She analyzed conversations among her students to find out what helped them engage in class discussion. The class she chose as her subject included eleven women and nine men. Tannen said he observed the class for a good period of time when he concluded that almost all of the men spoke in class occasionally. The student who talked the most in class was a woman, but then she says that almost half of the women didn't talk at all in class. Tannen decided to split the class so she could prove her point that having both genders in the same class is a problem. He analyzed the students, separated them into three relevant groups for each, based on the qualification, gender and conversation style he observed in each student. Naturally, she focused on how the all-female group became chatty once the men left. At this point in her essay, she focused too much on what she was trying to prove with her thesis rather than allowing readers to consider the other side of the story. As Tannen continued to explain the experiment he conducted in class, he began to deviate by including the ethnicity of some students. Foreign students tend to speak less regardless of gender, thus calling into question the validity of their contribution. The information provided towards the end of the essay started to become irrelevant. This part of his essay was very weak and showed some obvious bias while sharing the information