Author: Gabriela Dragnea Horvath, PhD
After teaching philosophy and literature courses to American college juniors for more than a decade, starting to teach Cultural Foundations and Social Foundations to freshmen at NYU Florence was a challenge. I had in front of me young people beginning their first college academic experience coming from different countries and different systems of education. The novelty of the class profile combined with the transversal reality of a new student typology: versatile with technology, but possessing a lower capacity to concentrate for long periods; quick at texting, but not as quick at phrasing concepts in a precise manner with an adequate vocabulary; sharper in identifying clues, yet with a weaker capacity to assimilate knowledge and personalize it; present on social media since an early age, but not always able to optimise connections with others in real-life situations. My new students could be hesitant in engaging in a class discussion, and some could not resist going on Facebook in the middle of a lecture or debate. It was obvious that if I wanted them to stay intellectually alert, improve their communication skills, learn how to improve their long-term memory, and work in a team, I had to devise new strategies.
I was committed to doing so without renouncing the benefits of technology, and while respecting my basic conviction that knowledge is not passively received, but rather created by the students in their interactions with the professor, the various readings, other colleagues, and the environment where this process takes place. In brief, in a culture that encourages the external projection of the self and its responsibilities, I had to make sure that my students were aware of being essentially the authors of their own intellectual progress.
The spark for a new strategy was given to me by the Liberal Studies Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, Robert Squillace. He attended one of my Social Foundations review classes a few years back and suggested that in the future, I could ask a student to take notes during the discussions and post them on NYU Classes. Building upon this idea and remembering how excited my own sons were about role-playing games, I started to create roles for my students, with each role being devised to develop a specific aspect of learning. I have experimented with this for three years, and now I can share my experience, as I have seen the results and the appreciation students have expressed for this method in their course evaluations.
How does it work? First of all, the role-playing method does not replace the basic model I have used, which is a combination of frontal and problem-oriented education, but has a very old tradition, functioning on the triad of lectio, quaestio, and disputatio. I always lecture on the general framework of the topic, giving students theoretical instruments of analysis. Then, we identify together the main ideas of the text they had previously read and we address them from various perspectives, relating them to the historical context and to contemporary thought and sensibilities. This part is dialogic, and it can be organised as a free discussion, a debate, a mock trial, or in various other ways. The roles I have created for students fit into this general structure, giving them the opportunity to participate by contributing their own knowledge and skills. The Cultural Foundations classes involve more creativity, and thus the basic model can change according to the topic: in an art history class, for instance, we can start from the art pieces we analyse together, pinpointing stylistic features, and successively enlarging the discussion framework as I add philosophical, religious, or literary references that define the epoch.
The roles students take on during the semester make up half of their participation grade, with the second half consisting of their responses to other class activities. Class Participation represents 20% of the final grade. I consider this to be fair, as no accomplished intellectual can be called such without being able to argue knowledgeably, engage politely in controversies, and express their views in a clear, articulate manner. I think that giving students valid oral instruments of expression and opportunities to interact is as much a part of fostering high literacy as teaching them how to read in-depth and write convincing papers.
And now the technical details: Every course has a shared Google folder where students post the materials they prepare, a sheet on which they sign up for the roles, and a Google doc where the Conclusions Masters take notes in class. These are the roles I have devised for each class type:
Cultural Foundations – Timeline Master, Treasure Hunter, Conclusions Master, Participant in group presentation.
Social Foundations – Timeline Master, Contemporary Critic, Conclusions Master, Participant in group presentation.
Each role responds to a distinct need and is aimed at forming or reinforcing specific skills.
The Timeline Master role aims at increasing the students’ sense of orientation in history, by making them focus on the sequence of events and their correlation with various texts, works of art, or musical pieces we study. The role entails preparing a brief presentation (not more than 10 minutes) of the biography of an author and his historical context, using whatever format the student prefers: a narrative, a PowerPoint presentation, Prezi, etc. Years are important, maps can be helpful, and a broader perspective can be offered by mentioning what was happening at that time in other cultures. Students learn how to perform concise research using academically reliable sources and calibrate their discourse to the time limit; in addition, this contributes to a better understanding of the objective-subjective factors dynamic in shaping a trend of thought, a legislation system, or a new style in art or music. Example: Plato’s discussion of justice in the Republic and the proposal of an ideal state make more sense if placed in the context of Athenian democracy, Plato’s biography, and his relationship with Socrates.
