The Dynamics of Class Room Teaching:

Expectations and Realities

Imagine, when as an experienced teacher, and that too in the inaugural class of a semester,
you get to hear, “Sir, we thought your subject was very sweet.” To be honest, I was nonplussed when
it happened. But, as an afterthought, I realized that an adaptation of Albert Einstein’s classic quote
(in the title picture above) could have served good purpose. That is: ‘everything should be made as
sweet as possible, but not any sweeter!’ The reason? Too much of sweet is bad for health; it makes
you lazy and suppresses motivation. May be, at the end of the day, it leaves a bit of bitterness in its
wake. The moral of the story is simple: “If a thing is worth doing, it is worth doing well.” Students
should not take their classroom conduct for granted unless, of course, they realize they have chosen
the wrong field of study. On the other hand, however, teachers need to bear a greater responsibility
for delivering value in the real sense. All in all, teaching in an institution of higher learning is a two-
way process — the design and delivery of the course being complemented by the assurance of
students having understood the contents and the objectives.
 I recently thought of getting some feedback from students at a local private university where
I teach, about various aspects of the classroom environment as the course gathers momentum. I was
helped by three of my former students in disseminating a questionnaire to the prospective
respondents. Six broad categories were defined within which a total of twenty-eight (28) questions
(potential issues) were identified. Respondents1 were asked to identify only the ones they thought
were relevant to their perceptions of the entire dynamics. Answers, that were common to most
respondents, provide the underpinnings for
the construction of the accompanying graphic.
The teacher, more or less, emerges central to
the whole dynamics, while the course being
taught is almost equally important from the
students’ point of view. Of slightly lesser
importance, are the inhibitors, which are
factors that inhibit active interaction between
the teacher and the students regardless of other elements of the classroom environment.

In order to better explain the finer details of the argument, I thought it appropriate to identify
issues that were common amongst, at least, ten (10) of the respondents. While this seems arbitrary,
in this case it ensures that each category gets included in the analysis. The graphic below (bar chart)
identifies the determinants that students perceive to be critical to an enabling learning process. While
a positive body language of the teacher,
invariably, attracts students, it is the overall
subject knowledge of the teacher that has
the potential to engage students
meaningfully. I have always believed that
not a single question raised in the class
should go unanswered, and, I guess, the
students are mindful of this too. In addition,
teachers should be able to define the
broader practical context of the subject they are teaching. Students also believe that the course
contents should be shared with them so they have a better preparedness level, though I am not
entirely sure if they are sufficiently motivated at the first place to benefit from that. However, the

1A total of thirty respondents were involved. Most were not my students at any time, to keep the analysis
unbiased.
issue of pre-requisites for a particular course, is a concern for both the teacher and the students.
While the main course runs, teachers should clearly emphasize what background knowledge is
needed and students must ensure that they have it in place. Though, in most instances pre-requisites
are in place, students do feel that difficult concepts need to be revisited.

The Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) at this institution is a great way to facilitate learning
and achieve deadlines. Most students feel that quizzes or assignments can be managed via the VLE,
thought at the current moment in time this facility is not regulated in a way to pre-empt plagiarism.
But open-book quizzes (which some students feel is not a bad idea), can be conducted through the
VLE. Besides, the VLE provides an elaborate environment to interact with the teacher in a variety of
ways. On the other hand, the classroom environment, as determined by the batch sizes, has elicited
very specific responses. Quite understandably, smaller batches help students interact with teachers
better and stay focused. While just a handful of students feel that small batches prevent compatible
groupings, most are of the opinion that larger batches cause distractions regardless of the interactive
mode of learning.

Finally, we may wrap up this discussion by accounting for the ‘inhibitors.’ Incidentally, in
designing the questionnaire, I had the most number of potential issues identified under this category.
However, the two most critical that emerged were: (1) lack of self-confidence in students; and (2)
teacher’s unfriendly attitude in inspiring students to raise questions. The latter, obviously, is a bit
tricky to be generalized, since students have their perceptions based on differing personal attributes,
but an indifferent, coercive attitude of a teacher doesn’t help anybody’s cause. On the other hand,
students in our culture, are in definite need of structured counselling on motivators that improve
self-image and self-esteem.