Todays seminar title was active listening. Since I got the syllabus last week this active listeningcaught my attention. At first I could not imagine what is meant, I thought that listening has to be passive or else it can not be called listening anymore. Then I got the idea that with activecould be meant that the listener gives a feedback, sends signals which show that he either understands or can not follow and that if necessary he asks back how something is meant but basically lets his conversation partner talk.
I found my assumption confirmed in todays course. -But one after another.

The first thing after welcoming new participants (we must be 60 now in the course!?) was a continuation of the introducing-game. This time I found it quite boring. It was really shuffling along. Only few people could think of new questions and the fascination was not the same as the first time we played it. If from now on we should play it every week then it would be better to know earlier so that we can think of new questions before the course starts.
Well, this time Easter is not far and some of the questions aimed into this direction. My question was how many people are notsearching Easter eggs anymore and except for five (at most!), nobody stood up. This was quite surprising to me; I had expected the result would be higher.

Then we came to the actual topic with a first game. We had to form couples of two. I said next to Beibei, a girl who I know. Then one of the partners should tell about his or her last evening and the other one should only listen. -This all during 5 minutes. It was not quite clear to us if we should change the roles after 2.5 minutes or not. Anyway, we did. Then the task was to compare what the listener has understood, what remained unclear and what was completely different. For me the result, that both of us couldnt repeat what the other said, was absolutely not surprising. It was so loud in the classroom when everybody was talking that literally one couldnt understand ones own word.
When everybody was silent again an evaluation followed. Some people really felt uncomfortable not being able to ask back and even sometimes couldnt follow anymore. There was also a distinction between those couples who had known each other earlier and those who were put together for the first time. While for former it was easier to talk and to listen and to follow the topic, latter felt more uneasy with this game. Either the speaker couldnt continue his topic anymore or didnt want to open himself too much or the listener couldnt understand the speakers plot anymore.

Of course this is logical, I mean. An insider has to explain things much better to an outsider than to an insider who already knows about the places, or relations of protagonists etc.In addition, it needs more narrating skills when speaking to an outsider. So, all in all it is more difficult to explain things to somebody who is new to the issue than to somebody who is familiar with it.

In consequence to our just made experiences we collected ideas what we understand under active listening. A crucial point was feedback through gestures and mimic. To the speaker it gives hold and the feeling of being understood (or misunderstood). But from listener to listener it can be individual.

For the next game there were six volunteers needed who should form 3 couples in the middle of a circle of classmates. The volunteers had to sit opposite of each other and to demonstrate what they have learned about active listening and feedback to those in the circle who observe. I was one of the volunteers. Fortunately my (female)partner agreed to talk and I could do the easier part of listening. She told me about her holidays in France. It was fairly structured and easy to follow. At the point where she didnt know further I asked her some additional questions. My intentionwas to give her some more inspiration that the talk doesnt get stuck but basically let her talk.

Also for this exercise a valuation followed. I admit I was pleased hearing from a fellow student that I did quite well, that I seemed to be interested in the talk and gave an how to say? animatingfeedback. Somebody else made a rather different impression on the observers. He sat leaning back with folded arms in his chair, something which I already knew you should avoid ( closed and open postures).
It was not really new to me how to behave in conversations. I mean as listener you also get a feedback from the speaker, like when he trusts you, feels comfortable, he would continue, if he feels unwell he would end the conversation. Secretly you can even experiment with how people would react to your (the listeners) behaviour. And sometimes you would have a situation like You dont listen to me AT ALL! Especially in relationships you can hear it often I suppose.

The exercises were good for becoming aware of the process of listening. I think in a partner therapy they are quite successful but in a seminar for intercultural communicationway off the track.
In Germany those simulated situations work well, no doubt. Already our parents teach us that we should first listen and then give a comment ifwe have something to say. If we do not, our behaviour is scolded. Especially in talk shows you can watch this phenomenon relatively often that the presenter interrupts and says: Please, Mr. Müller, you should let Mr. Schmidt finish first! or that the interrupted interlocutor says Would you please let me finish!. (On the contrary interruption can be on purpose when the interrupter wants to draw attention on him/her.)

But the same as the German conversation culture do also other conversation cultures exist (what I pointed to already during the course). A girl who was an exchange student in Argentina proved this. She said that people are interrupting each other all the time and finish the sentences and thoughts of the other. If you do not and remain listening (the German way)you are supposed to be impolite and ignorant.
On the other side of the world it is neither the German way of listening. When you have Japan, it is impolite to look somebody in a higher position into his eyes, instead have your head down and dont interrupt.
Speaking of East-Asia, it was unfamiliar to me as a German that people take a hand in front of their mouth when speaking close to someone or on the cell phone. (My assumption: It is probably because they dont want to spit at the listener while talking?)

But anyway, I think that it had been of much more value for the seminar to demonstrate how people talk to each other in other countries. One (sensible) method could be to evaluate (short) video clips and let the students present their experiences with that particular culture.
Much better it would be of course to have somebody of whom the others do not know that he or she acts like someone from another culture. It would be interesting to see how the observers would react and evaluate this different communicative behaviour and where they had problems with.

When being confronted with a foreign culture for the first time the best thing to do is observing. At the beginning nobody would be able to listen actively and to give a proper feedback because of the different conversation cultures. One shouldnt expect that communication is everywhere the same as in Germany. But after learning how a feedback is given in that particular culture a successful active listening would be possible.