Negotiating Classroom Process: Lessons from Adult Learning

Abstract

Learning by doing is standard fare in negotiation courses across disciplines, and techniques such as learning contracts, self-reflective essays, and small-group work are commonly used. In addition, teachers must resist the temptation to "teach the canon" without regard to the needs, interests, and concerns of the students in the room. Learner-centered education requires that teachers build from the beliefs and preconceptions that students bring to the classroom, including their cultural beliefs and norms about conflict resolution, some of which may be at odds with the North American canon. A discussionbased approach to teaching not only engages students more actively in the learning process but also models many of the skills negotiation teachers seek to develop in their student-negotiators.

Teaching for Implementation: Designing Negotiation Curricula to Maximize Long‐Term Learning

“…Just as a negotiator cannot prepare a useful negotiation strategy without developing a sense of her own goals in the negotiation — for instance, the goal of “squeezing as much money as possible out of the other party” calls for a different strategy than “getting a fair deal this time while building a foundation for additional long‐term business”— a negotiation instructor cannot design an effective curriculum without any sense of what the goals of the course should be. These goals may well be modified as the instructor learns more about the students as well as how their learning develops and may even be negotiated with students (see Nelken 2009 in this issue), but the point is that learning activities should be selected with clear learning goals in mind.…”

“…Ironically, a teacher who resists the tyranny of content by designing a highly learner‐centered curriculum may unwittingly fall prey to a subtler “tyranny of design” if she insists on teaching the course exactly as designed, irrespective of student input or response. Just as a highly prepared negotiator may adjust her strategy in response to the dynamics that arise with her counterpart, a highly prepared negotiation teacher may adapt his curriculum in response to what he learns about his individual students and to the collective classroom dynamics that emerge (See Nelken 2009 in this issue).…”

Negotiating Your Syllabus

“…Reflecting on the process and the resulting syllabi from these negotiations, we see no discernible difference in student characteristics or acceptance. Although we have only done this with undergraduates to date, given our experience and what is known regarding adult learners (Davis & Schrader, 2009; Dean & Fornaciari, 2013a, 2013b; Fornaciari & Dean, 2013; Nelken, 2009), this should work well with graduate students also.…”

“…One of the most prevalent ways of conceptualizing a syllabus is as a contract between ourselves and our students (Berschback, 2010; Dean & Fornaciari, 2013a; Gentry, 2012; Parkes & Harris, 2002; Veliyath & Adams, 2005); one that we unilaterally define and present on the first day of the course. Many educators have suggested that we move away from this perspective because the syllabus as a contract (a) can set a tone that is defensive, (b) reinforces power disparities between us and our students (Baecker, 1998; Singham, 2005), and (c) is inconsistent with what we know about how adults learn (Davis & Schrader, 2009; Dean & Fornaciari, 2013a, 2013b; Fornaciari & Dean, 2013; Nelken, 2009). Specifically, the traditional view of the syllabus as contract does neither allow for collaboration with adult learners nor does it involve them in the planning process.…”

The Deceptive Simplicity of Teaching Negotiation: Reflections on Thirty Years of the Negotiation Workshop

“…7 7 For a discussion of the theoretical support for this approach and more guidance, see Nelken (2009). …”