Small Group Discussions
(Some sections adapted
from Davis, 1993; Brookfield and Preskill, 1999)
Discussions can be an
excellent strategy for enhancing student motivation, fostering intellectual
agility, and encouraging democratic habits. They create opportunities for
students to practice and sharpen a number of skills, including the ability to
articulate and defend positions, consider different points of view, and enlist
and evaluate evidence.
While discussions
provide avenues for exploration and discovery, leading a discussion can be
anxiety-producing: discussions are, by their nature, unpredictable, and require
us as instructors to surrender a certain degree of control over the flow of
information. Fortunately, careful planning can help us ensure that discussions
are lively without being chaotic and exploratory without losing focus. When
planning a discussion, it is helpful to consider not only cognitive, but also
social/emotional, and physical factors that can either foster or inhibit the productive
exchange of ideas.
Determine and communicate
learning objectives
For discussions to
accomplish something valuable, they must have a purpose. Consider your goals
for each discussion. How do the ideas and information to be discussed fit into
the course as a whole? What skills, knowledge, perspectives, or sensibilities
do you want students to walk away from the discussion with? Your goals for a
particular discussion should be consistent with your course objectives and
values as an instructor. You might, for example, want students to be able to:
·
Articulate
the arguments made by the authors of two assigned readings and assess the
evidence used to support them. Evaluate the arguments alone and in comparison
with one another and discuss their contemporary policy implications. Or…
·
Formulate
arguments and counter-arguments for a legal position. Or…
·
Imagine
a particular approach to the design of cities and discuss the impact such a
design would have on the lives of people in different socioeconomic categories.
Suggest and justify design changes to optimize the benefits for the most number
of people.
When you can clearly
envision the purpose of the discussion, it is easier to formulate stimulating
questions and an appropriate strategy for facilitating the discussion.
Communicating your objectives to your students, moreover, helps to focus their
thinking and motivate participation.
Plan a strategy
After determining the
objectives for your discussion, ask yourself: How will I make sure that
students meet these objectives? Plan the discussion out, even if you end
up deviating from your plan. Some of the questions to consider when formulating
a plan include:
·
How
do I want students to prepare: read a case study? (if so, in class or as
homework?) do a team exercise? watch a documentary? reflect on a set of
questions?
·
What
questions will I pose to spark or guide discussion? to encourage deeper
analysis?
·
Will
I open the discussion to the entire class or ask students to discuss the issue
in pairs, small groups, or some combination of the above?
·
What
will I do if students simply aren’t participating? If certain students dominate
the discussion?
·
How
will I allocate and manage the time I have?
·
How
will I deal with digressions or unanticipated shifts in topic?
·
How
will I correct students’ misconceptions or inaccuracies without stifling
participation?
·
How
will I (or my students) synthesize the ideas at the end of the class period?
Your answers to these
questions will depend on your goals. For example, correcting factual inaccuracies
might be critical in some circumstances, less so in others. Digressions may be
productive if your primary purpose is to explore connections, and undesirable
if the goal of your discussion is more focused.
One of the most
important things to consider when formulating a strategy is how to get the
discussion jump-started. Davis (1993) and Frederick (1981) provide a number of
excellent suggestions.
Ask Good Questions
Good questions are the
key to a productive discussion. These include not only the questions you use to
jump-start discussion but also the questions you use to probe for deeper
analysis, ask for clarification or examples, explore implications, etc. It is
helpful to think about the various kinds of questions you might ask and the
cognitive skills they require to answer. Davis (1993) lists a range of question
types, including:
·
Exploratory questions: probe facts and basic
knowledge
·
Challenge questions: interrogate
assumptions, conclusions or interpretations
·
Relational questions: ask for comparisons
of themes, ideas, or issues
·
Diagnostic questions: probe motives or
causes
·
Action questions: call for a conclusion
or action
·
Cause-and-effect questions: ask for causal
relationships between ideas, actions, or events
·
Extension questions: expand the discussion
·
Hypothetical questions: pose a change in the
facts or issues
·
Priority questions: seek to identify the
most important issue(s)
·
Summary questions: elicit synthesis
These question types
can be mapped onto Bloom’s taxonomy of learning objectives, which shows
increasing levels of cognitive complexity as students move from fairly simple
tasks (such as recall of information) to more complex tasks (such as synthesis,
evaluation, or creation.) While you might frame the entire discussion in terms
of a Big Question to grapple with, it is a good general strategy to move from
relatively simple, convergent questions (i.e., questions with correct answers,
such as “According to this treatise, what is Argentina’s historical claim on
the Falklands?” or “What kinds of tax cuts does this bill propose?”) to more
complex, divergent questions (i.e., questions with many valid answers, such as
“Why did Argentina invade the Falklands?” or “To what extent would this bill’s
proposed tax increases resolve the budget deficit?”) (exmples from Davis,
1993). Starting with convergent questions helps discussion participants to
establish a base of shared knowledge and builds student confidence; it also
gives you, the instructor, the opportunity to correct factual inaccuracies or misconceptions
before the discussion moves into greater complexity and abstraction. Asking a
variety of types of questions can also help to model for students the ways that
experts use questions to refine their analyses. For example, an instructor
might move an abstract discussion to a concrete level by asking for examples or
illustrations, or move a concrete discussion to a broader level by asking
students to generate a generalization or implication.
