1. Consolidation of Responsibility Adam Gray Preston Hughes Dr. Lenny Shedletsky

2. Introduction 1976, Karp and Yoels developed the term “consolidation of responsibility” as, “a norm that suggests in the typical classroom, participation in discussion will be consolidated in the hands of the few, with the majority of the students being passive observers or only occasional participants.” Howard, Short, and Clarke (1996) believe that this “consolidation of responsibility” is still the classroom norm presently.

3. Consideration was taken of instructor’s gender, class size, teaching techniques, student age, and traditional or non-traditional student. Howard, Short, Clarke, when the “consolidation of responsibility is operating, there are only “talkers”- who account for the vast majority of all interactions- and “nontalkers”-those students who speak up only occasionally, if at all”

4. Procedure Pilot Study Started in January 2011 Step 1: Researched past studies and results. Step 2: Administered a survey in 1 chosen class: sex, traditional vs. non-traditional, year of school, and sex of instructor. Step 3: Experimented with different ways of gathering information proving or disproving “consolidation of responsibility.”Seating chart, verbal exchange diagram, structure of exchange chart, voice recording.

5. Step 4: Gather information from chosen course for 3 class periods; proved easier said than done. Step 5: Report information to rest of group, make proper adjustments if needed. Step 6: Results based on information gathered.

6. Conclusion Consolidation of responsibility existed in our classroom.

7. Frequency of Student Comments in class (3 classes) student bltPAJ1J2NJ3s mean freq3995701207007.9 %4911690150900

8. Highest participation in student to teacher exchange.

9. Who Initiates Classroom Talk? (totals based on 3 class meetings, senior seminar)

10. Teacher to student second highest exchange rate.

12. Student to student very weak.

14. Teacher to student exchange high based on traditional question by teacher and response by student. Student to student exchange very low; comfort of students with each other and professor, schedule of students outside the class, common understand/state of mind between students.

15. Student to teacher exchange highest because of classroom formation, instructor/student comfort ability, common understand of procedure of class