![\"A](\"https:\/\/braindevs.net\/blog\/\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/AdobeStock_504129793.jpeg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nThis “debate” mostly involves making strong claims — “it’s vital!”; “no, it’s dreadful!” — but rarely draws on research to explore its key contentions.<\/p>\n
In fact, the debate doesn’t often turn to research\u00a0because we don’t have much research<\/em>. But given the energy of recent arguments, I thought I’d check to see if any recent studies can help us out…<\/p>\n A few years ago, I wrote about a 2013 study<\/a> done by Dr. Elise Dallimore and Co. This research team — working with college sophomores — found that cold calling increased<\/i> voluntary class participation and\u00a0decreased<\/em> class discomfort.<\/p>\n That is: compared to students in low<\/strong> cold-calling classes, those in high<\/strong> cold-calling classes spoke up more<\/em> on their own, and expressed greater levels of comfort<\/em> in class.<\/p>\n That sounds like a win-win.<\/p>\n Of course, all studies include limitations — no one study can explore everything. Team Dallimore spotted an obvious concern with their first study: it didn’t consider the effect of gender<\/em> on class participation.<\/p>\n We have LOTS of research showing that women feel less comfortable participating in class discussions, and — unsurprisingly — speak up less often than men.<\/p>\n So, picking up where they left off, Dallimore and Co. wanted to see if cold calling reduced or increased this gender split<\/em>.<\/p>\n In other words: if cold calling benefits students overall (the 2013 study), does it have a different effect on men and women?<\/p>\n Important note<\/strong>:<\/p>\n Dallimore’s first<\/em> study more-or-less supported Team A as described above: “cold calling encourages class participation.”<\/p>\n Her second<\/em> study starts to address the the concerns of Team B. We might reasonably worry that women — who (on average) go into many classes feeling stressed about participation — will feel EXTRA stress if that participation becomes mandatory.<\/p>\n This second study explores that plausible concern.<\/p>\n Like her first study, Dallimore’s second study<\/a> looks at class participation in several college Accounting classes.<\/p>\n They divided those classes into two groups: “low” cold-calling (less than 25% of the questions were framed as cold call), and “high” cold-calling (more than 33% — and as high as 84%!!).<\/p>\n According to survey data, male and female students went into these classes with roughly the same perceptions of class participation.<\/p>\n So Dallimore’s questions were:<\/p>\n First: Did students’\u00a0behavior change based on high- vs. low-cold-calling?<\/em> And,<\/p>\n Second: Did gender matter for any changes?<\/em><\/p>\n In answer to the first<\/em> question: over time, students volunteered more<\/strong> in the high-cold-calling classes than the low-cold-calling classes.<\/p>\n Whether you’re counting the percentage of students who participated or the number of questions that students asked, those numbers went up.<\/p>\n So,\u00a0cold calling INCREASED voluntary<\/em> participation.<\/p>\n Of course, we’re happy to see that cold calling increased participation. However, that finding simply replicates the 2013 study. What about the\u00a0second question: did gender matter?<\/em><\/p>\n Well, both men and women voluntarily participated more<\/em> in high-cold-calling classes. And, women’s participation increased more<\/em> <\/strong>than men’s participation.<\/p>\n Specifically: 57% of men voluntarily participated in the low-cold-calling classes, whereas 73% did in the high-cold-calling classes. That’s a difference of\u00a0 16%.<\/p>\n For women: 52% voluntarily participated in the low-cold-calling classes, whereas 82% did in the high-cold-calling classes. That’s a difference of 30%<\/strong>.<\/p>\n We get the same result if we look at the number of questions asked. Men asked more questions in high-cold-calling classes than in low-cold-calling classes; the average number went from 1.78 to 2.13.<\/p>\n Women asked LOTS more question: the average went from 1.33 to 2.6.<\/p>\n In brief: high-cold-calling classes increased participation for everyone — especially women.<\/p>\n So far, Dallimore’s 2019 study seems like a slam dunk for Team A. It says, basically: “cold calling does help and doesn’t hurt.”<\/p>\n At the same time, I don’t think we can now rush to conclude “all teachers must cold call all the time.”<\/p>\n I have three reasons to hesitate:<\/p>\n First<\/strong>: both Dallimore’s studies were done with college students. As I’ve written elsewhere, I don’t think that college students make great proxies for K-12 students. On average:<\/p>\n College students\u00a0know more<\/em> than K-12 students.<\/p>\n They have higher level of academic and personal maturity.<\/em><\/p>\n They probably have higher levels of academic motivation — they’re in college!<\/p>\n So, these findings\u00a0might<\/em> apply to K-12 students…but we don’t have research (that I know of) to demonstrate that conclusion.<\/p>\n Second<\/strong>: as I wrote in a blog post last fall<\/a>, bad cold calling does exist<\/em>. As the research study described there explains, we need to refine our question.<\/p>\n Instead of asking: “is cold-calling a good idea?”<\/p>\n We should ask: “how can we hone our cold-calling technique to get its benefits without its potential harms?”<\/p>\n Let’s get some really good answers to that second question before we insist on spreading the practice.<\/p>\n Third<\/strong>: At least so far, research suggests that Team B’s concern — “the stress that results from cold calling hampers learning” — doesn’t hold true\u00a0for most students<\/em>.<\/p>\n At the same time, our goal is not that most students learn, but that\u00a0all of them do<\/em>.<\/p>\n We should accept the almost certainly true statement that cold calling will stress out a few students to the detriment of their learning. Part of “honing out technique”\u00a0— described in my second point above — will be identifying and working with those students.<\/p>\n Despite all the heated debate about cold calling, I think we have the beginnings of a persuasive research pool. So far — at least — it seems to encourage class participation (which should, in turn, increase learning).<\/p>\n Yes: we need to be good at this technique for it to work. Yes: we should respect important boundary conditions.<\/p>\n And, based on the research I’ve seen so far, I plan to keep using cold calling myself.<\/p>\n After I wrote this blog post, I discovered that LOTS of people have been adding to this debate.<\/p>\nPicking Up Where They Left Off<\/h2>\n
Take II<\/h2>\n
Better and Better<\/h2>\n
Not So Fast<\/h2>\n
To Sum Up<\/h2>\n
Coda<\/h2>\n