next »

[freefallen]

This is probably petty compared to a lot of graduate life issues, but this is a current one I am currently dealing with...

I used to never speak up in class. I can debate one on one, but I don't think I ever really grasped the ability to argue skillfully in a classroom. However, pushing myself in the past year to prepare for graduate school I've been participating a lot more.

Today I had my first graduate class that involved (and will involve) a lot of discussion. I piped up a lot actually but felt ridiculously stupid afterward. I just didn't feel that any of my points moved the discussion along, for example, the professor didn't take what I said and used it to ask another question/elaborate/etc.

I feel silly posting this, but I was wondering if anyone had any advice on participating effectively in class? I do try to listen attentively, I will do the readings, etc... but any tips for feeling less stupid for speaking up in class would be nice. :(

[systeme_d_]

First, good for you for working to develop this essential skill.

Keep in mind that when professors use another person's comment as a springboard, sometimes it is to redirect the discussion, or to correct the misreading.  So a direct response from a professor is not always a good thing.

My best suggestion is to take notes on the reading, and formulate questions about the reading prior to class.  Spend time thinking about the reading (processing internally) so that you feel more comfortable expressing it externally later.  Also, keep up what you are doing, and calibrate your in-class responses to what others are saying. 

You are looking for external validation, which is the norm for a graduate student.  But part of your grad student "apprenticeship" is to learn how to achieve internal validation by knowing that your contributions are valuable, whether or not anyone expresses this.  This comes with time -- often a good deal of time.   :)

[stanwyck]

Keep in mind that when professors use another person's comment as a springboard, sometimes it is to redirect the discussion, or to correct the misreading.  So a direct response from a professor is not always a good thing.

So true.  I had at least one seminar in which this was obviously true (well, it became obvious to me after 3-4 weeks).  The professor remained almost silent unless it was necessary to redirect the seminar.  At that point, he'd respond to the student contribution immediately prior to push the discussion in a different direction.  It's not such an obvious tactic if the professor participates in discussion quite a bit, but in this case, it was usually the only time he got really involved.

You are looking for external validation, which is the norm for a graduate student.  But part of your grad student "apprenticeship" is to learn how to achieve internal validation by knowing that your contributions are valuable, whether or not anyone expresses this.  This comes with time -- often a good deal of time.   :)

This, too.  True story, same seminar.  I struggled in that class up to the midterm.  Sometimes I read the book through TWICE before seminar, wrote my response paper, prepared a list of comments/questions, and come to class thinking, "Okay, I got this," only to have every single thing I said met with silence.  Week after week, I would come to class really excited about something I'd read in the book, only to end up sitting for two hours in frustration.  No one seemed to respond in the same manner I did, and I kept thinking, "God, stanwyck, you are so stupid!"

It wasn't until I wrote my midterm essay that I suddenly realized (with the professor's help), that I was actually doing really, really well with the material.  He sat me down when I came to pick up my essay and said something like, "This is outstanding work.  You're approaching the material in a different way than the rest of your cohort.  Keep on doing that," or something like that.  Not that what I was doing was absolutely brilliant, but what I was doing was good, and I couldn't use class response as a gauge.

In that case, the professor's validation trumped my cohort's lack of interest, but then the next step was for me to stop looking even for the professor's validation (took approximately two years).  I mean, of course, you will need your advisor's feedback and help, but it's important to nurture confidence in your capabilities.  Otherwise, you will be paralyzed during the dissertating process, and unable to write because you're uncertain of the strength of your ideas.

As systeme_d says, it takes awhile.  You don't want to become dogmatic and inflexible, but you need to believe that you can contribute, and that what you say is worthwhile.  Or, at least you need to believe that you can get to that point during the next 2-3 years of coursework.

[patchouli]

Systeme's analysis is spot on.  Often when I use another person's comments as a springborad when faciliating discussion, it is to correct or redirect.   Also, some professors are more validating than others in terms of responding to each comment; that is not always a good thing. 

I also concur that your internal validation needs to be ingrained by the middle or towards the end of grad school; at first though, this is hard to get used to.  I say this as a former grad student (now professor) who never spoke up as an undergrad even if my profs tried to get me involved.  I was too quiet.  I realized I had to change, and I did what you are doing, made a marked plan to do so.   

First, good for you for working to develop this essential skill.

