It is often perplexing when students don’t respond to a question when learning in a group. This often lends to reactions by the ‘initiator ’-the lecturer who asked the question expecting an answer as in a normal conversation between two persons. The complex relationship in a classroom setting is evidently quite different from a conversation in the corridor.
The situation in this complex relationship is rather unnatural as we have to factor in several interactions , the group that is watching the expected response, the confidence the student has in getting the answer correct, previous experiences with the same lecturer or with other lecturers which may have resulted in a traumatic outcome and the student’s own ability to communicate, to articulate his thoughts, his ability to organize his answer based on how he has understood and analyzed the question thrown at him.
When we talk about communication we are so very familiar with the ‘new millennium’ kid, the so called wired kid or is it ‘wireless kid’! It is a familiar scene now that it is no longer possible for one to have a conversation for more than 10 minutes without an interruption as the other party fumbles for his hand phone and breaks off the communication to answer the call, which could not be that important. The person on the other line had made the call without a single thought as to what the receiving person would be doing at that point in time.
Ironically we see these at all levels of society, not only among kids and young adults. It was amusing when I saw a leading politician recently, coming out of his car as a huge group was waiting to greet him. He had his mobile phone ‘attached ‘to his left ear being held with one hand, while the other hand was systematically outstretched willing to shake the hands of large group of willing supporters. Would this be civil or is part of the ability to multitask!
I often lament that the next generation would be lacking that bit of empathy and would fail to have the human touch if the electronic media transacted through our society without any respite for human communication.
‘Communication in a changing world’; that is what I wanted to address. However I thought I should digress and discuss the elements of communication as well elaborated by Bethami Dobkin & Roger Pace, (2003). The model sited in their book reminded me of the Artkinson and Schiff’s ‘memory ‘model. Although communication can be verbal and non-verbal we are mindful of the visually challenged and those who have hearing impairment who lead meaningful lives utilizing their skills in communication, verbal or otherwise.
Whatever message is transmitted during the communication involves several channels and media, they go through a sieve like barrier, so that the listener has the option of not registering it (encoding) or decoding it. Clearly one would want to be engaged in the complex situation to be communicating, otherwise the message gets thrown away.
The ‘working memory’ , according to Atkinson and Schiff last but 20 seconds and if the message transmitted is not captured to be encoded after analysis, it just gets brushed off, like raindrops falling on the wind screen of your car. Should there be some enthusiasm in wanting to be engaged, then all the factors like meaningful language, interest and active learning, need to be in place before there is a reaction to complete the communication loop. The latter could be a verbal expression immediately after or non-verbal expression of understanding and acceptance.
The SMS that one uses with mobile phones has had a lasting impression of how communication has changed. All the processes as to how the mind reads is explicit in the SMS. If one types ‘I would prefer face to face learning’ it may take that much longer. An alternative would have been ‘I wld prefer F2F lerning’. Is this correctly written? That would be another arguing point but the message is understood and communication is complete, if that was the original objective of communication.
It is a changing world and new communication skills would have to be accepted as we move to another generation of people. Initiation and interpretation are all elements of the mind, the maturity of thought and the makings of our alignment to understand each other. The ability to vocalize is intrinsic to the human race and as to how to use it to communicate should be left to innovativeness, flexibility and practicality, I believe, though it is rather difficult to fathom in totality as we become unfamiliar with the language of the new millennium kids and the Y generation.
People contend that messages are indeed the thoughts and ideas expressed by others. It may have an emotive context especially when expressed in the first person. The charismatic leader exploits this aspect to the maximum to reach out to his listeners and supporters. Music icons and preachers are great communicators. Intonations and hand expressions, facial expressions and specific movements which are all non-verbal enhance verbal communication. Communication is multidimensional and the man on the street is always learning newer and newer media that is used. The means of communicating will not abate with the conventional e-mail, video conferencing, face- book and twitter as long as innovations and appeal go hand in hand. It is a dynamic world that we live in and we have to keep track of the rapid changes to be able to communicate. There is now a huge move to make education virtual and computer mediated learning will mould the future generation to begin learning and working using communicational channels which have less and less face to face communication.
The context of communication is an often misunderstood area because of the meaning behind the message. If we have an invitation to a wedding addressed to couple and a dressing code is required, it is only civil that the invitation is accepted or declined and the dress code is adhered to. In the context of the modern world it is clear that one expects just the two people at the wedding. However, in the Asian context, the message (invitation) may have a deeper meaning and may permit the entire family to come! The diversity of culture does play a big role in considering the context of communication.
It is a peculiar truth that communication is irreversible especially when vocalized. There is little way we could retract a statement once made and that makes it so important to be careful what is said. An apology after a harsh statement can be difficult to mend, we all know that. At times we use such a strategy to close a discussion or to drive home a point.
Conclusion
Communication is integral to interpersonal relationships and is a complex subject. Most arguments centre on poor communication and peace reigns when communication is at its best. Cultural diversity and the context of the environment will impact on communication whether it is verbal or non-verbal. As good humans we need to be civil in communication and be mindful of the sensitivity of the message as once it is communicated it is irreversible.
Further Reading:
Bethami A Dobkin & Roger C. Pace. Understanding the Process of Communication in Communication in a Changing World. 2003; Mc Graw Hill, Boston
Sivalingam Nalliah 30th Oct 2011
No comments:
Post a Comment