Studies by Seidel et al. (2015) and Harrison et al. (2019), have demonstrated how Instructor Talk plays a crucial role in shaping classroom environments, influencing student engagement, learning attitudes, and potentially mitigating stereotype threats. Instructor talk is defined as any language used by an instructor that is not directly related to course content but instead shapes the learning environment.
Seidel et al. (2015) identified five major categories of non-content talk:
Building the Instructor/Student Relationship– Encouraging respect, boosting self-efficacy, and offering advice for student success.
Establishing Classroom Culture – Setting expectations, fostering a sense of community, and making students feel comfortable in the learning process.
Explaining Pedagogical Choices – Justifying teaching methods to help students understand why certain approaches are used.
Sharing Personal Experiences – Providing personal anecdotes or relating to student experiences.
Unmasking Science – Discussing the nature of science and emphasizing diversity within the field.
Harrison et al. (2019) added a new category:“Negatively Phrased Instructor Talk.” This includes statements that may discourage students, undermine confidence, or convey unhelpful attitudes about learning.
Positively phrased Instructor Talk includes language that motivates, supports, and encourages students, helping to create an inclusive and productive learning environment.
Examples of Positively Phrased Instructor Talk:
Building the Instructor/Student Relationship (Encouraging and Inclusive Language)
“Debugging can be frustrating, but every programmer goes through it—even the best software engineers. You’re developing a valuable skill by troubleshooting.”
“There are many ways to solve this problem. If your approach works, it’s valid! Computer science is about creativity as much as logic.”
“If you’re stuck, that’s a good sign—you’re thinking critically! Take a step back, break the problem into smaller pieces, and try again.”
Establishing Classroom Culture (Fostering a Positive Learning Environment)
“In this class, collaboration is encouraged! Working with others will help you see different approaches and learn more effectively.”
“Asking questions is a sign of an engaged learner. Feel free to speak up—there are no bad questions in coding!”
“Mistakes are part of learning to program. The best way to improve is to experiment, test, and debug!”
Explaining Pedagogical Choices (Justifying Learning Strategies to Reduce Resistance)
“We use pair programming because research shows it helps students learn faster and develop teamwork skills.”
“I emphasize problem-solving over memorization because in real-world programming, you’ll be looking up syntax all the time—what matters is knowing how to think through problems.”
“This assignment is designed to help you build a strong foundation. Once you grasp these basics, you’ll be able to tackle much more complex projects.”
Sharing Personal Experiences (Relating to Students)
“When I first learned recursion, it completely confused me! But breaking it down into base cases and recursive steps helped me understand it.”
“I once spent an entire weekend debugging a program because of a missing semicolon. Now I always double-check my syntax!”
Unmasking Computer Science (Encouraging Diverse Perspectives & Scientific Thinking)
“There’s no single type of person who becomes a great programmer—some of the best developers come from all kinds of backgrounds.”
“Computer science isn’t just about writing code. It’s about solving problems and thinking critically—skills that are valuable in any field.”
Examples of Negatively Phrased Instructor Talk:
Building the Instructor/Student Relationship (Discouraging Students)
“This is just how programming works—either you get it, or you don’t.”
“If you’re struggling with loops, maybe computer science isn’t for you.”
“Some of you clearly didn’t put in the effort, and it shows in your code.”
Establishing Classroom Culture (Creating Anxiety or an Unwelcoming Environment)
“If you can’t get this assignment working, you’ll probably fail the course.”
“I’m not here to hold your hand—figure it out on your own.”
“Real programmers don’t need to ask for help. If you need help, you’re not thinking hard enough.”
Explaining Pedagogical Choices (Undermining Learning Strategies)
“I don’t really believe in these ‘new’ teaching methods, but the department requires me to use them.”
“Honestly, I don’t see the point of teaching theory—you’ll just learn everything on the job anyway.”
“You just need to memorize this syntax and move on. Understanding isn’t really necessary.”
Sharing Personal Experiences (Self-Effacing or Confusing Students)
“I never really understood object-oriented programming myself, but here’s the textbook definition.”
“Back in my day, we had to learn this without any online tutorials. You have it easy!”
Unmasking Computer Science (Excluding or Dismissing Certain Groups)
“Let’s be honest, some people just don’t have the logical thinking required for coding.”
“There aren’t many women in AI, but that’s just the way the field is.”
“If you’re not naturally good at math, you’re going to struggle a lot in this class.”
Findings revealed that Instructor Talk was present in every class session, ranging from six to 68 instances per class session. The study by Seidel et al. (2015) suggests that Instructor Talk can impact student motivation, reduce resistance to active learning, and help mitigate stereotype threat. The introduction of negatively phrased Instructor Talk suggests that some instructor behaviors may unintentionally harm student learning and should be carefully examined. The authors recommend that educators reflect on their non-content talk to enhance student engagement and learning outcomes. While Harrison et al. (2019)validated its applicability across multiple courses and identified new challenges related to negative instructor language. Both studies emphasize the importance of non-content communication in higher education, particularly in STEM courses.
Harrison, C. D., Nguyen, T. A., Seidel, S. B., Escobedo, A. M., Hartman, C., Lam, K., … & Tanner, K. D. (2019). Investigating instructor talk in novel contexts: Widespread use, unexpected categories, and an emergent sampling strategy. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 18(3), ar47. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-10-0215
Seidel, S. B., Reggi, A. L., Schinske, J. N., Burrus, L. W., & Tanner, K. D. (2015). Beyond the biology: A systematic investigation of noncontent instructor talk in an introductory biology course. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 14(4), ar43. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-03-0049
