Education as Pretense: Schooly “Speeches” versus Real “Talks”
Wednesday, 23 April 2008 Clay Burell 
Print This Post
The always-interesting Doug Noon of Borderlands wrote a post recently that’s worth a click, but here’s the gist:
This post is about the talking part of student presentations, and helping kids to develop an actual public speaking voice. I discovered last week, by accident, just how much my students have to learn about talking in front of people. I had them make science slide shows about global warming. The technology part came out good enough, no prizes for originality, though some were done fairly well. But the talking part….Oh boy! That part was rough. It’s probably been many a year since show and tell happened for them. I see now that what’s needed is an older kid version of the get-up-and-say-something drill.
I’d been planning a post on something similar, triggered by a recent experience of my own in the schoolhouse. But I pretty much wrote that post in a comment on Doug’s post, so I’m nicking it and putting it here:
This has been on my mind with my high school students. They all give oral presentations in their classes, many are heavily involved in Speech and Debate Club, etc. But when I told them to
try out for giving a presentation to a local corporation for sponsorship for Project Global Cooling, I was dismayed at how incapable they were of simply and directly informing their audience of the project’s goals, methods, needs for sponsorship, and benefits returned if sponsorship was given.
Over and over I told them, “Don’t speechify. Don’t ramble. Don’t get preachy and don’t try to impress. Just make your point to these busy businessmen quickly, so we can get through the presentation as quickly as possible and move into the discussion stage. Clear, direct, natural, fast. Simple.”
What I got instead was either memorized stuff or high-flown homework-sounding stuff. It was so unnatural, I canceled the presentation (if this sounds harsh, realize it was our second appointment with this corporation after a, er, problematic first showing).
To me it really brought home how artificial speeches about canned subjects in front of a class are little to no preparation about talking to people naturally in a real-world setting. It’s like the students are only good at “pretend speaking” – and these were smart, capable students. Crazy.
Maybe we need to drop the word “speech” and replace it with the good old, demotic “tell us what you want to say.” I’m stumped, honestly.
There’s so much more to say about this. For example:
Are “speech” and “debate” two skills ready for the dustbin of pedagogy?
“Speech,” the way we do it in classrooms – speaker standing in front of audience, talking at it instead of with it – is a 20th century oral analog to the 20th century web, with the screen giving one-way content to a passive audience. (These types of schooly speeches also unconsciously perpetuate the teacher-centered model of 20th century classrooms, with students being trained to carry that largely stultifying ritual into the future.) Ours is a century of sharing ideas, and sharing the stage, with the audience. (I’ll resist the Speech 2.0 label.)
“Debate” is similarly suspect for our century. In a globalized world, “score points talking against each other” is a suspect paradigm for multi-cultural conflict resolution. The last thing we need is another generation of Americans being trained to confuse “communication” with “winning debates” and “being right by proving others wrong.”
Are there any alternative school competitions that reward not “competitive speechifying” a la Speech and Debate, but instead cooperative negotiation and conflict resolution – both sides being rewarded for listening, conceding points, offering compromises? Both teams winning, else no winner at all? This is not a rhetorical question – if you know of one, please drop a comment.
And then there’s the whole formality of school “speech.” Sure, we see politicians giving state of the union speeches and such, but aren’t those the exception? Don’t we see something else rising – the idea of “Talks”? Just think of TED (and if you don’t know TED, leave here now and discover it): some of the world’s smartest, most creative, famous people, giving “talks” not from podiums, not in suits and ties, not in the formal oratorical register; instead, they’re in jeans and t-shirts, pacing around on stage, hands-in-pocket or seated front-porch-like, just talking to us about their ideas. And they’re wildly successful at being more stimulating than the suit.
But here’s the thing: they’re talking about their ideas. They have their own ideas. They care about them enough to want to tell them to us. They weren’t assigned so
me god-awful sleeper – “Should Students Be Forced to Wear Uniforms?” – to fake interest in.
And this is where we fail: We assign speech topics that replace idea-creation in students; then we put them through the sweatshop workshop of drafting and adorning these lifeless cliches with rhetorical window-dressing; then we suffer through the performance, give it a grade, and pat them on the head.
What’s the hidden curriculum?
- Speech is a competitive tool that has nothing to do with listening.
- Rhetoric is more important than invention.
- It’s not okay to just talk to us about what moves you.
- You have to wear a tie and be a suit.
Worst of all, the deepest hidden message: School is about pretending: Pretending to care, pretending to understand, pretending to speak, pretending to have ideas and convictions.
I know this is a straw man, and hope it’s a poor one. If so, straighten me out? Share how school “speeches” help students learn how to talk.
