In this paper I am reviewing the article; ‘Anybody Listening’ by David Daniels. It has been the subject of several debates and reviews. It is about using discussion classes as an effective teaching methodology in college. David Daniels is an established and revered author with this as one of his exemplary works.
The author believes that lecturing in college halls, as a method of teaching, is preferred by most educational institutions but is in fact detrimental to both the learners and instructors. He argues that with the lecture method, learners cannot pay attention for long, that some of them are unreceptive and therefore must be replaced with a new and practical instruction technique. The author wants it to be substituted with classroom dialogue programs or lessons, which as he stresses, are effective and functional. The reason he puts forth is that it will facilitate the learner’s academic improvement and give the instructors a chance to be accustomed to their learners and their progress.
I would, to an extent, be of the same opinion as to the author that the lecturing method of instruction contributes to learners being unreceptive and dispossess them of the opportunity to grow their significant values and inventiveness as far as intellectualism is concerned but I think that the method of dialogue classes which he advocates has its own shortcomings.
First, it has been long since college learners have put up with their incapability to reflect and gain knowledge alone without the help of instructors. For them, it is an ingrained habit or even a culture. Because since they started schooling they have been receiving their education by being addressed by their instructors and them taking notes. The proper way could have been for them to challenge their beliefs and positions by mapping out what they actually need to study and be able to hold different views from what they are enlightened with.
With time, the learners get used to the system by becoming unmotivated, for them, education turns out to be a programmed course of recalling and narration. Therefore gaining knowledge comes second to being in a position to handle issues individually and agree to dissimilar beliefs. All the learners have to do is reproduce what the instructors said and masquerade it as their knowledge. It is justifiable to argue that the lecturing method inhibits learners from gaining knowledge autonomously and philosophizing ingeniously.
On the contrary, I think that the dialogue method as a different tutoring approach recommended by the author would be somewhat ineffective. To start with, compelling college freshmen to hold dialogue sessions is a surefire way to put on them too many demands and needless strain because they have modest or no familiarity in putting across their opinions explicitly, questioning other learners’ stances and even differing with the instructors on topical issues. It is even worse when a learner’s point of view is disputed and shot down by colleagues. This can lower his or her sense of worth and eventually may lead to disappointment. For me, I would argue for this method to be used by college novices since it is challenging and confusing for them.
The second premise is that dialogue lessons would only give confidence to assertive learners rather than to the recluse. To the former, it is an opportunity to control the others while to the latter simply gets little or no prospects of contributing to the dialogue. Furthermore, learners are not positioned to take advantage of the dialogues and arguments. This is because, for someone to be articulate and contribute positively to any discussion, a far-reaching introspection and experience is a prerequisite. If the learners are not able to explore the topics shrewdly and to give incisive contributions then the dialogue method is probably bound to fail. Hence, I differ with the author in the sense that this method does not make learners develop their skills in thinking.
In conclusion, the lecturing method inhibits the learner’s ability to develop rationally and autonomously as well as diminishing his or her resourcefulness, the dialogue method, on the other hand, does not help when learners’ contributions are left out during the lessons. Therefore the lecture method cannot be substituted with the dialogue programs.