ac educator
J U N E 1 , 2 0 0 2 / A N A LY T I C A L C H E M I S T R Y
1 A
ac educator
Using Humor To Teach The right type of humor can help students relate to instructors and material. Charles A. Lucy University of Alberta (Canada)
W
hile a great deal of discussion has focused on the importance of the analytical chemistry curriculum, an instructor’s ability to engage students and clearly convey information is of equal concern (1–7 ). Educational research has found that effective teaching requires the development of interpersonal relationships between the teacher and the students, and that this process can be enhanced by using humor in lectures. For undergraduates, humor can lighten the tedium of studying “dogmatic” and sometimes esoteric analytical chemistry subjects such as quantitative analysis, but it should be used with care and caution.
342 A
DAN SHERBO
Does humor enhance learning? Proponents of using humor in lectures claim numerous student benefits, including better retention of material, improved student–teacher rapport, greater attentiveness and interest, and less academic stress; they also claim that it makes the principles seem a little less abstract (8). However, detractors argue that humor distracts students from the lecture content, trivializes the subject matter, and may offend some students, thereby decreasing rapport and even undermining the instructor’s authority. In reality, most professors already use humor. Studies show that 80% of lecturers tell a joke at least once during a 1-h lecture (9, 10). Also, educational studies have shown that humor has a positive influence on keeping an audience’s attention (11). A survey of 314 undergraduate communications students at a mid-sized U.S. uni-
versity found a strong positive correlation between students enjoying an instructor’s “humor orientation” and their engagement in the course material (12). Humor’s influence on students’ attitudes and anxiety was studied by Assistant Dean of Teaching Ronald Berk at Johns Hopkins School of Nursing and Programmer Joy Nanda at the School of Hygiene and Public Health, who monitored 142 nursing students in three 14week introductory statistics courses—one undergraduate and two graduate (13).
A N A LY T I C A L C H E M I S T R Y / J U N E 1 , 2 0 0 2
The researchers observed that amusing lectures significantly improved the students’ attitudes toward statistics in the undergraduate class and one of the graduate classes. Moreover, anxiety levels in the undergraduate class decreased by almost two standard deviations based on student survey responses. This survey result is particularly relevant to quantitative analysis courses in which the entire mark for an experiment may depend on how accurately an analysis is performed. These improvements are nice, but an
ac educator
instructor is primarily concerned with learning. Avner Ziv, an educational psychologist at Tel Aviv University (Israel), tested this question in two one-semester undergraduate introductory statistics courses presented in parallel by the same experienced instructor—one in a humorous manner and the other straightforward (14). On average, the female students in the humorous class averaged 8.5% higher test scores than their counterparts in the straight course, while the male students scored 11.7% higher. Ziv then replicated this experiment with a different student population but this time in an introductory psychology course with a different teacher. In this course, the humorous class scored 82% on the final exam while the control class scored 72.5%.
