The Power of Communication Lessons from Dale Carnegie

When I was a little bit younger, I read Dale Carnegie’s How to Win Friend and Influence People, and the clear evidence that the ability to communicate to people effectively was able to create success even in the domain of business sparked my curiosity about the mind. Since then I had always been interested in what the little things are that make people so much more inclined to help each other out. People who understand people have better relationships with everyone, and that ability opens up countless opportunities.

People who can establish rapport and that friendly connection open themselves to such a rich depth that everyone holds, only if the key is held. In the past half-year or so, I have been listening to public intellectuals Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris speak about the mind. The two speakers elucidate profound ideas, Harris from the domain of neuroscience, and Peterson from religion and psychodynamic theory. These two have shown the depths of the mystery our minds hold.

These three events d my desire to study in the field of psychology, and become a professor.

Professors employ various techniques to communicate effectively. However, there is a dichotomization that can encapsulate most styles; Professor Obert says, “a sage on the stage, or a guide to the side”. The relationships of both manifest quickly within the classroom. The sage on-the-stage methodology necessarily inhibits the students to see themselves on the same level as the teacher, and the guide to the side aims to bridge the gap between the student and teacher.

Get quality help now

WriterBelle

Verified

Proficient in: Carl Rogers

4.7 (657)

“ Really polite, and a great writer! Task done as described and better, responded to all my questions promptly too! ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Both of them have drawbacks and benefits, however. The sage on the stage is a more disciplined and practical method of systematically getting through lessons while the guide to the side seeks to develop the own student’s ability to heuristically learn, and seeks to fit each student into his staff learning. The group participation that accompanies the latter method often allows more downtime for the students to understand each other. Each student gradually shows his method of understanding and thinking, and this allows other students to speak to them in a way that fits that individual style of understanding. There is an important distinction that the more lecture-oriented style does have less risk. When responsibility is given to students to learn, it is uncertain that they will be able to learn it more effectively than if a leader was to show them the way. These two methods should be judged carefully to see which style will allow the student to learn most effectively.

Professor Obert believes that the guide to the side is a mo conducive to a learning environment. He seeks to bridge that gap created by the roles in the classroom. Reminding students of the human element within all of us is an effective method to build a quick connection. Professor Bart says, “I rant my students to know that everyone in the classroom is just like one another. Humans seek to learn. Even me, I’m trying to learn from them.” If you can set the intention of each classroom to be, “How can I provide a relationship in which this person may use for his sonar growth”, a completely different classroom will manifest itself (Carl Rogers). One effective technique to create that perception of a homogenous group, simply seeking to learn, is to the classroom is to allow your weaknesses and vulnerabilities to show themselves. Showing your insecurities is a great way to let other people feel comfortable and not have to worry about their insecurities being revealed. This allows students to speak their minds or ask questions without regarding the typical impediments that block a learning environment.

An important thing to understand is the differences between people’s psychological temperaments. Professor Obert requires students to complete a psychometric test, and he evaluates it with the student. The student understands himself better, insights about the way he acts and perceives, his desires and goals, and of course, the professor then also understands what type of feed will be more suitable for this student’s temperament. Hobart also recommends that students try to work on the areas of their personality where they are weakest. The more well-rounded individual can understand and communicate to a far broader range of people much easier because he becomes more of them. He embodies more characteristics and it transforhimelf.

In Psychology professor Jordan Peterson’s 12 Rules for Life, there is a section that offers excellent insights on conversations that create rich and meaningful interactions. Chapter 9, “Assume the person you are listening to might know something you don’t”, can improve conversation immensely by itself if followed duly. It is an easy trap for an accomplished person to assume they are of greater worth than the person they are listening to. The supercilious person makes the conversation distasteful and achieves nothing from it. This is not so atypical for the relationship between the professor and the student. Instead, the professor should understand the student has a couple of decades of individual experience, and he is smart enough to attend a university. If the professor is not able to attain something of value, then the shame is on him. If the professor truly listens with the intent of adding to his base of knowledge, not only will the conversation be more productive, it will manifest in the conversation, and the student will feel cared for because his opinion is valued. That knowledge of knowing one’s word is truly valued is key to creating successful relationships.

Another interesting idea in that chapter is his commentary on lecturing. Peterson says it is a conversation; “The lecturer speaks, but the audience communicates with him or her non-verbally. A surprising amount of human interaction – much of the delivery of emotional information […] takes place in this manner” (Peterson 251). A competent lecturer can read these nonverbal signals his audience speaks to her and values their importance, as evaluations of his speech. Another important technique that Peterson says is that an effective lecturer is one is with and not at or even to his or her listeners. […] The lecturer needs to be closely attending to the audience’s every move.” There is a great emphasis on the effectiveness of a lecturer lying within his ability to become to the audience, so much that there is no separation of the audience and the speaker. This cannot be achieved through talking to a group, this careful examination requires the speaker to talk to and watch “single, identifiable people”, which becomes an excellent tool as well if you have fear of speaking to a large group say in a classroom of students. It is never the group you are speaking to, rather it is one individual at a time.

One overlooked technique of speaking effectively is Carl Rogers’ technique of Active Listening. It can be an incredibly helpful technique for speaking to students one on one or requiring them to use it in a debate. It is a simple, but not an easy process. Before the next person speaks, he must first restate what the other person said by paraphrasing. Only once the speaker has agreed that what the listener has summarized is the gist of what he has said, may the listener then be able to speak (Peterson 246). Not only does this facilitate a respectful environment, but both persons also improve each other’s statements. They create a more concise summary of what each other says, refined of the superfluous points. Listening to Carl Rogers is a risk and a sacrifice. ‘The great majority of us cannot listen; we find ourselves compelled to evaluate because listening is dangerous. If you truly listen, you have the risk of transforming yourself, which means being forced to realize you have lived with impurities that this speaker has just exposed. Ignorance is bliss. As a professor, it is hard to yield that a student has correctly pointed out flaws or errors in your curriculum or claim, it is a camel to swallow that requires humility.

There are several concepts covered in this paper, so I will review them. T theme there are two typical styles professors employ to teach students, a sage on the stage or a guide to the side. It is important to recognize when each style may have more utility than the other. A professor has a psychological temperament, as does every student in the class. More effective communication can proceed if the classroom understands what type of person they are, and how to work on their weaknesses. This will result in a more homogenous group that can connect easily. Another way to create a more connected group is by showing your human qualities. Allow that human element to reveal itself, and not bebevershadbeby conventions of the structure. Create an environment that allows each person’s insecurities to manifest, so the group’s objective of learning is not impeded by the worry of harsh judgment from peers. Peterson has an aphorism that will remind you to care, that is to “assume the person you are speaking to knows something you don’t”. No one has learned enough. A lecturer does not speak to the group, rather he speaks with each student individually, one at a time, carefully assessing his body language and adjusting his style and content of speech accordingly. Carl Rogers’ technique: before you speak, you must summarize what the other person has said, and achieve the approval that your summary captured what the person said. This creates a respectful environment and refines the speech’s impurities.