Conflict is good. Conflict keeps us from the sheep and shepherd mentality in the classroom, but conflict is a difficult balancing act to pull off well. I encourage my students to ask questions, and to be active in their learning, but I struggle personally with walking the line between healthy conflict that fosters engaged multi-vocal discussion, and aggressive non-productive conflict that puts others down, stifling intellectual discourse.
This is a daily battle in my classroom. I am having to remind one student that their adversarial role in the classroom is not positive. His opposition to other student’s comments are framed in a way that is viewed as aggressive and not productive. His adversarial role towards the curriculum influence other students who now feel afraid to speak up in the class because of his aggressive tone.
Contrasting this example to a positive adversarial role in the classroom, a graduate seminar class is a good example. Grad students can be adversarial in a positive manner that is respectful, and discussion fostering. If Student A makes a comment on her interpretation of the text, and Student B opposes in a way that is not aggressive towards Student A as a person or her ideas, then a debate ensues that leads to intellectual exploration rather than a stifling non-discussion.
Adversarial relationships have the power to be both positive and negative in the classroom. With one hand it can foster growth, and with another it smothers.