I am reading about the importance of the exhibition of active-learning techniques in the course of teaching demonstrations of tenure-track interviews. This paper frequently stresses on the usage of various forms of active learning to engage the (hypothetical) students in an interview:
Effectively incorporating any of these active-learning activities into your teaching demonstration can be impressive to the search committee.
The paper suggests various means of the realization of active learning, for example, by
Similarly, ask the audience to construct possible conclusions to be drawn from the data rather than just telling them your conclusions—interpretation of material is a key aspect of the student learning process;
Job candidates will often stop periodically and ask whether there are any questions, which in a real classroom can be problematic, because students who are lost are usually reluctant to speak in front of the class. A more effective strategy is to ask a question that will diagnose whether the students actually understand the material.
However, authors automatically assume that an interviewee necessarily benefits from the co-operation of the audience as "fake students", say,
Regardless of the makeup of the audience, it is advised that you treat them as though they were students.
''... when active-learning exercises are being used, as the faculty need to give typical student responses if the exercise is to work appropriately.''
In particular, in a real class, if a lecturer does not get that much of response from students regarding his applied active learning processes, nothing catastrophic happens and he can switch to other means of delivering his material and progression.
Now let's say an interviewee, in a 15-minute demo facing a committee whose members are all fake students (faculty members), plans to incorporate two instances of active learning in his demo (for example, a usage of clicker while asking a question from them, and a query to ask what they can express about the interpretation of a graph). Now, what should the interviewee do if his fake students do not properly react to the first planned active learning idea of the demonstration?
Option 1: moving on without any further try to keep them involved (as it would be pretty likely that they won't react to next engagement impulse of the applicant);
pros: there would no no more awkward silence there, and he can instead do some thing else
cons: active learning demonstration also flies out of the window.
Option 2: keep executing the plan and performing the next active learning strategy with the hope that this time they react more co-operatively; in this case,
pros: the applicant has, at least, demonstrated another instance of active learning engagement.
cons: the next silence, if not totally negative, does not convey any positive feedback from the panel.
Any experiences (and/or thoughts) about the proper approaches to handling such a situation are welcome!