Leading Discussion: The Ups and Downs

The Graduate Students’ Corner

Jenna Asbury

(note to History 109 students, material from this post is quiz-able for the week of September 10-15)

After completing Week 1, (a.k.a. “syllabus week” – which as a student, this was my favorite day because professors typically let students out early) I had my first content session with my students. Preparing for Wednesday’s lecture, I created a PowerPoint which covered all of the major points from Hist: Chapter 1. I began with slides that explained the three different eras before contact in the Americas: The Paleo-Indian, Archaic, and Pre-Columbian Eras.
Through the advancement of these eras, civilizations became more established and advanced; complex societies formed among the native people, and societies became more sedentary as their caloric intake increased through the simple discovery of harvesting corn. To show examples of complex societies, I displayed images of Mesoamerican chinampas (floating gardens that the Aztecs used in their capital city, Tenochtitlan), the Incan ruins in the Andes Mountains of Peru, and the brilliant way the Incas farmed in the mountainous  terrain of the Andes through terraced farming. Furthermore, I reviewed the types of social structures that existed in North America prior to European contact. All of this information was a prelude for what historians currently still debate – should the Americas be considered “The New World? One of the major problems with early history is that many primary documents were written through a European perspective. Europeans believed they were superior to all other civilizations, and through the discovery of the Americas by Christopher Columbus, these “barren,” “uncivilized,” and “barbaric” lands were deemed “new.” However, carbon dating challenges this concept of a New World because civilizations already existed thousands of years before the Europeans. As Professor Blum reiterated in lecture, there were three distinct old worlds that collided, each with their own established civilizations. Sure, the indigenous people were not as technologically advanced as the Europeans, but that plays in part due to the Ice Age of the Paleolithic Era that resulted in a sense of worldly isolation. 
If I started lecture with the question “Should the Americas be considered ‘The New World,” I would not have gotten much of a response. However, by showing examples of complex societies that evolved over time, this triggered an “ah-ha” moment for the students. Just by the order of how I presented the question and material, the students were able to see a historical debate in the process.
My next plan of reviewing the textbook was to explain European feudalism and what events prompted the decline of this exploitative system. And “shockingly,” my PowerPoint presentation stopped working and the slides were not projecting on the screen; thus ending the remaining information from Chapter 1. Therefore, I worked with the students on how to properly format bibliographical and footnote citations.
Change of Plans
Coming up to my Friday discussion section, I decided I needed to revise how I structured my lecture; due in part because I wanted more participation in class. I spoke with Professor Blum about some ideas of how to conduct my section on Friday, and my revision worked wonders! I began class with three discussion questions, which each incorporated information from Hist and Wednesday’s lecture. Professor Blum suggested I come up with open-ended questions and the students could work on them collectively in pairs. I observed 100% student participation and was thoroughly pleased. When I asked them what they came up with, everyone was raising their hands, and I had them explain the terms, historical figures, or events – a way to reiterate everything they learned. When applicable, I mentioned additional information to solidify their understanding. We covered material ranging from the events that prompted the decline of feudalism, the factors that contributed to European overseas expansion, and how West Africa was exploited. This material incorporated combined understanding of Hist and Professor Blum’s large lecture.
By asking open-ended questions, I had more thorough and opinionated answers. Rather than asking them questions that just required them to search for answers, I asked them their opinions, or how they viewed specific events, or what they would do in certain situations, with the incorporation of course material.
From Friday’s section on pre-Contact and Contact in the Americas, I learned new techniques of how to get 100% out of my students, and will apply them to my other section. Although I support the use of PowerPoint, I learned that partner/group activities work better in break-out-style sections, as it encourages more involvement with the course material.
Jenna Asbury is a graduate student in the history department at San Diego State University

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *