Critical Thinking

Conducting the Discussion: Common Problems 49

to answer a question immediately. Even the shy person will respond when asked, “What did you write? “Rewarding infrequent contributors at least with a smile helps encourage participation even if the contribution has to be developed or corrected. Calling students by name seems to foster freer communication. Seating is important too. Rooms with seats in a circle help tremendously. Getting to know the nonparticipant is also helpful. For example, I have found that it is helpful to ask students to write a brief life history indicating their interests and experiences relevant to the course. These self-summaries help me to gain a better knowledge of each student as an individual, to know what problems or illustrations will be of particular interest to several students, and to know on whom I can call for special information. One of the best ways of getting nonparticipants into the discussion is to ask them to contribute to a problem area in which they have special knowledge. The technique of asking for a student’s special knowledge deals directly with one of the major barriers to class discussion—fear of being wrong. No one likes to look foolish, especially in a situation where mistakes may be pounced upon by a teacher or other students. Student’s par-titularly avoid—or dread—questions that put them on the spot and only have one right answer, such as: “This is an example of what?” which is expecting the student to fill in the one correct word. There is an infinity of wrong answers, and obviously the teacher knows the one right answer; so why should the student risk making a mistake when the odds are so much against the student? And even if the answer is obvious, why look like a pawn of the teacher? One way of putting the student in a more favorable position is to ask general questions that have no wrong answers. For example, you can ask, “How do you feel about this?” or “How does this look to you?” as a first step in analysis of a problem. Students’ feelings or perceptions may not be the same as yours, but as reporters of their own feelings, they cannot be challenged as being inaccurate. While such an approach by no means eliminates anxiety about participation (for an answer involves revealing oneself as a person), it will more often open discussion that involves the student, than will questions of fact. Another technique for reducing the risk of participation for students is to ask a question one class period before the discussion and ask students to write out answers involving an example from their own experience. Similarly, one can ask students to bring one question to class for discussion. This helps participation, helps students learn to formulate questions, and provides feedback for you. Finally, remember that out-of-class learning is often more important than that in class. E-mail, computer conferencing, and other interactive technologies can support active learning, discussion, and debate.

50 Chapter5 Facilitating Discussion

What about a student Who Monopolizes?

If you have worked on nonparticipation effectively, the discussion “monopolizer” is less likely to be a problem, but there will still be classes in which one or two students talk so much that you and the other students become annoyed. As with nonparticipation, one solution is to raise the question of participation in discussion— “Would the class be more effective if participation were more evenly distributed? “A second technique is to have one or more members of the class act as observers for one or more class periods, reporting back to the class their observations. Perhaps assigning the dominant member to the observer role would help sensitivity. A third possibility is to audiotape a discussion, and after playing back a portion, ask the class to discuss what might be done to improve the discussion. A fourth technique is to use buzz groups with one member chosen to be reporter. Finally, a direct approach should not be ruled out. Talking to the student individually outside of class may be the simplest and most effective solution. This has been very successful for me as long as I am sensitive to that student’s need for affirmation.

What if the students have not read the Material?

It is hard to have a discussion if students have not studied the material to be discussed. What to do? Hopefully, you have avoided this by following the advice at the beginning of this chapter. However, even the best laid plans.... One strategy is always to give students questions at the end of one class, asking them to get information on the questions before the next class. If they have the reading materials available in class either in hard copy or through the Internet, you could have them skim the material and formulate the questions that the material purports to answer. It would be a chance to have them practice the SQ3R strategies that we discussed in the chapter on “Reading as Active Learning.” Using the jigsaw method also discussed in the chapter on “Reading as Active Learning,” you could assign parts of the class to create the summary of parts of the reading and present the summaries to the class. You can ask students to evaluate the validity of different Internet sources providing relevant information to the topic at hand. You might even give different assignments to teams of students. The relative availability of in-class computers and network connections might allow you to set them a task of finding information on the web during the class that deal with the problem or topic of discussion. If there are extenuating circumstances, you (or a student who is pre-pared) can summarize the needed points. Alternatively, you can give students a few minutes to scan the material before beginning the discussion. If used often, however, such strategies may discourage out-of-class preparation. It is better to deal with the behavior by having them do some of the work themselves in class, than having everything summarized for them. If the problem persists, present it to the students. What do they suggest? One likely proposal is a short quiz at the beginning of class—which usually works. However, you would like to have students motivated to study without the threat of a quiz. Usually, the quiz can be phased out once students find that discussion really requires preparation and that the assignments are more interesting as they develop competence. Handling conflicts and arguments in any good discussion, conflicts will arise. If such conflicts are left am-bigamous and uncertain, they, like repressed conflicts in the individual, may cause continuing trouble. You can focus these conflicts so that they may contribute to learning. First, I hope you took the advice to set up ground rules for discussion before the class ever gets to this point. If things start getting heated, it is time to roll out those guidelines again and remind students of the principles of civil discourse. Then try to turn the discussion to one that is more productive by one of the following

■■Reference to the text or other authority may be one method of resolution if the solution depends on certain facts.

