|
The classroom is a diverse and unique community
where standards, rules and expectations develop
over time. In the adult learning arena, prevalent in
graduate degree programmes, there is an experiential
dynamic that adds depth and complexity to the
community. As such, the community is best served
in its omnipresent state of development through
personal ref lection of experience in the classroom
combined with the world outside the classroom.
Cultures, both collectively and individually held
among members, seek structural balance between
the need for change and the need for predictability.
Just as members create the living culture of the
community, disruption occurs when members of
the community are changed by means of removal or
arrival. The most prominent change in membership
in an educational community of learning, especially
those following a cohort model, is when a new professor enters the dynamic and introduces his/
her own classroom standard. This upheaval results
in time spent on relearning administrative specifics
of cultural rules and limits the members' ability to
quickly focus on the course content. Recognising
this classroom dynamic raises a serious question-
are you a disruptive professor?
The Disruptive Professor
As a new member t o the community, the
professor engages, knowingly or otherwise, in
acculturation. According to McMillan and Lopez
(2001), community members assimilate, integrate,
marginalise or separate with the culture at large.
As facilitators of learning, professors are not
likely to avoid interaction with the class even if
the culture is one they would otherwise elect to avoid. Thus, a separation strategy is not likely. The
professor usually has more than just a mild interest
in building and maintaining relationships with
students at least for the duration of his/her class.
Therefore, a marginalisation strategy, which occurs
when the new community member has little interest
in building or maintaining ties with members
of the society, is not an option for the professor.
This leaves the professor with an integration or
assimilation strategy.
Assimilation happens when an individual gives up
his/her culture to take on the values and beliefs of
the new culture. This may occur if the professor is
looking to change her/his classroom style and is
open to persuasion by the students' culture. While
assimilation is an option, integration is more likely in
the classroom and perhaps the most effective strategy.
Integration occurs when an individual maintains his/
her own culture while participating in a new culture.
Classroom Culture and Professor Style:
A Strategy for Integration
The integration strategy is the most effective
because over time, the cohort model of education
engrains a culture among students/community
members and this becomes increasingly difficult
to change. Similarly, professors often have a unique
and individualistic style that is too engrained. If the
collective cohort/programme professors can integrate
a culture of academic administration standards such
as participation rules, rubric, use of technology,
assignment format, testing protocols, boundaries
and other expectations among themselves, then new
professors (each semester or term) can continually
reinforce the standards while integrating their
unique professor style in terms specific to course
content. This, however, takes finesse because it is a
cultural change endeavour. So, how best can change
be introduced into a classroom while reinforcing the
rules and standards of students' culture?
The short answer to effectively addressing cultural
change is member involvement. Since it takes
time for patterns to emerge and styles to form
into a culture, the first two to three classes of the
programme are paramount in setting standards,
rules and expectations desired by the educational
institution. It is during these early classes that work
patterns emerge and member behaviours solidify. If
new professors come into the culture every semester
with new administrative expectations, routines are
hard to develop and students become increasingly
frustrated. This frustration does not stem from
the challenge of new course content but from the
constancy of administrative change.
We all have heard students say with a tone of disgust,
"That is not the way other instructors have done it."
While it is human nature to change for reasons of
adaptation and survival, it is also human nature to
desire consistency and balance. Such a statement
is often a response to frustration. Asking students
to change is difficult, especially in the later stages
of the programme. One way to combat this is to
have the programme and culture allow for subjectcentric
activities yet reinforce the existing student
culture.
Integration Tactics: Setting Expectations
and Ground Rules That Matter
The topic of setting or reinforcing classroom
expectations and ground rules in an attempt to
integrate student and professor cultures was
discussed recently among 36 MBA students in a
private university in the United States. The class
was the students' last in their two-year MBA
programme; hence a strong culture was established
among them. The tactical process of the discussion
was as interesting as the findings and is the focus
of this article. While the facilitated approach was
orchestrated by a single professor, the discussion was
led and data were captured, codified and analysed by
MBA students. The process, café-style facilitation,
followed these steps:
- At the start of the first class of the semester (the
first time the professor met the students), the
professor, serving as host, welcomed students
and expressed appreciation for and value in their
attendance, individual experiences, knowledge
and capability.
- The host asked for four volunteer student
facilitators who were nominated based on
their experiential knowledge from work and
practice.
- Each of the four volunteers was provided a
question and a comfortable area with chairs,
tables, flipcharts and markers in which a
dialogue could occur. All questions pertained to
the course and the classroom culture (e.g. what
are your expectations from the instructor of
this course, what ground rules should everyone
uphold and respect throughout the course, what
are the student-specific and professor-specific
success factors for this course and what are
the most pressing content issues that must be
addressed during this course).
- Students were divided into four groups and
allotted 30 minutes in each of the four facilitated
areas of dialogue. Although one large classroom
was used for all groups, each was separated
from the others enough to avoid disruption. To
mitigate social facilitation and groupthink issues,
after each 30-minute dialogue, each group was
modified instead of taking on the next topic.
While the facilitating volunteers remained to
facilitate the same dialogue question, the group
members-and thus group dynamics-within
each dialogue were different. This meant that the
eight-member dialogue groups had a different
make-up of participants during each dialogue.
- The facilitators' role was to introduce the
question, ensure full participation and document
the specif ics of each dialogue. Along the
way, similarities were categorised. While the
volunteers' role is noted as a facilitator, each
was encouraged to participate as well. Thus the
facilitator is an active participant, referred to
as a dialogue steward (Brown, 2005). As the
second, third and fourth rounds of dialogue
occurred, the steward reintroduced the question
and quickly summarised the work from prior
dialogues before the new members commenced
their dialogue. Participating members were
always encouraged to take their own notes,
draw or document their ideas and feelings about
the dialogue topic along with the facilitating
steward.
- At the end of the last dialogue, the professor
thanked each member for their participation
and allowed the facilitating stewards to report
key findings. As the findings were reported,
the professor acknowledged students' work
and expectations, thus assimilating to their
culture. When an issue arose, the professor
negotiated with students, thus integrating both
the students' and professor's cultures. The
negotiations occurred only when a reported
expectation was wholly unacceptable. To be
sure, the professor attempted to assimilate as
much as possible, but negotiated integration
when necessary. This approach allowed for
greater buy-in from students because they
recognised that their involvement was valued
and voices hea rd. The end result was a n
integrated student/professor culture.
Figure 1. Illustrated example of café facilitation. Reprinted with
permission from the World Café Community Foundation (www.theworldcafe.com)
People Matter: A Concluding Summary
on the Power of Café Facilitation
The aforementioned findings from this MBA class
may be of less interest than the café facilitation
tactic employed to integrate two cultures. The tactic
proved efficient and effective in quickly establishing
the value of cultural members, as well as theirs and
the new professor's expectations. The process can
be modified to allow more questions or less, more
time per dialogue or less, and it could even be
done online. Furthermore, this tactic is not just for
the start of classes. Whenever a professor wants a
dynamic exchange of ideas discussed about an issue
that is of significance to the audience/students, café
facilitation is an applicable tactic.
References
Brown, J. (2005). The World Café: Shaping Our Futures
Through Conversations That Matter. San Francisco, CA:
Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
McMillan, A. & Lopez, T.B. (2001). 'Socialisation and
Acculturation: Organizational and Individual Strategies
Toward Achieving P-O Fit in a Culturally Diverse Society'. The Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp.
19-34.
|
