Two years into his English literature degree at the University of Pittsburgh, sophomore Luke Johnson has noticed something in his liberal arts courses: Students in his classes have gone quiet. As he sits in sociology or English writing classes, he finds himself having to fill the silence through more participation.<\/p>\n
Every time his professors assign a book or an excerpt to read, he ensures it\u2019s completed by class time so he can participate effectively. When no one else speaks, he feels frustrated \u2014 unable to dialogue with his peers and deepen his learning about the text.<\/p>\n
\u201cI feel indebted to my teacher to make the class engaging,\u201d Johnson said. \u201cI feel like the majority of people in the class are taking it as a gen ed<\/a> and therefore sort of discounting the importance of doing the coursework.\u201d <\/p>\n Johnson\u2019s concerns about waning participation and declining reading<\/a> are shared by professors and teachers in liberal arts programs, including in Pittsburgh. Teachers at four universities interviewed for this story had a variety of theories about the cause, including:<\/p>\n Public Source asked liberal arts professors at Pittsburgh universities for the strategies they\u2019re implementing to keep students engaged. From new material to approaches rooted in pioneer times, here\u2019s what they told us.<\/p>\n Less Aristotle, more community<\/p>\n When Ryan D\u2019Souza, a communications professor at Chatham University, asks a question and receives no response, he feels \u201con edge\u201d and questions his capabilities as a professor and communicator. He said he thinks to himself: \u201cDid I not say that correctly? Was that a stupid idea?\u201d<\/p>\n He doesn\u2019t blame any student for silence. \u201cI would be unwilling to point at one student and say \u2018you\u2019re the problem,\u2019 when really it\u2019s a structural problem.\u201d <\/p>\n D\u2019Souza said the federal No Child Left Behind Act<\/a> (NCLB) of 2001 \u2014 replaced by the Every Student Succeeds Act<\/a> in 2015 \u2014 negatively impacted students\u2019 views on reading. NCLB sought to encourage K-12 schools to take responsibility for student\u2019s academic performance by emphasizing test scores and altering funding if schools or states didn\u2019t meet its requirements. <\/p>\n \u201cThe current generation of students would have been the ones really ingrained with the No Child Left Behind kind of policy where you no longer need to read something for comprehension, but to know the correct answer,\u201d D\u2019Souza said. <\/p>\n He said he\u2019s willing to try anything \u2014 newspaper articles, comic books, video essays \u2014 to fuel student participation. \u201cChange the way you teach,\u201d he said. \u201cThat has often worked for me as I\u2019ve understood what my student population is like.\u201d <\/p>\n While D\u2019Souza believes there is still a place for more academically rigorous texts, he does not find value in \u201cburdening\u201d undergraduate students with materials far removed from their generation. When he does present dense material to his students he assures them they can discuss ideas together. <\/p>\n Brock Bahler, a religious studies professor, taught at Duquesne University and Seton Hill University between 2010 and 2014. He previously assigned classic texts like Aristotle\u2019s \u201cNicomachean Ethics\u201d or Immanuel Kant\u2019s \u201cMetaphysics of Morals.\u201d<\/p>\n Since joining the University of Pittsburgh in 2014, his syllabus has shifted to prioritize more \u201caccessible\u201d materials that explore contemporary topics. Instead of having his students read the entirety of Aristotle, he\u2019ll assign chapters from Hannah Arendt\u2019s \u201cThe Origins of Totalitarianism.\u201d This adjustment, according to Bahler, helps his students stay motivated to read. <\/p>\n Bahler doesn\u2019t see students\u2019 changing reading habits as a bad thing. While some criticize \u201chelicopter professors\u201d \u2014 teachers who appear to micro-manage students in the classroom \u2014 he thinks increased supervision and assistance in reading can help him better understand who is struggling with the text and, if needed, provide help. <\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019ve had this assumption that learning can happen in these very autonomous, individualistic ways,\u201d he said. \u201cBut maybe that\u2019s not how learning happens, maybe learning happens in the community?