often phrase it as a question. Student comments are more likely to begin with “Do you think that . . .” than they are to begin with “I think that . . .”)

The following list gives an idea of some of the processes that a student goes through in deciding whether to ask a question and then asking it.

1. Identifying a need to ask or say something. 2. Deciding whether it is legitimate to ask the question. 3. Getting the teacher’s attention and receiving permission to ask the

4. Asking the question. 5. Dealing with the response to the question.

question.

’ J . T. Dillon, “The effect of questions in education and other enterprises,” Journal of Curriculum Studies, 1982, 14, 127-152.

Much of what I have to say about student generated questions is based on J . T. Dillon, Questioning and Teaching: A Manual of Practice (New York: Teacher’s College Press, 1988). The discussion of teacher queqtions is based more on my own thinking.

366 JOHN IMMERWAHR

Each of these areas is problematic in one way or another. 1. Identifying a need to know. Even the seemingly simple task of

identifying a need to ask or express something is far from easy. This task requires that a student stop focusing on what is being said and reflect upon his or her own needs. But as we all know, students often are rewarded most for paying attention to what the teacher says, rather than for struggling with their own doubts. To put it another way, the task of identifying a potential question or comment takes time and concentra- tion - especially in the discussion of a subject that is typically new and unfamiliar. The normal pace of a classroom does not give much room for either.

2. Deciding whether the question is legitimate. The classroom is a highly charged emotional climate. The students are typically very much concerned about what teachers, as authority figures, think of them. Students are equally or even more concerned about the attitudes of the other students in the classroom. It is to other students, after all, that most students look for companionship, intimacy, housing, and even career possibilities after graduation. A student who asks an inappropriate question in a classroom risks much, a student who does not ask a question at all risks little.

What are some of the risks in asking a question in class? A few are:

0 The question may reveal the ignorance and stupidity of the person who asks it because: 0 It has already been dealt with before but the questioner was not

paying attention. 0 The answer is too obvious; everyone else knows the answer.

0 The question may be out of phase with the events in the classroom; it might have been appropriate earlier, or will be appropriate later, but is inappropriate right now.

0 The question may take the instructor too far off the pre-determined path of the class discussion, thus generating a lot of talk on material that no one really needs to hear about.

0 The question may be too good. It will make the person who asked it look like a showoff, “brownoser,” or in some other way demonstrate that the student is too much interested in what is going on.

This list is surely incomplete. But if anything like this is at work, it is remarkable that we ever see an unsolicited student hand in a classroom.

3. Getting the teacher’s attention. In most classes, the question must wait until the teacher recognizes it. Frequently in a classroom a hand goes up but is not noticed at all, or is not noticed for a very long time. The professor may be too buried in the notes, looking at the board, or just not recognize the question. I once had occasion to observe a class where a blind instructor was giving a guest lecture. Some of the students had taken other courses from this lecturer. but most assumed that the

THE PHILOSOPHER AS TEACHER 367

lecturer was sighted. (The visitor was escorted in an unobtrusive way into the room, gave excellent eye contact, and there were no obvious cues of visuai impairment.) Several students raised their hands at various times; their hands were ignored and they then politely lowered them. No one seemed to find anything unusual in the instructor’s refusal to recognize these students. (It is an interesting commentary that most students can’t tell a blind professor from a sighted one by the ability to recognize student hands). What finally made everyone sit up was when a few of the lecturer’s former students called out their questions without waiting for recognition. (This is normal practice in the blind professor’s classes). This behaviour shocked, surprised, and puzzled the students. Students interrupting a conversation without recognition was clearly a very unusual experience for them. One could watch a gradual understanding of the situation develop and be communicated around the room as students began to mouth the word ‘‘blirtd” to each other or touch their eyes.