The Conclusions Master is in charge of taking accurate notes in class on a shared Google document. I look at them to see if they need editing. These notes can provide support when preparing for an exam, as they record all the questions raised in class, the answers provided, and the conceptual nuances addressed during our critical debates. The role reinforces the students’ capacity for synthesis, and knowing that their notes become a public document makes the students more attentive to their written expression.
Participant in Group Presentation: When we dedicate more than one class to a reading, the first class is an introduction to its historical context and its general topic. Then, during the second or third class, students are asked to form a group of presenters that will convey the main ideas of the chapters required for that day, followed by questions they wish the class to answer. The explicit goals of this role are: learning how to work in a team, dividing tasks and sharing knowledge, reading a text in-depth, sharpening their capacities for analysis and synthesis, training in problematizing a discourse, asking significant questions, and launching a debate. The individual presenter is time limited (to not more than 10 minutes), has to be clear and concise, and must be able to answer questions regarding the text if a colleague desires a clarification.
The Contemporary Critic is a role specific to the Social Foundations classes. It consists of establishing parallels or contrasts with contemporary issues and presenting critical conclusions on them. This involves research, the ability to compare and contrast, and an effort to re-signify or re- interpret phenomena and concepts. Example: Descartes’ ideas on the separation of the mind from the body were addressed by one student in connection with the current debates on the autonomy of artificial intelligence (i.e., the possibility that artificial intelligence might become independent of its creator or of the human species, or even come to dominate us) and the supersizing of the mind (i.e., the supersizing of intelligence versus other dimensions of human reality, such as the body, emotions, or spirituality).
Treasure Hunter is a role for Cultural Foundations. The student who signs up for this role is expected to look for intriguing details (hidden treasures) in the literary, art, or musical pieces under focus that we normally do not have time to cover in class. The shared results of this personal search contribute to the general understanding of our study object. Examples: A student researched funeral rites in ancient Rome, rendering the final lines in Book IV of Virgil’s Aeneid more significant; another student uncovered a translation error in the English version of the Chinese novel Journey to the West by Wu Cheng’en, contributing to a more accurate interpretation of its symbolism. Sometimes I too learn from treasure hunters, which makes students gain confidence in their own knowledge and skills by being able to teach their professor something new.
Integrated with my basic combination of frontal and problem-oriented education, this method renders the classes more vivid, the students more attentive and responsible. They start developing scholarly skills from the very first semester, learn how to distinguish between reliable and unreliable sources, do independent research, and hone their critical capacities. Being consciously involved in the formation of their own knowledge has good effects on their memory: they rely less upon mechanical memorization exercised two days before the exam, and more upon their own capacity to grasp and interpret concepts, which works better for comprehension and long term memory. They considerably improve their rhetorical strategies, from organizing the material and identifying significant issues to present in class, to deploying an appropriate and precise terminology. They become more articulate in expressing their ideas and more audience friendly, paying attention to keep their listeners on board, while staying persuasive and clear. Learning to become audience friendly and starting to value considerations, remarks, and insights different from their own, both makes them more careful and balanced in expressing judgments and increases their socializing abilities.
From a sum of individualities that do not know each other at the beginning of the year, the class turns into a working group, where personal skills can be refined and valorised for the common benefit. I had students who let me know that even if they were not naturally driven towards certain subjects, the class dynamic was so absorbing that they ended by being interested and sometimes even grew passionate about these subjects. Students are not the only ones favoured by this method. I too take more pleasure in the classes, looking forward to being surprised by their contributions and their fresh look at familiar topics and works. Last, but not least, this method allows me to know better the way my students reason, the syntax of their thoughts, and their specific vocabulary. This has two advantages: it enables me to detect plagiarism immediately and to evaluate their performance in a more accurate manner.