Photos by beny schlevich and practicalowl
- Boundaries Blurring, Writing Getting Real at School
- Beyond Global Collaborative “Units,” on to Real PLN’s: Podcast with Chris Craft
- My Wikispaces in Education Webinar Presentation Video is Up
- Refining the Message: A Re-Post and Self-Check on Fear and Irrelevance in Education
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
No. 1 — April 23rd, 2008 at 9:00 pm
I had a similar experience with a project I recently did in journalism. My students had to research the background behind a famous photograph and also report on why it’s an important photo from both a newsworthiness standpoint and a composition standpoint. Instead of 30 in-front presentations, I had them record their reports and made a long movie. Despite not having to stand in front of everyone, I still got alotofstudentstalkinglikethisasiftheyweregoingtobeshotforspeakingslowlyandclearly.
So I share your frustration. The alternative to the classic oral report thing helped make it a little “cooler” in terms of the quality of the written work … their delivery was a little off, though (and I won’t get into how fun it is to try and keep the rest of the class quiet while you’re having students record).
As for alternatives to debate/speeches. The only thing I ever encoutnered that was slightly different was mock trial. I speak from personal experience–I was on my high school’s mock trial team. I don’t know if that’s what you were thinking of though, considering in mock trial you’re essentially playing lawyer and competing against other schools that are playing lawyer. There’s obviously “competitive speechifying” involved in the opening/closing statements, but the theater of direct and cross examination for those who are team lawyers and team witnesses involves a lot more than simply memorizing and presenting.
At 8:00 a.m. and only with about half my coffee, that’s the best I could come up with
Toms last blog post..Well that escalated quickly
Reply
No. 2 — April 23rd, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Hi Clay
Good post and strikes a chord with me. Upon my return to the classroom I began teaching Ancient History to the seniors. Each year they have to deliver a ‘speech’. It is a compulsory and formal assessment. I remembered the speeches of yore where individuals stood alone, occasionally feeling bereft, in front a class of their peers who could not wait for the speech to end.
I decided to allow the students to be creative in how they delivered the speech and suggested that they emulate the media or live theatre. As a result the students delivered their speeches as role plays, television style interviews, press conferences and the like.
Some of the students who dreaded the thought of standing in front of the student body delivering a speech were so glad to be able to collaborate with a few friends to deliver a message that could be both entertaining and interactive.
The speeches were assessed by myself and by their peers. I have maintained that method. I feel that it works and makes the whole process more enjoyable and relevant.
Cheers,
John
Reply
No. 3 — April 24th, 2008 at 10:57 am
The trial idea strikes me as a powerful way to improve student rhetoric. We’ve toyed with the idea of adding a student court to our high school. Students could appeal minor disciplinary decisions in court. Students could defend them to a committee of piers and teachers. An interesting exercise in justice and asking the students to practice oratorical skills. Rather crazy though on the downside potential.
Charlie A. Roys last blog post..Unleashing the Power of TED
Reply
No. 4 — April 24th, 2008 at 11:30 am
The way that we talk, interact, and socialize in school is not the norm for kids. We make them read, write and speak in a language that is different from their peer to peer speak. I am not saying that I believe students should use street language or IM gibberish, but they should talk in a way that makes them feel comfortable.
In school they are all on stage and most teachers try to play Geppetto and show how their puppets can regurgitate material for all to see. What is needed is intervention at an early level. Kids need to feel comfortable in front of other peers and educators. Ask a student a question about something that they care about and then they will just talk to you like you are someone they knoe. The children that usually are well spoken had a teacher who didn’t force/scare them into speaking in front of a class.
Reply
No. 5 — April 24th, 2008 at 11:46 am
I like all the suggestions for moving off scripted speechifying, and am glad people are adding approaches.
The thing I’m still wanting is a way to get students comfortable talking with adults — and before you say “they talk to teachers all the time, and do it quite comfortably,” I have to say this:
I don’t think students see teachers in the same way as they see non-teacher adults. We’re in their comfort zone, but the rest of the adult world is not.
That’s what I saw at that corporate presentation.
Sorry to be rambling, but I’m trying to go in the direction of helping students find non-teacher adult audiences to talk to about things they care about.
So far, the closest I’ve come is the Basketball without Borders students interviewing college basketball players for podcasts, and sophomore Patrick Nam interviewing Bill Farren about sustainability and well-being.
Short version: more projects requiring students to talk publicly with the adult world? Skype, podcasts, etc a way to do that from within the classroom.
Reply
No. 6 — April 24th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
“Short version: more projects requiring students to talk publicly with the adult world? Skype, podcasts, etc a way to do that from within the classroom.”
I 100% agree with you here, but (and it’s a big but) the hurdle to clear, at least where I’m standing, is the way that administrators and school boards treat anything involving the “big bad internet.” They really talk out of both side of their mouths when it comes to anything involving the ‘net, especially student work made available.
I’m not saying it can’t be done, but I fear that this is one major non-standardized-testing-related reason that people haven’t attempted it more in the past.
Toms last blog post..Well that escalated quickly
Reply
No. 7 — April 25th, 2008 at 5:53 am
Tom: I hear you. More on that later. Admin does talk out of both sides of its mouth here: “Look what we do” versus “Don’t do anything that gets beyond the teacher, the walls, and homework.” Upshot: Our students hit the real world unable to be adults who can talk to older adults. (Again, I swear they don’t perceive us teachers as adults. They see us as a different breed, like the rest of the world.)