Even a student who is recognized may not be dealt with immediately. Perhaps another student is dealt with first, or perhaps it takes a while for the teacher to see the hand, or the teacher asks the student to hold the question for a minute. While this is happening, of course, the meter is ticking. With each passing second the doubt may grow in the questioner’s mind as to whether the question is still in phase, or even whether it was a legitimate comment or question after all.

4. Asking the question. Students frequently have trouble formulating exactly what it is that they need to know or want to say. As the psychologists say, the presenting problem is not always the real problem. Often enough, the question is asked in a timid voice so that many people in the class do not hear it.

5. The teacher’s response. Since the question or comment is almost always directed at the teacher the real risks start after the question has been asked. The response of the teacher will determine whether that student will ask another question (even in another class), and also will have an impact on others who have not asked a question. Often the teacher’s response is unpredictable.

One possibility is that the question will be recognized by the teacher as a legitimate question, and dealt with in a way that helps both the asker and the other students in the class. Such a reaction empowers the student and encourages others to have a try. On the other hand, other reactions from the teacher are at least possible:

0 The question may not be answered. In one way or another, the question can be ignored or passed over or answered in an unhelpful way. Frequently the instructor responds, but not to the question that was asked or intended. The response generated may be given sincerely, but may not help the asker. From the student’s point of view, much was risked and little was gained.

368 JOHN TMMERWAHR

0 The question may be penalized. The instructor may penalize the student in one way or another. Here are some familiar but penalizing responses, which validate the fears that the student had about asking the question in the first place:

“We’ll get to that later” “Good question, but . . .” “As I said earlier . . .”

But even if the question is well placed and regarded by the instructor as helpful and appropriate, the risks are not over. Suppose the response of the teacher is to begin an interrogation of the person who asked. “Interesting question, and here is an even harder question for you to try to answer.” The subtle message here is something like this: “You may not have looked dumb for asking this question, but you may look dumb in trying to answer the questions that I will throw at you now.”

To put it another way, asking even a “good” question wakes the sleeping giant, and directs the attention of the teacher toward the questioner. As even those of us who were outstanding students remember, however, sometimes it is safer to be in the shadows than in the full glare of the teacher’s attention.

Approaches

What if anything can be done to encourage unsolicited questions and comments from students? There are at least two areas where teachers can change their practice to increase the opportunity for student- generated questions and comments.

1. Creating space. The most obvious strategy is to create space for student questions. If we act as though we are in a hurry, and have more information than can be crammed in a 50 minute class, students may be much too polite to interrupt us. Giving an uninterrupted monologue for 48 minutes and ending with “Any questions”, may also not create the necessary space. Many students worry that if questions are asked at the end of class, it is all too likely that the instructor will keep the class overtime. If questions are not asked at the end of class, there is always the remote chance that the instructor may dismiss the class early.

Silence. As a beginning German student I was startled by the fact that German has a verb, schweigen, meaning “to be quiet.” For the first time it occurred to me that not saying something could be a positive action. As teachers we need to learn not to be afraid of silence. One of the best techniques for generating student responses is to wait for them. More and more I find myself saying things like, “OK, just take a minute and think about this, to see what comments or questions you have in mind.”

Structures. There are many possible ways to create structures where students can formulate questions and comments. We can assign students to bring in a question, or divide them up into small groups and ask them

THE PHILOSOPHER AS TEACHER 369

to brainstorm questions or comments. The techniques vary but the goal is the same: to give students the time and concentration to develop their thoughts, and to lower the fears that prevent them from expressing themselves.

2. Rewarding questioners. The greatest opportunities are captured or lost in our responses to a student question. Obviously if we punish the student for asking the question we will hear fewer questions in the future. There are many ways to reward questions:

Listening. The most obvious reward is to make it clear that we have really heard the question. One way to do this is to repeat and rephrase the question, and to ask the student if we have correctly understood it. Other techniques are to write it on the board, mention it in later classes, or thank the student. Two anecdotes have helped me:

0 I once had a relative who returned to college after raising her children. As anyone who has tried this can imagine, she was even more terrified than the typical undergraduate. She told me once about her introductory sociology class, when, for the first time, she asked a question in a college class. The teacher dealt with it in a helpful way, but also caught up with her after class and said, “Thank you for bringing up that question in class. It was really helpful and I appreciate the perspective you bring.” My relative eventually became an articulate participant in class discussion, and also majored in sociology.

