Two years into his English literature degree at the University of Pittsburgh, sophomore Luke Johnson has noticed something in his liberal arts courses: Students in his classes have gone quiet. As he sits in sociology or English writing classes, he finds himself having to fill the silence through more participation.
Every time his professors assign a book or an excerpt to read, he ensures it’s completed by class time so he can participate effectively.
When no one else speaks, he feels frustrated — unable to dialogue with his peers and deepen his learning about the text.
“I feel indebted to my teacher to make the class engaging,” Johnson said. “I feel like the majority of people in the class are taking it as a gen ed and therefore sort of discounting the importance of doing the coursework.”
Johnson’s concerns about waning participation and declining reading are shared by professors and teachers in liberal arts programs, including in Pittsburgh. Teachers at four universities interviewed for this story had a variety of theories about the cause, including:
1. Inequitable educational opportunity that leaves some college students unable to comprehend difficult material
2. Federal policies that encourage teaching to the test rather than critical thinking
3. Increasing student use of artificial intelligence (AI) to draft papers and write summaries, which some instructors worry will only worsen the trend.
Public Source asked liberal arts professors at Pittsburgh universities for the strategies they’re implementing to keep students engaged. From new material to approaches rooted in pioneer times, here’s what they told us.
When Ryan D’Souza, a communications professor at Chatham University, asks a question and receives no response, he feels “on edge” and questions his capabilities as a professor and communicator. He said he thinks to himself: “Did I not say that correctly? Was that a stupid idea?”
He doesn’t blame any student for silence. “I would be unwilling to point at one student and say ‘you’re the problem,’ when really it’s a structural problem.”
D’Souza said the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 — replaced by the Every Student Succeeds Act in 2015 — negatively impacted students’ views on reading. NCLB sought to encourage K-12 schools to take responsibility for student’s academic performance by emphasizing test scores and altering funding if schools or states didn’t meet its requirements.
“The current generation of students would have been the ones really ingrained with the No Child Left Behind kind of policy where you no longer need to read something for comprehension, but to know the correct answer,” D’Souza said.
He said he’s willing to try anything — newspaper articles, comic books, video essays — to fuel student participation. “Change the way you teach,” he said. “That has often worked for me as I’ve understood what my student population is like.”
While D’Souza believes there is still a place for more academically rigorous texts, he does not find value in “burdening” undergraduate students with materials far removed from their generation. When he does present dense material to his students he assures them they can discuss ideas together.
Brock Bahler, a religious studies professor, taught at Duquesne University and Seton Hill University between 2010 and 2014. He previously assigned classic texts like Aristotle’s “Nicomachean Ethics” or Immanuel Kant’s “Metaphysics of Morals.”
Since joining the University of Pittsburgh in 2014, his syllabus has shifted to prioritize more “accessible” materials that explore contemporary topics. Instead of having his students read the entirety of Aristotle, he’ll assign chapters from Hannah Arendt’s “The Origins of Totalitarianism.” This adjustment, according to Bahler, helps his students stay motivated to read.
Bahler doesn’t see students’ changing reading habits as a bad thing. While some criticize “helicopter professors” — teachers who appear to micro-manage students in the classroom — he thinks increased supervision and assistance in reading can help him better understand who is struggling with the text and, if needed, provide help.
“We’ve had this assumption that learning can happen in these very autonomous, individualistic ways,” he said. “But maybe that’s not how learning happens, maybe learning happens in the community?”
Hillary Lazar, a sociology instructor at the University of Pittsburgh, said policies like NCLB have made students view reading as a chore rather than an activity. “Decades of teaching to the test … have not benefited us,” she said.
Lazar said students arrive at college with varying levels of preparation, not because of personal deficiencies but because of unequal educational opportunities. She said the “ opportunity gap ” created by unequal distribution of K-12 resources is only exacerbated once a student arrives on a college campus. “I don’t think it’s that our students are becoming less capable and competent,” she said. “I don’t know if they have the right training or that the right level of expectations being put on them.”
Lazar has adopted a teaching strategy she calls the “one-room schoolhouse approach.” Similar to a traditional schoolhouse of the early 20th century, Lazar provides material that enriches both introductory learners and advanced students who may already be familiar with lower-level material.
“It’s not perfect, but it’s what I’ve found as a way to help meet the different needs of our students,” Lazar said. “Combined with techniques to help encourage participation, I have actually found some really wonderful and generative conversations.”
Ditch the answers. Bring the questions.
James Swindal, a philosophy professor at Duquesne University, builds participation through what he calls “precis questions.” Students write questions about the required readings, then Swindal projects them onto a whiteboard and has the student read their question aloud.
“The questions can involve clarifications about a meaning that they did not understand, what is meant by any concepts mentioned that the student is unsure about, or, as often is the case, something about the quotation that the student criticizes and then offers a possible fallacy,” Swindal told Public Source. “What is uncanny is that most of the questions they come up with match the very questions I want to go over for the whole class.”
Precis questions don’t just facilitate discussion, they also ensure students are actively engaging with the assigned material, according to Swindal. When his students know they have to present, they are motivated to read the text well in advance and provide strong discussion questions.
Lazar believes students should be able to think critically about reading materials without relying on artificial intelligence, but recognizes that with the university’s embrace of AI means her students are likely using the technology. To better understand it, she hosts “AI confessionals,” at which students write about how they use the tool in their coursework. Lazar believes that by understanding how they use it, she can assist them in valuing their own voice.
Bahler has, on occasion, let his students use AI in his assignments, but only for critical evaluation. He’s a firm “no” on using the tool for writing. “You learn what you think about the world as you write,” he said.
Bahler is also concerned with generative AI’s potential for “flattening” language, at the expense of certain forms of English — like African American Vernacular English — which AI tends to devalue, according to a 2024 study.
“We’re assuming that there’s some kind of standard English out there, when it’s really just some white guy’s version of English,” he said.
Professor of English Jane Bernstein hasn’t noticed a major shift in participation in her creative writing courses at Carnegie Mellon University, though if she had to teach a literature course again, she would require every student to present their book reports in person to ensure they didn’t use AI.
She acknowledges that literary analysis can be difficult, but she urges her students not to use AI in search of correct answers. In fact, she encourages them not to look for “the point” at all. “Immerse yourself in the story,” she said. “This isn’t about getting something right or wrong.”
She worries that if students continue using AI in place of comprehension and writing, they will have difficulty not just producing complex work, but also appreciating the humanity inherent in literature.
Bernstein has been teaching since 1991 and plans to retire at the end of the spring semester. She describes the feeling as bittersweet. She’ll miss her students, but is also relieved she won’t have to navigate the potential impact of Generative AI.
___
This story was originally published by Pittsburgh’s Public Source and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
