Over Stepping or Stepping Back

Students were discussing the Homestead Strike and examining two different perspectives on why the strike became violent. I had assigned my students different roles, so that the discussion could be authentically student led. Chris, a student who was a good listener, was the challenger, tasked with asking probing questions to prompt other students to think more deeply (e.g., “What evidence do you have for your claim?”). Anna, a student who was never shy about being confused, was the clarifier, responsible for asking students to elaborate on points she found confusing or vague (e.g., “Hey, I’m not sure what you mean. Can you be a little more specific?”).

At this moment they were trying to figure out how responsible the factory owner, Henry Clay Frick, was for inciting the violence. Most students believed that Frick was mainly responsible for the strike becoming violent. Chris, in his role as challenger, was growing increasingly frustrated. He kept pushing back against students' claims that Frick’s decision to lower wages caused the violence. He started tapping his foot, and even from across the room, I could sense that he was becoming genuinely agitated. It seemed to me that he felt like his classmates were genuinely against him and not listening to the arguments he was making. I was torn about what to do. I wanted to find a way to help Chris, who was getting frustrated and potentially feeling ganged up on. But, I did not want to settle their disagreement myself and reveal what "side" I was on. I debated turning to Anna, the clarifier, to see if she could identify the point of misunderstanding. However, I knew that turning to her risked putting her on the spot and potentially embarrassing her. I wanted to protect Chris and make sure he felt safe, and at the same time, I did not want to take away student agency by asserting my voice.