Keep in mind that when professors use another person's comment as a springboard, sometimes it is to redirect the discussion, or to correct the misreading.  So a direct response from a professor is not always a good thing.

My best suggestion is to take notes on the reading, and formulate questions about the reading prior to class.  Spend time thinking about the reading (processing internally) so that you feel more comfortable expressing it externally later.  Also, keep up what you are doing, and calibrate your in-class responses to what others are saying. 

You are looking for external validation, which is the norm for a graduate student.  But part of your grad student "apprenticeship" is to learn how to achieve internal validation by knowing that your contributions are valuable, whether or not anyone expresses this.  This comes with time -- often a good deal of time.   :)

[barred_owl]

Systeme_d, stanwyck, and patchouli have made excellent comments and suggestions, freefallen.  What I will add is to say that your feelings are not uncommon, especially so early in your graduate career.  Over time, as you develop more and more confidence in your ability, you won't second-guess yourself as much.  It just takes time and determination, and it seems like you have both of those going for you right now.  Good luck, and don't hesitate to speak up!

[hapax]

I'd just like to chime in and say thank you for the advice, as I've been feeling the exact same way. I spent most of my undergrad career trying to go from hiding in the back to actually contributing meaningfully in discussions. By my senior year I thought I had the hang of it, but now that I've started grad school I'm back to my old shy, silent self. I know it'll get better eventually, but it's still hard to deal with.

[barred_owl]

Sorry for the so-quick reply again, but freefallen's post really triggered quite a few memories for me!  Freefallen, you didn't mention your discipline (and it probably doesn't matter), but one of the hardest things for me in making the transition from undergrad to grad student in a STEM field was to get beyond the notion that there was always a "right" answer.  Sometimes, much of the undergrad work in the STEM fields seems so concrete and the thinking so established that it's difficult in the first graduate classes to make the transition from dutiful notetaker and occasional questioner to a full-fledged skeptic or critic.  It's a challenge to make that change, of course, but--again--it just takes time.

[hipgeek]

First, good for you for working to develop this essential skill.

You are looking for external validation, which is the norm for a graduate student.  But part of your grad student "apprenticeship" is to learn how to achieve internal validation by knowing that your contributions are valuable, whether or not anyone expresses this.  This comes with time -- often a good deal of time.   :)

This is the best advice I've heard in a long time!  I need to remember this because I just love external validation.  Ways that I've been able to structure my participation is to not to think of class discussion simply as a debate where I'm forwarding my position but also to think of it as an opportunity to hear other perspectives.  Of course, if I have a strong disagreement with a classmate I'll articulate it up to a point but more often I find myself asking questions and trying to draw connections to other texts (I'm in lit.)  I often feel stupid in grad school, especially after certain class discussions where I feel lost or silly, but that never stops me from participating.  The more people I talk to the more it seems to me that part of being in grad school is sometimes feeling stupid and insecure and just coping with it. 

[lenniel]

This is wonderful advice, and though I am farther along as a grad student, I need to be reminded of all of this.  I also used to be afraid to speak up in class for a number of reasons, ranging from feeling stupid to not wanting to sound like little miss know-it-all.  (I was one of those in high school)  Having been in grad seminars where one or two people monopolized the conversation, gassing off at length to hear themselves speak, I was fearful of becoming more like them, actually. 

I think the biggest step for me was not being afraid to be wrong and look stupid.  Grad school is about, as stated here, learning to articulate your views, hearing other points of view, and also just learning the field.  No one knows everything going in, and sometimes a great discussion can be had when someone simply admits they don't know about a particular topic. 

Go ahead and speak up, and don't be afraid to be wrong.  So what if you look stupid? There isn't a Stupidity Committee rating all your answers, so admit if you are uncertain, but don't apologize for it.  Chances are, the class windbags don't know either, and just have more experience talking things out.

[snowbound]

Tenniel already said some of this while I was writing, but I'll add my 2-cents worth anyway . . .

What if the OP does make a “stupid” comment?  Such things happen.  The only sure way avoid that is to stick to saying something so noncommittal as to be meaningless or to say nothing at all—neither of which will move the discussion (or OP’s intellectual development) forward. 