Reply
No. 8 — April 25th, 2008 at 5:59 am
You know, Charlie and all, that “mock trial” thing has a different slice that strikes me as fertile: the JURY part. After hearing the “competitive speechifying” of the lawyers, there’s potential to put the pedagogical emphasis on the role of the jury in negotiating and compromising their way, after much speaking and listening to each others’ interpretations of the trial, to a sentence. Interesting.
Reply
No. 9 — April 25th, 2008 at 8:21 am
I never thought of using a jury. Excellent idea. All of our competitions were decided by a judge (in “regular season” they were lawyers and law students, in the “playoffs,” they were actual judges). But the jury element takes it that one step further. Excellent.
Toms last blog post..Well that escalated quickly
Reply
No. 10 — April 28th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
I sat through our Grade 8 District Public Speaking Finals and must agree with you whole-heartedly. One student entertained us thoroughly with his passionate speech on why Heavy Metal will live forever. He wore a Led Zeppelin T-Shirt and spoke eloquently on his topic weaving humour into his will versed description of how other genres encroached and even consequently strengthened Heavy Metal’s hold. I listened, laughed and was left wanting more.
The dozen other speeches varied in quality, but none were worthy of a description greater than what you suggested, “artificial speeches about canned subjects”.
From my own school the topic was ‘We need Capital Punishment’ and the speech was riddled with empty rhetoric.
I was left wondering why students could not use audio-visuals to enhance their ‘presentation’? When will we get past the idea that faked emphasis and intonation actually convinces anyone of anything? Contrived is not convincing.
Although I like your idea of debates shifting to ‘cooperative negotiation and conflict resolution’, I also like the idea of shifting public speaking to ‘presentations’. Shift away from orator and move to marketer. Sell an idea. Use any format you wish. Confidently convince me.
Reply
No. 11 — April 28th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
[...] connects, by the way, to a conversation with “Uninspired Teacher” Tom and Charlie A. Roy on the “Schooly Speeches versus [...]
No. 12 — April 29th, 2008 at 6:21 am
@Dave,
That too. I’m thinking of a project along those lines.
Reply
No. 13 — May 1st, 2008 at 3:17 pm
To respond to your question about alternative competitions to debate, when I was on speech team in high school I participated in the discussion event for a few years. The basic premise was that the group (usually about 5 or 6 of us) was given a problem that needed to be solved and we had an hour to do it using resources we brought with us. Sometimes we had lots of trouble coming to a consensus, other times we’d pull something together very quickly but the important part of the event wasn’t the solution it was the process of getting there and how we interacted with each other.
There is more information, including links to outlines and critique forms at: http://mshsl.org/mshsl/activitypage.asp?actnum=415
Reply
No. 14 — May 5th, 2008 at 7:49 am
You know it’s funny. Unless your classroom is a whole lot different than my room, then don’t you have, like, a bazillion discussions in your room? I know it’s normal for teachers to think that whatever they do is pretty much universal and if it isn’t it’s because they’re doing it wrong! Still, I thought the English teacher bread and butter was the provocative quote, short write, pair compare, larger discussion, reflective write. My kids get all kinds of time to talk about all kinds of stuff. Usually, whatever I’m interested in. And very little of it is graded. Again, that’s lazy teaching when I don’t have a better idea and I still haven’t graded the last paper.
Also, isn’t the very next favorite lazyteacher idea to have the students teach the class with the all purpose lead the discussion section. When my first child was born, I pretty much outsourced an entire quarter of Honors 10.
Our school has one section of 5-7 minutes speeches in our HS curric. One is persuasive and the other expository. They choose from the Opposing Viewpoints database and then research away.
Also, I should mention that real people actually do spend more than little time just talking to groups of people without sharing or negotiating or doing anything but delivering data. It’s not going to die out without a fight.
Nate Stearnss last blog post..At least five forms of pseudoscience…
Reply
No. 15 — May 5th, 2008 at 10:30 am
[...] Expand Education as Pretense: Schooly “Speeches” versus Real “Talks”… [...]
No. 16 — May 6th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
To me, this is all part of the larger issue of authentic writing vs crappy school writing. If students are conditioned to produce bad thesis-driven writing about things they don’t care about, it’s going to carry forward into their crappy speechifying.
Jeff Wassermans last blog post..Daily link post 05/02/2008
Reply
No. 17 — May 6th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
@ Jeff
I wholeheartedly agree. A lot of writing in high school has gone way downhill because of standardized testing, in more ways than one. First, you get bland, uncreative writing which even the students can’t stand. Second, so many schools stop teaching basic mechanics at an early age so they can focus on getting kids prepared to write for the standardized tests. So not only does their writing suck, you can’t understand it because of the bad grammar, spelling, and punctuation.
Toms last blog post..It’s Teacher Depreciation Week!
Reply
No. 18 — May 8th, 2008 at 9:02 am
[...] Education as pretense: Schooly “speeches” versus real “talks” [...]