0 In Gregory Vlastos’ graduate seminars on Greek philosophy, Vlastos would frequently distribute notes on the points raised in the previous class. These handouts were saved by graduate students and under- graduate majors and circulated in samisdat form. They were, as one might expect, brilliant, clear, and extremely helpful. What impressed me most about them, however, was that the notes frequently referred to individual graduate students by name and commented on their comments and questions. In retrospect it strikes me as significant that this was one of the few times in my education that I had ever heard a professor refer back to something a student had said. Living the Questions. In his Letters to a Young Poet, Rilke draws a

distinction between the value of a question and its answer:

T want to beg you as much as I can . . . to be patient toward all that is unsolved in your heart and to try to love the questions themselves . . . Do not now seek answers which cannot be given you because you would not be able to live them. And the point is to live everything. Live the questions now. Perhaps you will then gradually, without noticing it, live along some distant day into the answer.’

Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet, (Norton, 1954, pp. 18-19).

310 JOHN TMMERWAHR

Oddly enough, sometimes the most empowering thing we can do with a student question is not to answer it, or not to answer it immediately. In a sense, the premature response to a question can diminish the question. Sometimes we need to reward the question itself.

As J. T. Dillon reminds us, in many of our educational institutions, perplexity is not something that is encouraged:

In most classrooms the norm is placid, unruffled procession through the subject matter. Perplexity is deliberately skirted as an undue disturbance to the students’ rightful state of mind.6

Valuing questions for their own sake credentializes perplexity and puzzlement. After all, as Aristotle reminds us, “philosophy begins in wonder. ”

Again, the techniques for rewarding questions themselves are many. We can write the questions on the board or comment on them as questions; we can discuss their importance as questions. Instead of trying to answer a question we may try to share our own puzzlement about similar questions. If a question takes the class ahead, an instructor may well say, “We will get to that later.” But then when the class does reach that point the instructor might refer back, “Now we are finally ready to look at the question asked several days ago.”

Of course, many questions and comments do require a direct response from us as teachers, and we need to struggle constantly to make sure that our responses are on target. The only technique I am aware of for doing this is to ask for feedback from the students. One teacher at my institution always seems to ask two questions: “Do I understand your question?” and “Did I respond to what you asked?” Students are sometimes too polite to answer honestly, but when they do the feedback can be helpful.

Student monopolizers. A separate problem, which I do not propose to deal with at length here, is what to do with the occasional student who is too talkative, and who disrupts the flow of the class and irritates everyone else. Aggressively tromping down on this student can help, but also sends out a message to other students. Some teachers find that they have success by taking this student aside and saying, “You seem to be much more articulate than the others in the class. I really appreciate it, but everybody else is sitting back to let you do the work. I’d like to try an experiment for a few weeks. I’d like you to say nothing in class at all, and meet with me once a week to cover the topics that interest you. Let’s see what effect this has on the rest of the group.”’

Dillon, Questioning and Teaching, p. 31. ’ For other hints on dealing with monopolizers see McKeachie, Teaching Tips, p . 37.

THE PHILOSOPHER AS TEACHER 37 1

Teacher-Student Questions The major category of questions in the classroom are those that we as teachers direct to our students. Here, as in the reverse, the emotional pressures in the classroom are high, and we can ask questions that either cut through those pressures or make them more severe. Some of the discussions of questions in the literature focus on the form of the question; several different classification schemes have been proposed for describing questions.’ My own thinking has concentrated less on the form of the question than on other aspects, such as: 0 Address. To whom is the question directed? 0 Range. How many different correct answers are there for the

0 Time. How much time is permitted between when the question is

0 Reaction. What happens after the question has been answered? As in the case of student-generated questions, how these factors play out can make a big difference.