What kinds of humor work? Ziv’s studies indicate that humor can have a notable impact on learning, but what types of humor should be used? Although there is no universally accepted definition of humor, it is often classified by the mode of delivery, such as sarcasm, cartoon, or joke. But categories such as “inclusive” or “divisive” are more relevant to teaching. Recent studies indicate an instructor’s ability to support students’ egos by making them feel good is second in importance only to ability to convey information clearly (7 ). Divisive humor, such as sarcasm, irony, insults, and parody, which tends to be biting and often leaves the student embarrassed, can be extremely detrimental to learning and should be avoided. It is possible to alienate students using any style of humor if the subject matter is inappropriate. Berk lists the following topics to avoid: “put-downs” of any individual, including public figures; comments based on ethnicity, race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or appearance; sarcasm or ridicule; sexual innuendo; profanity; and extremely sensitive issues such as illness, abortion, divorce, or personal tragedies (15). Berk classifies humor as either high or low risk (15). High-risk humor loosely entails outlandish comparisons that are often not related to the subject matter, may distract the students, and are prone
to being offensive. Because very few of us have American comic Robin Williams’ unique talents, the fear of stumbling into high-risk humor hinders many instructors from incorporating any kind of humor into their lectures. Low-risk humor is in fact easily attainable for most lecturers and is much more effective. It is generally prepared in advance and can be tested beforehand to hopefully minimize failure. Berk also suggests using funny quotations and questions; multiple choice items; top 10 lists as popularized by American TV host David Letterman; skits; and prepared adlibs. In addition, classes enjoy reviews based on popular TV game shows, such as Jeopardy or Who Wants To Be a Millionaire? (16–18). Berk’s book Professors Are from Mars, Students Are from Snickers is a very useful resource for instructors who want to incorporate low-risk humor into lectures or presentations. Overall, research has shown that using various modes of humor is most effective (19). Studies also show that students learn more when concepts are illustrated with humor that is pertinent to the course material (20). Teaching often involves repetition to reinforce concepts and ideas, which can be boring for students. Humor can help relieve the boredom and even make the repetition amusing, as long as the humor relates to the subject matter. In contrast, irrelevant or unrelated humor can distract students and waste valuable classroom time. Ziv’s prior research indicated three or four jokes per lesson to be the optimal “dose” (10, 11). Too many jokes or skits risk transforming the lecture into a circus and distracting the students. Also, research has shown that changing the lecture pace is more conducive to learning than maintaining a regular one, hence instructors should vary the amount of humor they use in each lecture. For example, an instructor followed a discussion about means and standard deviations in his statistics course by presenting an overhead of a cartoon depicting an African explorer saying to several children, “There is no need to be afraid of crocodiles; around here, their average length is only about 50 centimeters.” Behind the explorer, a huge crocodile with
its mouth open wide is ready to swallow him. Seeing this, one of the children says, “This guy had better think about the standard deviation, too.” After the laughter, the lecturer paraphrased the concept.
In the repertoire Although there is evidence that humor works, it remains merely a tool and is far from the only means of improving student–teacher interpersonal relationships. Making eye contact, calling students by name, and moving about the classroom are also effective means of bettering relationships with the class. Thus, if humor does not come naturally, it should not be forced. Chuck Lucy is associate chair at the University of Alberta. Address all correspondence to Lucy, Dept. of Chemistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2G2, Canada, or
[email protected].
References (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15)
(16) (17) (18) (19) (20)
Valcarcel, M. Anal. Chem. 2001,73, 333 A–335 A. Malissa, H. Fresenius’ J. Anal. Chem. 1995,351, 141. Otto, M. Fresenius’ J. Anal. Chem. 2001,369, 738–740. Pemberton, J. E. Anal. Chem. 2000,72, 173 A. Smith, D. R. Anal. Chem. 2000,72, 503 A. Valcarcel, M.; Rios, A. Fresenius’ J. Anal. Chem. 1997,357, 202–205. Frymier, A. B.; Houser, M. L. Commun. Educ. 2000,49, 207–219. Korobkin, D. College Teaching 1988,36, 154–158. Bryant, J.; Comisky, P.; Zillman, D. Commun. Educ. 1979,28, 110–118. Warnock, P. Lifelong Learning 1989,12, 22–24. Bryant, J.; Zillmann, D. J. Child. Contemp. Soc. 1989,20, 49–78. Wanzer, M. B.; Frymier, A. B. Commun. Educ. 1999,48, 48–62. Berk, R. A.; Nanda, J. P. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 1998,11, 383–409. Ziv, A. J. Exp. Educ. 1988,57, 5–15. Berk, R. A. Professors Are from Mars, Students Are from Snickers; Mendota Press: Madison, WI, 1998. Deavor, J. P. J. Chem. Educ. 1996,73, 430. Keck, M. V. J. Chem. Educ. 2000,77, 483. Deavor, J. P. J. Chem. Educ. 2001,78, 467. Ziv, A.; Gorenstein, E.; Moris, A. Educ. Psych. 1986,6, 37–44. Kaplan, R. K.; Pascoe, G. C. J. Educ. Psych. 1977,69, 61–65.
J U N E 1 , 2 0 0 2 / A N A LY T I C A L C H E M I S T R Y
343 A