When instructors are
nervous that a discussion might flag, they tend to fall prey to some common
questioning errors. These include:
Asking
too many questions at once: Instructors often make the mistake of
asking a string of questions together, e.g., “What do you think the author is
trying to say here? Do you agree with him? Is his evidence convincing? Did you
like this article?” Students may get confused trying to figure out which
question to address first. Asking a number of questions together may also
conflate issues you really want to help students distinguish (for example, the
author’s thesis versus the kinds of evidence he uses to support it).
Asking
a question and answering it yourself: We have all had the experience of
asking a question only to encounter blank stares and silence. The temptation
under these circumstances is to jump in and answer your own question, if only
to relieve the uncomfortable silence. Don’t assume, though, that students’
silence necessarily indicates that they are stumped (or unprepared); sometimes
they are simply thinking the question through and formulating an answer. Be
careful not to preempt this process by jumping in too early.
Failing
to probe or explore the implications of answers: One mistake instructors can make in
leading a discussion is not to follow up sufficiently on student contributions.
It is important not only to get students talking, but to probe them about their
reasoning, ask for evidence, explore the implications of what they say, etc.
Follow-up questions push students to think more deeply, to substantiate their
claims, and consider the practical impact of particular perspectives.
Asking
unconnected questions: In the best discussions, there is a
logical progression from question to question so that, ultimately, the
discussion tells (or reveals) a story. When you are planning your discussion
questions, think about how they fit together.
Asking
yes/no or leading questions: Asking questions with a yes/no answer
can be the starting point of a good discussion, but only if there is a
follow-up question that calls for explanation or substantiation. Otherwise,
yes/no questions tend to be conversation-stoppers. By the same token,
discussions can stall if the instructor’s questions are overly leading, i.e.,
if there is clearly an answer the instructor wants, and the students’ task is
simply to guess it, rather than to think for himself.
Ignoring
or failing to build on answers: If students do not feel like their
voices have weight in discussion, their motivation to participate drops. Thus,
it is important to acknowledge student contributions, responding
enthusiastically when they are insightful (“That’s
an excellent point, Sarah; could you elaborate further?”) and pointing out
when they contain inaccuracies or problematic reasoning (“Take another look at the article, Tranh; is that really what the
author is claiming?”). If you do not wish to play such a directive role
yourself – and want students to develop the habit of assessing and responding
to one another’s contributions – you can throw student comments back to the
class for evaluation (for example, “Do
the rest of you agree with John’s recommendation? What would be some possible
consequences if this plan of action were followed?”)
Provide Direction and Maintain
Focus
Discussions tend to be
most productive when they have a clear focus. It may be helpful to write out a
few questions that the discussion will address, and return to those questions
periodically. Also, summarize key issues occasionally as you go and refocus
student attention if the discussion seems to be getting off track (for example,
“How do the issues that have just been raised relate to the question originally
posed?” or “That’s an interesting point, Alexis, and one we will return to
later in the course.”)
While some lulls in
discussion are to be expected (while participants are thinking, for example)
the instructor must be alert to signs such as these that a discussion is
breaking down (Davis, 1993):
·
Excessive
hair-splitting or nit-picking
·
Repetition
of points
·
Private
conversations
·
Participants
taking sides and refusing to compromise
·
Apathetic
participation
If the discussion
seems to be flagging, it can help to introduce a new question or alter the task
so as to bring a fresh kind of thinking or a different group dynamic to bear.
For example, you might switch from discussing an ethical issue in the abstract
to a concrete case study, or shift from large-group discussion to small group
or pair-work.
Bring Closure
It is important to
leave time at the end of the discussion to synthesize the central issues
covered, key questions raised, etc. There are a number of ways to synthesize.
You could, for example, tell students that one of them (they won’t know who in
advance) will be asked at the end of every discussion to identify the major
issues, concerns and conclusions generated during discussion. You could also
ask students individually to write down what they believe was the most
important point, the overall conclusion, and/or a question the discussion
raised in their mind (these can be collected and serve as the basis of a
follow-up lecture or discussion.) You might also provide students with a set of
2 or 3 “take-home” points synthesizing what you thought were the key issues
raised in discussion. Synthesizing the discussion is a critical step for
linking the discussion to the original learning objectives and demonstrating
progress towards meeting those objectives.
In conclusion…
While there are a lot
of issues to consider when planning and leading a discussion, the time you
spend up-front thinking through the cognitive, social/emotional, and physical
aspects of discussion will pay off later in more lively, productive, and
rewarding discussions as well as greater student learning.
References
Brookfield, S. D.
& Preskill, S. (1999)
Discussion as a Way of Teaching: Tools and Techniques for Democratic
Classrooms. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Davis, B. G. (1993)
Tools for Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Frederick, P. (1981)
“The Dreaded Discussion: Ten Ways to Start”. Improving College and University
Teaching. 29(3).
Summary:
This is a basic lesson plan for running of some small
group discussions. This article provides some instructions to teachers which
are suitable for a wide range of learners.
Concluding
Remark:
In my opinión create a lesson plan is basic to prepare our class. When we are
running in an activity to work on groups. We have to be more careful at the
moment to teach because there are different kinds of students and we know that
not all student learn in the same way.
we have to making sure that the task is clear and that they having enough
knowledge and resources to complete the task. We dont have to allow that one
group become too noisy because they will attract interest from other groups,
who will then lose their own identity. Read this article made me think in more
ideas about how can i develop my
teaching to work on groups and im sure that it
will help me a lot.
Sources:
CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