1. Address: To Whom is the Question Directed? Most questions are directed in some way. Rhetorical questions are directed to no one at all (although students sometimes try to answer them anyway). Other questions are directed to the entire class, with the invitation for one or more students to respond. Questions can also be directed to a specific individual, or even to a subgroup. An example of a subgroup question might be: “Several of you said that you support this position: what are some reasons for doing so?”

2. Range: How many possible answers are permitted? In most cases a question implies some constraints on the permitted answers or answers. One of the most interesting variables is the number of possible answers to a question. Some questions have only one possible answer: “In which dialogue does Plato interrogate the slave boy?” Other questions have an infinite number of acceptable answers: “How do you feel about this?” This distinction overlaps another interesting distinction, namely whether the teacher knows the answer to the question that he/she has asked. Usually, if the range of acceptable answers is low, the teacher knows most of them in advance. If the range

questions?

asked and when the answer must be given?

See Thomas Kasulis “Questioning,” in The Art and Craft of Teaching (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1982), pp. 38-48. See also R. P. Riegle “Classifying Classroom Questions,” in K. A . Strike, ed. Philosophy of Education, 1976 (Urbana Illinois: Philosophy of Education Society, 1976), or for a different classification based on R . S. Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Pamela J . Cooper, Speech Communication for the Classroom Teacher (Scottsdale, Arizona: Gorsuch Scarisbrick, Publishers, 1988 [Third Edition]), pp. 127-128.

372 JOHN IMMERWAHR

is high, the teacher may generate responses that he/she has not anticipated.

Address and Range. Taking these two factors together gives us a matrix with four different extremes (see chart below). Each of these extremes has its distinctive advantages and disadvantages in the classroom setting.

a. Toss-up questions. A regular feature of the old TV show, College Bowl, was the “20 point toss-up,” where the game show hosts presented a question with a specific answer and threw it out to see who could answer it first. We use toss-up questions, then, when we address a question with a narrow range of answers to the entire class and then wait to see who responds. (For example, a teacher may ask the entire class: “HOW does the utilitarian define moral rightness?”) In many class- rooms, this is the most frequently asked kind of question.

I have observed classes where teachers used toss-ups to start excellent class discussions. With inexperienced teachers, however, toss-ups sometimes cause problems. The politics of the toss-up are that the teacher knows the right answer and says to the students, “Who can guess what I am thinking?” Toss-ups also put a lot of pressure on students. The student who tries to answer the toss-up has many chances of losing, and relatively few chances at winning. Some of the more obvious ways to lose:

The question will be too easy. Most students dislike answering a question which they perceive as too easy. Some students find easy questions offensive or manipulative, other students are concerned that they may be perceived as “brownnosers” if they answer easy questions.

0 The question may be too hard. Alternatively, the question may be too difficult. The student may only think that he/she knows the right answer. As we philosophers recognize, there is a big difference between knowing the answer and knowing that we know, If the student gets the wrong answer, the student looks stupid in front of both teacher and, even more disastrously, fellow students.

Sometimes teachers seem to be using toss-up questions as a way of getting students to give the lecture. As teachers we already know what we want to hear, but for some reason we want to hear the students say it for us. Sitting in a classroom where a teacher is using toss-ups can be nerve-wracking. The teacher asks the question and there is an embarrassing silence while everyone hopes that someone else will take the risk. Usually a toss-up question will be answered with another question, where the student is implicitly saying “Did I guess right?” A typical exhange:

Teacher: The plague originated in Italian port cities in the 14th century.

THE PHILOSOPHER AS TEACHER 373

What else was going on in those cities then? Student: Trade?

