Rachel Rys

WRIT 501
Professor Johnson
6 October 2015
COR #1: Counting
In this reflection, I consider the group dynamics that emerged during a recent pedagogy
workshop in the Feminist Studies department. This 90 minute workshop was part of a threequarter pedagogy series facilitated by the Feminist Studies Lead TA. As the first session of the
year, this workshop covered general logistics about TAing in the Feminist Studies department
and included three separate guest presentations about a) the TA union b) responding to student
writing, and c) creating queer and trans* affirming classroom spaces. Here, I will focus on the
ratio of talk during the third segment on queer and trans* identities in the classroom. It is
especially important to consider the ratio of talk during this discussion because of the topics
deliberate focus on interrogating power in pedagogy.
Fifteen graduate students attended the meeting, although individuals rotated in and out of the
workshop. Two people left early for sections or lectures, and three people arrived late from
similar engagements. Based on the sharing of pronouns at the start of the session, nine out of
twelve attendees were female-identified, one was male-identified, and two students identified as
genderqueer. Nine of the participants were white and three were three people of color. Six out of
twelve attendees were Feminist Studies graduate students and the remaining students were from
Political Science, Clinical and Counseling Psychology, Religious Studies, and Chican@ Studies.
Six students were currently TAing for the department in the fall, while the rest were either TAing
in a future quarter or not TAing during 2015-2016 at all.
Most of the talking was done by female and genderqueer-identified students, particularly those
who were in the Feminist Studies department. During the session about queer and trans*
identities, the two genderqueer-identified students were much more vocal than they had been
during the prior sections because this topic allowed them to draw from personal experiences. The
lead TA talked for the majority of the time, primarily to introduce the agenda, explain the nature
of the workshop series, and describe departmental policies and resources. She was also the clear
facilitator of the session, keeping time and ending discussion to move to the next agenda point or
presentation. Given the wide range of topics to be covered in 90 minutes, her talk emphasized
providing information and resources rather than stimulating open discussion on the designated
topics.
This trend of presenting resources and best practices continued through the beginning of the
session on queer and trans* identities. The presenter, a past Lead TA in the department, circulated
a handout that listed suggested practices and language for creating inclusive spaces. As an
introduction to the presentation, she asked people to split into groups to discuss the purpose and
benefits of having students state their preferred pronouns as part of their introductions. While
working in small groups, one of the Feminist Studies graduate students expressed her

Rys 2
disagreement with the pronoun exercise in question and communicated this hesitation with the
group when asked to share out. The remainder of the session was spent with her arguing with the
facilitator about the merits of this exercise, a relatively minor point in the overall agenda of the
presentation.
Seeing the way that talk and power operated in this instance is closely related to Blacks Power
and Talk because it shows the ways in which phrasing and transitions operated in a group
setting to derail or redirect conversation. In this case, one of the most noticeable observations
was that Feminist Studies grad students and doc emphasis students, particularly those who were
further along in their degrees, dominated the conversation. Very few comments or questions were
added by students from other departments, even though they were more likely to be unfamiliar
with TAing in the department. Much of the talk worked to position some students as experts
(performed through transition words, signal phrases and references to citations and theoretical
works) and the others as novices or learners (performed, in part, through their silence).
A takeaway from the meeting and the course readings is was the necessity of clearly outlining the
purpose of a meeting or conversation. In some communication, this training was described as a
mandatory training for new TAs. In others, it was described as a broader, ongoing pedagogical
discussion. In a space with such disparate levels of familiarity and experience, explicitly
identifying the purpose of the interaction will help each participant consider how their
contribution will further that aimin addition to clarifying the roles of the facilitator in directing
conversation and focus.

Rys 3
CORs should be posted to the appropriate GS Forum at some point during the week that they're
assigned (and the due date depends on when your class meets...). They're likely going to be
between 500-750 words (or 2-3 pages). They should include:
The

A description of what you observe without evaluation. Here, you just want to retell the
experience.
If appropriate, an analysis of what went well
Notes on what surprised you (for whatever reason because it didnt go well, because it
was unexpected)
Anything else that you notice

A connection between at least one of these things and at least one reading from Writing
501

A reflection on what you will take from this observation for your teaching in W2 (and,
perhaps, beyond)

Week 2 - Counting
This week, your focused observations should concentrate on counting in the classroom. The goal
here is to get a broad sense of the dynamics in the classroom. Some suggestions for specific
things to count:

Who talks? For how long?

What is the ratio of your talk to student talk? ?

Who changes the conversation, how, when, and why? ?

What is the ratio of male to female talk? ?

How much time is spent talking about writing? About reading/s? About connections
between both?

When you write this entry, youll want to include as many specifics about your counting as
possible.