\u201d<\/p>\n The one-room schoolhouse strategy<\/p>\n Hillary Lazar, a sociology instructor at the University of Pittsburgh, said policies like NCLB have made students view reading as a chore rather than an activity. \u201cDecades of teaching to the test \u2026 have not benefited us,\u201d she said. <\/p>\n Lazar said students arrive at college with varying levels of preparation, not because of personal deficiencies but because of unequal educational opportunities. She said the \u201c opportunity gap<\/a> \u201d created by unequal distribution of K-12 resources is only exacerbated once a student arrives on a college campus. \u201cI don\u2019t think it\u2019s that our students are becoming less capable and competent,\u201d she said. \u201cI don\u2019t know if they have the right training or that the right level of expectations being put on them.\u201d<\/p>\n Lazar has adopted a teaching strategy she calls the \u201cone-room schoolhouse approach.\u201d Similar to a traditional schoolhouse of the early 20th century<\/a>, Lazar provides material that enriches both introductory learners and advanced students who may already be familiar with lower-level material. <\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s not perfect, but it\u2019s what I\u2019ve found as a way to help meet the different needs of our students,\u201d Lazar said. \u201cCombined with techniques to help encourage participation, I have actually found some really wonderful and generative conversations.\u201d <\/p>\n Ditch the answers. Bring the questions. <\/p>\n James Swindal, a philosophy professor at Duquesne University, builds participation through what he calls \u201cprecis questions.\u201d Students write questions about the required readings, then Swindal projects them onto a whiteboard and has the student read their question aloud. <\/p>\n \u201cThe questions can involve clarifications about a meaning that they did not understand, what is meant by any concepts mentioned that the student is unsure about, or, as often is the case, something about the quotation that the student criticizes and then offers a possible fallacy,\u201d Swindal told Public Source. \u201cWhat is uncanny is that most of the questions they come up with match the very questions I want to go over for the whole class.\u201d<\/p>\n Precis questions don\u2019t just facilitate discussion, they also ensure students are actively engaging with the assigned material, according to Swindal. When his students know they have to present, they are motivated to read the text well in advance and provide strong discussion questions. <\/p>\n AI limits and \u2018confessionals\u2019<\/p>\n Lazar believes students should be able to think critically about reading materials without relying on artificial intelligence, but recognizes that with the university\u2019s embrace of AI <\/a> means her students are likely using the technology. To better understand it, she hosts \u201cAI confessionals,\u201d at which students write about how they use the tool in their coursework. Lazar believes that by understanding how they use it, she can assist them in valuing their own voice. <\/p>\n Bahler has, on occasion, let his students use AI in his assignments, but only for critical evaluation. He\u2019s a firm \u201cno\u201d on using the tool for writing. \u201cYou learn what you think about the world as you write,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n Bahler is also concerned with generative AI\u2019s potential for \u201cflattening\u201d language, at the expense of certain forms of English \u2014 like African American Vernacular English<\/a> \u2014 which AI tends to devalue, according to a 2024 study<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re assuming that there\u2019s some kind of standard English out there, when it\u2019s really just some white guy\u2019s version of English,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n Professor of English Jane Bernstein hasn\u2019t noticed a major shift in participation in her creative writing courses at Carnegie Mellon University, though if she had to teach a literature course again, she would require every student to present their book reports in person to ensure they didn\u2019t use AI. <\/p>\n She acknowledges that literary analysis can be difficult, but she urges her students not to use AI in search of correct answers. In fact, she encourages them not to look for \u201cthe point\u201d at all. \u201cImmerse yourself in the story,\u201d she said. \u201cThis isn\u2019t about getting something right or wrong.\u201d <\/p>\n She worries that if students continue using AI in place of comprehension and writing, they will have difficulty not just producing complex work, but also appreciating the humanity inherent in literature. <\/p>\n Bernstein has been teaching since 1991 and plans to retire at the end of the spring semester. She describes the feeling as bittersweet. She\u2019ll miss her students, but is also relieved she won\u2019t have to navigate the potential impact of Generative AI.<\/p>\n ___<\/p>\n