The toss-up is sometimes mistakenly thought of as teaching by the Socratic method. This seems to me incorrect. In Plato’s texts, Socrates rarely if ever uses toss-up questions. Invariably Socratic questions are directed at an individual person, so in my terminology they are “hot- seats” (see below). Law schools are probably more accurate in describing their own method as “Socratic,” since the classic law school methodology directs a single-answer question to a specific individual.

b. Hot-seat Questions: With the hot-seat question, a particular student is asked a question with a single answer which the teacher already knows. In effect, a hot-seat question subjects the student to a mini oral-exam in front of the entire class.

Hot-seat questions are aggressive and intrusive, and many philosophy teachers avoid them. But in some situations hot-seat questions are more effective than toss-ups. Toss-ups invite students to skimp on prepara- tion: if one does not know the answer one can always be a free rider and let some other student take the risks. Hot-seats, by contrast, can serve as a motivator, since if students expect that they may be interrogated in class, they are more likely to prepare the assignment. Unfortunately, hot-seats can also motivate students who have not done the assignment to miss class altogether.

Hot-seats avoid some of the peer-pressure problems associated with toss-ups. Since the student does not volunteer for the hot-seat, there is no shame in correctly answering a question that is too easy. Likewise a student who gives a wrong answer when put on the spot looks much less stupid than one who voluntarily gives a wrong answer. Students who are sympathetic to someone who does not know an answer when called upon may be contemptuous of someone who volunteers to say something stupid. Hot-seats can also build confidence. If the instructor directs questions that are at the right level, the student who answers them correctly looks good. If one is going to ask questions with only one answer, one suggestion would be to favor hot-seat questions over toss- ups.

c. Free-fires: In a free-fire zone, anyone can shoot at any target. Some questions embody this principle in a less militaristic way. In free- fire questioning, a question with many possible answers is offered to anyone who wants to try. Here are some types of free-fire questions:

Can anyone give me an example of an action that violatcs Kant’s categorical imperative? What are some of the points in this text that you found most convincing, least convincing, or most puzzling? In what ways does this text remind you of other tcxts we havc already read this semester?

374 JOHN TMMERWAHR

These questions go a long way toward cutting through some of the fears that students have of looking bad either in front of their teacher or in front of their peers. Since the student has a choice of possible answers, he/she can monitor whether the answer is too obvious or too risky, and stay within the limits of something that is comfortable.

Free-fire questions are often more likely to open up discussions. The dynamic of a hot-seat or toss-up is as follows: teacher question, student answer, teacher judgment. Because free-fires have a large number of answers, the teacher does not need to respond to each one. A free-fire is often followed by multiple student answers, where the teacher may perhaps write each one on the board. In the series of multiple answers, students may start talking to each other, which leads to a more free- flowing discussion.

The politics of the free-fire question are also more honest than those of the toss-up or the hot-seat. Since the number of possible answers is great, the instructor cannot possibly know what the students will say in advance. Hence the instructor is also participating as a learner, and seeking new information. Since the teacher does not know in advance what students should say, the instructor may also end up listening more attentively to the answers, which in itself will help to reinforce further student discussion.

d. Inviters. Asking someone to dance solicits a response from a specific individual. But many possibilities are open to the person who is asked. He/she can politely refuse to dance at all, or can exercise considerable creativity in accepting. “Inviter” questions have a similar feel in that they direct an open-ended question at a specific individual, for example: “Mary, what was your reaction to the text?” An even softer version is, “Mary, did you have any reactions to the text that you would like to mention right now?”

The inviter falls somewhere between the free-fire and the hot-seat. Like the free-fire, it allows for many possible answers, but like the hot- seat it puts the pressure on one individual. Inviters can be used to include some of the shyer students. Some students are too shy to volunteer, but will join in if they are given an invitation where there is a

Address and range: the four possibilities Address

A individual group

Few acceptable answers

Many acceptable I answers

Range of permitted answers

THE PHILOSOPHER AS TEACHER 375

low probability of failure. Inviters are often a useful way, then, to include students who look like they might have something to say but have not volunteered.

