When trying to maintain a conversation in class that is both stimulating and relevant, it is necessary to promote student enthusiasm on the subject. This is difficult, because the student is not always enthused about the subject or reading. The reasons for this can be various. First, simply to accept the fact that a book is famous does not mean that the student will see the value in it. Without seeing the value, legitimate enthusiasm is not created. False enthusiasm is sometimes created by the student in order to appear engaged, but this at best leads to a starting point in a discussion. It does not allow for a deep discussion.
To handle this problem, I generally allow students to go off on tangents to some degree, even if it is just to build sufficient authentic enthusiasm for an interesting discussion to occur. But sometimes these tangents go too far afield. As discussion navigator, I sometimes cannot see how to tie the tangent back in to the intended topic. Sometimes I do see how to do this, and these are the best moments: I allow the student to go where they wish, and then I build from what they construct to show how it tells us something about the topic. But this is not always possible.
The starting point is key. What is the first question we will try to answer? The first problem we will try to solve? The first concept we contemplate? The first passage we read? The first 10 minutes of the class are often the most important. I am setting the course, which will need to be adjusted over the period of the class, but those first ten minutes can spell destruction if I get off on the wrong foot.
Over the last couple of days, I have employed the strategy of writing on the board one critical statement found near the end of the essay in question. If the essay we are reading is genuinely profound, the statement will be something that is counter-intuitive and the result of a long argument. If the student had done their reading, they have seen the argument and touched on the concepts, but they generally do not know all the nooks and crannies of the argument yet. The bulk of the essay probably looked like some nebulous cloud of ideas with a basic idea. But the depth was unseen.
By starting the discussion by introducing the end of the text, the student is prompted to ask how this statement could be true, while utilizing whatever ideas they reaped from their first encounter with the text while reading on their own. It is a puzzle. If I picked the quote well, then with a little bit of discussion, the student will be curious and feel that figuring it out is important. Their curiosity is piqued. They want to know, and want to figure it out. Therein lies genuine education.
For example, over the past two days, we have been discussing Plato’s Apology. Near the end of the text, there is a statement:
“Nothing can harm a good man, either in life or death.”
and, more famously:
“an unexamined life is no life for a human being to live.”
(Both quotes have been rendered in different ways. ie., The unexamined life is not worth living.)
We start with the first statement. The second sits on the board, inducing (I hope) temptation. But discussion starts with the first: do you believe it? Isn’t it a ridiculous statement looked at matter-of-factly? After prodding around a little bit, we see some students rendering ridiculously optimistic answers: bad things don’t happen to good people. Then we prod and prod, and someone eventually asks, “I don’t mean any offense, Mr. Swanson, but don’t we need to know what “good” is first?” Yes, and not only that, but “harm” and what a person is too. All three factors need to be puzzled. So hypotheses are given and examined, some rejected and others left. Then I ask, how is this related to the unexamined life quote?
At this point, we are in a position to delve into Plato’s metaphysics, questions of how the immortal soul affects one’s current ethical beliefs, the value of the mind, and whether or not the body is distinct from the mind. Conversation blooms, and at the end of the class I feel that every hope I had for that one hour fifteen minute period have been met.
Natural Causes 