The Role of Social Group Membership on Classroom Participation

Abstract

Active and cooperative learning is integral to many social science classes, as it increases student motivation, improves communication skills, and stimulates creative thinking. Many political science departments break large lectures down into smaller, weekly tutorial groups to foster active learning. But do all students participate equally in active, participatory learning? We use an original dataset measuring self-reported participation and a number of important predictors (student gender, race, and language proficiency) collected from 700 undergraduate students in 91 political science tutorials. We find that participation does vary across social groups, even when controlling for psychological and some contextual factors. Female students participate significantly less than males, racial minorities report speaking less frequently than white students, and students with lower English-proficiency (the language of instruction) also participate less. In light of these findings, we offer suggestions for instructors on how to motivate all students to find their voice in the classroom.

Effectiveness of Using Paired Storytelling Technique Towards the Students’ Reading Comprehension

“…The formula that used is correlation Pearson Product Moment as follows: The formula of validity is: Based on the result of reading tryout test, it shows that 40 questions are valid and 10 questions are invalid. The number 3,4,5,6,8,9,10,11,13,15,16,17,19,20,21,22,24,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,38,39,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49, 50 are number that is valid. Meanwhile, the number 1, 2, 7, 12, 14, 18, 23, 25, 37, 40.…”

Discursive Inequity and the Internal Exclusion of Women Speakers

“…A review of the literature on small-group discussions shows that women political science students participate less in class discussions (Yaylaci and Beauvais 2017), that women are less likely to participate in group discussions in the public sphere (Beauvais 2019), and women attending group discussions often feel less influential when they do speak (Mendelberg 2002). Continuing with my example of women’s political participation, the legacy of women’s political exclusion embedded in cognitive schemes of perception and appreciation can lead women to perceive themselves (and lead others to perceive them) as less knowledgeable and influential in political conversations.…”

“…Discourses about the weakness or intrinsic inferiority of disempowered social group members “can inflict harm, can be a form of oppression, imprisoning someone in a false, distorted, and reduced mode of being” (Taylor 1997, 25). There is some evidence that gendered variation in self-esteem matters for discursive political participation: a study of small-group discussions of political science students shows that female students report lower levels of self-esteem and that self-esteem is related to frequency of verbal participation (Yaylaci and Beauvais 2017). Other researchers suggest that when avoidance is not an option in politics, low self-esteem individuals are more likely to conform to dominant views and behaviors (Gibson 1981; McGuire 1968).…”

Course characteristics influencing students’ oral participation in higher education

“…To be sure, a student's engagement in class is firstly determined by him-or herself, his or her individual interests, needs, and other personality characteristics (Fassinger, 1995;Nadile et al, 2021;Weaver & Qi, 2005;Yaylacı & Beauvais, 2017). But the particular learning environment of a course-its level of demand, the opportunity given to speak, the respective teacher's demeanour-may also either encourage or discourage students' participation.…”