3 . Time The type of question asked is also closely related to the problem of how much time is given to answer it. Over the years I have wondered why some students talk a great deal in class and others don’t. In my experience, some of the best students say very little, while some of the least skilled and prepared are vocal participants in class discussion. One difference that I have noted is this: Some people are improvisers, and think better on their feet. They feel comfortable beginning a question or comment when they don’t completely know what will come out at the end, because for them thinking and saying are simultaneous. They are confident that if they have an idea, they will develop it better by saying it.

Others are planners. They don’t want to start talking until they have a pretty good idea what they are going to come up with. Of course, by the time they have planned out what to say, the conversation has been moved to another point by improvisers, so their own comment or question is no longer relevant.

One way to equalize this is to allow students time to respond to our questions. In his wise book, Teaching Tips, William McKeachie suggest a very useful strategy. Rather than tossing out a question and taking the first comment, McKeachie recommends asking people to write down some comments:

Asking students to take a couple of minutes to write out their answers to a question can help. If a student has already written an answer, the step to speaking the answer is much less than answering a question when asked to answer immediately. Even the shy person will respond when asked, “What did you write.”’

In my terminology, an inviter is even more effective if people have some time before being asked to respond.

4. Response Of course the most important determinant of how much people will participate in the future is how the instructor responds to a comment presented by a student. The rules here are the same as those mentioned in connection with student questions. If the comment is heard, repeated, used, and valued, an example is set for the next student who wants to comment. This reveals another problem with toss-ups. In questions where only one answer is permitted, many responses may be

’ Teaching Tips, p. 35.

376 JOHN IMMERWAHR

rejected until a student guesses the one the teacher is looking for. This discourages future participation. In free-fire questioning, however, the instructor literally does not know the answer to the question. Answers to questions such as “How did you react to this text?” are much more likely to be valued by the instructor since the instructor really gains new information from the answer.

One technique that is sometimes used is to follow an answer with another question. This can be useful in that it draws out the student to develop the ideas presented. It can also be disastrous in that it can punish the person for presenting an answer in the first place. Some teachers use a technique something like this: They first ask a toss-up. Then when someone does answer it, they follow up with that person with additional hot-seats. In the following dialogue I have tried to capture how this may look to other students.

Spoken dialogue Instructor: Class, who was Aristotle’s teacher and main philo- sophical influence? David: Plato Instructor: Right. Now David, tell me how Plato influenced Aristotle?

David: Urn, I’m not sure. Maybe got him interested in philosophy in the first place? Instructor: We don’t really know that. What about . . . etc.

Unspoken thoughts of non-participator

Obviously she wants us to say Plato, but only a geek would answer a dumb question like that. What a geek. I’ve got it. I f you volunteer for an easy question the teacher picks on you for a hard one. I guess the best idea is to keep your mouth shut. That’s dumb.

Serves him right!

In this scenario the hot-seat is used as a punishment for correctly responding to the toss-up. From the teacher’s point of view this makes sense. David is the only student in the class who has shown any liveliness, and is most likely to be able to be successful in saying what the teacher wants to have said. The teacher, following the western proverb, “The squeaky wheel gets the grease,” may see David as being rewarded with extra attention. But many students will analyze this situation using the Japanese proverb with a rather different message: “The nail that sticks out is the one that gets hammered down.”

Conclusion In the rough and tumble of an actual classroom, of course, all of the rules fly out the window, and many of the most effective moments in college classes violate the principles I have hinted at above. But the basic advice is something like this:

THE PHILOSOPHER AS TEACHER 377

0 Understand and counteract the pressures that prevent students from

0 Create opportunities in time and climate for students to participate. 0 Welcome their participation when it is offered.

participating.

Villanova University Villanova, PA 19085 USA