Part of becoming a scholar is developing the confidence to tread on unsure ground, and thus to run the risk of making mistakes.  So you misunderstand the concept and say something that reveals that, or you make a suggestion that turns out to be invalid or irrelevant or whatever.  Know what?  The sky doesn’t fall.  The professor will clarify and make sure the discussion keeps on track, and most have lots of experience in doing that diplomatically.  As for your peers, most are too worried about the reception of their own comments to give much thought to who made the not-so-useful comment.  So keep doing what you’re doing, and try not to worry so much about reception.

I’m sure most your comments are far from stupid, OP, but if you never ever say anything wrong or invalid, then it probably means that you’re being too cautious in your thinking.
As you become more comfortable with voicing your thoughts, you will become more adventurous in what you allow yourself to say—and think.  So you may actually run more risk of being wrong—but also be more likely to bring fresh insights. 

[snowbound]

Lenniel, I liked most of what you said, but I don't think characterizing active participants in a seminar as windbags, know-it-alls, just wanting to hear themselves speak, etc is very helpful.  Of course, it's important for participants in any conversation to have respect for others, and listen as well as speak.  Of course.  But instead of thinking snide thoughts about the two or three people who do talk in your seminar, and remaining silent for fear of being thought to be like them, the silent folks should join the discussion!  Believe me, the class, especially the professor, will be glad to have the discussion broadened rather than have it all carried on just a few shoulders. 

As we all know from high school, being the smart person doesn't usually make you the best-liked person.  And even in grad school, peers occasionally resent someone whom they compare themselves unfavorably to.  But it's time to put these petty concerns aside.  If fear of being one of those "know-it-alls" derided in high school makes a student silent in discussions in grad school, that is a problem that he or she has to overcome--as Lenniel did. 

Academic life requires the development of a thick skin.  Not that you shouldn't be sensitive to others, but you can't let the desire for popularity hold you back.  As much as possible,  try to think of seminars as being about ideas, rather than about who it is that said them. 

[kedves]

Believe me, the class, especially the professor, will be glad to have the discussion broadened rather than have it all carried on just a few shoulders.

This is a good point.  The seminar is a community, and it doesn't work as well if everyone does not contribute to the work of making the discussion happen.  Nervousness about talking decreases with practice, and decreased focus on one's own feelings about talking allows one to be a better listener when other people are talking--the other key part of conversation.

[freefallen]

(barred_owl-- I'm in the social sciences.)

Thank you everyone for your great advice! I do feel less upset about the matter. It might be the external validation part-- the professor is co-editor with my old adviser and I know they communicate often so I kind of want to do my old adviser proud. :) That will probably never go away, but I'll work on the fear of sounding stupid (thank you for your thoughts on that snowbound) and I'll keep practicing. It's just frustrating that I can write persuasively but verbally... meh.

[bewilderedta]

There has been a lot of really good advice posted here, and it's a topic that's very relevant for me as I have long been, and continue to be, rather shy in seminars. One of the things that has worked best for me, mentioned above, is to write out my thoughts and questions before class so that I know what I have to say and can be ready for an opportunity to put in my two cents.

One of the other comments I like is

As much as possible,  try to think of seminars as being about ideas, rather than about who it is that said them.

This is a bit of advice someone gave me a while back and it helped me quite a bit. Shyness has an element of narcissism to it sometimes - I fear feeling stupid because I want everyone to think I'm smart/cool/etc. It's helpful to think most people aren't all that concerned about you personally.

[stanwyck]

Lenniel, I liked most of what you said, but I don't think characterizing active participants in a seminar as windbags, know-it-alls, just wanting to hear themselves speak, etc is very helpful.  Of course, it's important for participants in any conversation to have respect for others, and listen as well as speak.  Of course.  But instead of thinking snide thoughts about the two or three people who do talk in your seminar, and remaining silent for fear of being thought to be like them, the silent folks should join the discussion!  Believe me, the class, especially the professor, will be glad to have the discussion broadened rather than have it all carried on just a few shoulders. 

I think you misunderstood lenniel's point (although correct me if I'm wrong, lenniel!).  I don't think the criticism was directed toward "active participants," but rather toward those one or two people you will meet over and over again during your professional career who just won't STFU, no matter how many times they are prompted to do so.  They are the same people who stand up during the Q&A in conference sessions and ask 20-minute long questions, only if you listen closely, there will be no question, just a lecture about that person's own research.  If you haven't experienced one of them in your seminar, that's fantastic.  But they certainly exist, and sometimes even the professor can't shut them up, much less the more timid members of the class.