Quick Reflections on How I Would Teach Speech Communication Differently

I taught speech communication in my former life. It was a lot of fun and I enjoyed the classroom experience immensely. Here are some assorted observations and ideas. They are nascent to be sure….I’ve developed some of the ideas in my speech 2.0 communication syllabus, but they are arguably in their infancy.

Guiding Principles: Constructivism and Experiential Learning
I would be more constructivist and experiential in my teaching (while still providing the needed training for “novices”–although perhaps to characterize college fresh-people as novices isn’t entirely fair. At least in terms of 10,000 hours of expertise they might be relative novices). Both of these are in response to the banking model of education which characterized about 60 to 75% of most classroom experiences I think I had as an undergraduate (although I think this may be more in the math and sciences…along with history. I think its possible that the later is coming along and moving in more of a constructivist bent). Certainly, there was classroom discussion, but outside this there wasn’t much interactivity and certainly that is a limited form of interaction (especially when viewed in contrast to the vast arrays of options available on Blooms Taxonomy–the circular version).

Communication Classroom Pedagogy in Perspective
I think I would be led by 10 other pedagogical principles:

1) critical thinking
2) project based learning & scenario based learning
3) research (including multiple forms of research, not just Lexis Nexis and EBSCO Host) and media literacy (including visual literacy)
4) practical
5) ethics
6) students teaching students
7) emphasis on EQ (including listening and invention and dealing with fear)
8] creativity, which is implicit in the constructivist model
9) much of the grounding of the class would look to the history of ideas and social change from Hegel to Edison to MLK and beyond–in addition to the more practical elements of the course
10) using story and narrative to understand the world

The teacher, in this way would return to his/her role as facilitator rather than repository of information to be memorized. (admittedly this is a pretty large plate and would likely best work over a 2 part course). But its an effort to fill the gap in current college education–and particularly some of the humanities:

1) the gap between knowing and doing
2) the gap between theory and practice
3) the gap between the classroom and the real world (work and community)
4) the gap between head, heart, and hands

Unfortunately, higher learning is deaf…or at the very least just waking up to these rather mammouth divides which characterize its retrograde approach to pedagodgy and practice/praxis.

Killing memorization: The Nasty Death of the Factory Model of Information Dissemination
This isn’t to say my teaching was particularly based on memorization, but unfortunately, given the nature of the materials I received for preparation the midterm and final were grounded in this mentality. If 20 to 25% of their effort in the class is grounded in this mentality–I think that type of classroom experience can only result in someone that reflects their banking model upbringing.

Class as democracy and metaphorical and modular learning Legos:
I think I would provide two or three syllabuses where they could vote. I would make the activities more modular. Or perhaps a range of activities that could be voted on. I would also have a contract with students and hopefully encourage feedback. Feedback is a really key important part of the teaching process as I see it–both for students and for the teacher.

***one caveat: “killing” isn’t probably the best word–but characterizes an effort to dramatically cut back the amount of content memorization that must take place to perform effectively on exams. Besides, memorization driven testing seems to make cheating easier. If students haven’t learned to memorize by age 18, I’m not sure what another exam is going to do for that skill. Leveraging those skills learned is far, far, far more important to the success of college students in the 21st century and beyond.