It might seem weird, but I would rather take a class with 400 people than one with only 40. No, its not because it’s easier to skip a 400-person class or because you can get away with anything in a larger class. Rather, it’s because large lecture classes generally have small discussion sections associated with them.
Yes, I like the discussion section, the oft-forgotten part of a course that usually makes up only 10 percent of your final grade, the thing that is completely gotten rid of once you start taking upper level courses.
A discussion forces me to take what I learned in lecture and actually apply it in order to pick sides in arguments. It’s how I discovered that a theory of nuclear disarmament that made no sense to me on paper, actually works in reality. It made me realize just how difficult it is to actually define the limits of the First Amendment.
I could spend all day spitting back what I read in a PowerPoint, but I have no real understanding of concepts until I am forced to think critically about them, which is why it doesn’t sense that the majority of upper level history and political science classes at Binghamton University have no discussion component.
Rather they comprise of 70 students stuffed in a small room with the professor standing in front and just lecturing.
Upper level courses should encourage students to think critically and encourage them to articulate their own ideas about the subject matter. They make up a good portion of Harpur degree programs and are often the last courses that students take before going out into the “real world” where they will have to be able to think quickly and critically.
And discussions are a good way to accomplish that.
In 1990, a math teacher filmed her third grade math class over the course of a year. On their own, through classroom discussions, her students managed to come up with the definition of odd numbers and the concept of infinity.
According to a New York Times article, through these discussions, “[She] was able to teach the class far more than if she had stuck to her lesson plan.”
And these were third graders learning math. Shouldn’t college students who have a broader foundation of knowledge to draw upon be encouraged and expected to do the same, especially in broader liberal arts areas?
Imagine a room full of students with an instructor in the front of the room lecturing about constitutional law. How many of those students are texting? How many are sleeping? How many are listening? How many are actually learning?
Now imagine that same room and instead of the students sitting in rows listening to the instructor, the students are sitting in a circle and the instructor is listening to them and encouraging their fellow students to listen and comment.
Students enjoy the give-and-take of discussions more. They are forced to participate more actively in the learning process. And based on my observations, they enjoy the learning more.
But instead, Binghamton gives us more lectures, more PowerPoints and more tests as we advance through the years here.
Discussions, even when held, generally count for almost nothing within the grading system. For some reason, despite the obvious learning and critical thinking that can only be accomplished through discussions, tests and quizzes still prevail at this University.
Binghamton should give students the education they deserve, expect and are paying for. And the way to accomplish that is a greater emphasis on discussions.