■■Using the conflict as the basis for a library assignment for the class or a delegated group is another solution.

■■If there is an experimentally verified answer, this is a good opportunity to review the method by which the answer could be determined.

■■If the question is one of values, your goal may be to help students become aware of the values involved.

■■Sometimes students will dispute your statements or decisions. Such dis-agreements may often be resolved by a comparison of the evidence for both points of view, but since teachers are human, they are all too likely to become drawn into an argument in which they finally rest on their own authority. To give yourself time to think, as well as to indicate understanding and acceptance of the students’ point, I suggest listing the objections on the board. (Incidentally, listing evidence or arguments is also a good technique when the conflict is between two members of the class.) Such listing tends to prevent repetition of the same arguments.

■■In any case it should be clear that conflict may be an aid to learning, and the instructor need not frantically seek to smother it

■■If you are having problems with a particular student, check the chapter “Dealing with Student Problems and Problem Students.”

52 Chapter5 Facilitating Discussion

The Two Column Method Another of Norman Maier ’s (1952) techniques, the two-column method, is a particularly effective use of the board in a situation in which there is a conflict or where a strong bias prevents full consideration of alternative points of view. Experimental studies (Gilovich, 1991) suggest that when people hear arguments against their point of view, they become involved in attempting to refute the arguments rather than listening and understanding. Disagreement thus often tends to push the debaters into opposite corners, in which every idea is right or wrong, good, or bad, black, or white. The truth is often more complex and not in either extreme. The two-column method is designed to permit consideration of complications and alternatives. Before the issues are debated, all the arguments on each side are listed on the board or projected. The leader heads two columns “Favorable to A” and “Favorable to B” or “For” and “Against” and then asks for the facts or arguments that group members wish to present. The instructor’s task is to understand and record in brief the arguments presented. If someone wishes to debate an argument presented for the other side, the instructor simply tries to reformulate the point so that it can be listed as a positive point in the debater ’s own column. But even though an argument is countered or protested it should not be erased, for the rules of the game are that the two columns are to include all ideas that members consider relevant. Evaluation can come later. When the arguments have been exhausted, discussion can turn to the next step in problem solving. At this point the group can usually identify areas of agreement and disagreement, and in many cases, it is already clear that the situation is neither black nor white. Now the issue becomes one of relative values rather than good versus bad. When discussion is directed toward agreements, some of the personal animosity is avoided, and some underlying feelings may be brought to light. The next stages of the discussion are thus more likely to be directed toward constructive problem solving. Challenges and disagreements may be an indication of an alert, in-volved class. But the instructor should also be aware of the possibility that they may be symptoms of frustration arising because the students are uncertain of what the problem is or how to go about solving it.

CONDUCTING The Discussion: Teaching STUDENTS To learn Through Discussion.

I have already implied that classes do not automatically carry-on effective discussions. To a large extent student must learn how to learn from discussions, just as they must learn how to learn from reading. How can this occur?

Conducting the Discussion 53

First, they need to understand the importance of discussion for learning. Expressing one’s own understanding or ideas, and getting re-actions from other students and the teacher, makes a big difference in learning, retention, and use of knowledge. What skills need to be learned? One skill is clarification of what the group is trying to do—becoming sensitive to confusion about what the group is working on and asking for clarification. A second attribute is the students’ development of a willingness to talk about their own ideas openly and to listen and respond to others’ ideas. It is important for students to realize that it is easy to deceive themselves about their own insights or understandings and that verbalizing an idea is one way of getting checks on and extensions of it. Teachers can encourage development of listening skills by asking one group member to repeat or paraphrase what another said before responding to it, and repeatedly pointing out the purpose and values students gain from discussion. A third skill is planning. Discussions are sometimes frustrating because they are only getting under way when the end of the class period comes. If this results in continuation of the discussion outside the class, so much the better, but often learning is facilitated if students learn to formulate the issues and determine what out-of-class study or follow-up is necessary before the group breaks up. A fourth skill is building on others’ ideas in such a way as to increase their motivation rather than make them feel punished or forgotten. Often students see discussion as a competitive situation in which they win by tearing down other students’ ideas. As Haines and McKeachie (1967) have shown, cooperative discussion methods encourage more effective work and better morale than competitive methods. A fifth attribute is skill in evaluation. If classes are to learn how to discuss issues effectively, they need to review periodically what aspects of their discussion are proving to be worthwhile and what barriers, gaps, or difficulties have arisen. Some classes reserve the last five minutes of the period for a review of the discussion’s effectiveness. A sixth attribute is sensitivity to feelings of other group members. Students need to become aware of the possibility that feelings of rejection, frustration, dependence, and so on may influence group members’ participation in discussion. Sometimes it is more productive to recognize the underlying feeling than to focus on the content of an individual’s statement. One way of helping students develop these skills is to use student-led discussions preceded by a training meeting with the student leader. A more mundane skill is how to take notes in a discussion. I mentioned earlier that good discussions do not lend themselves to linear note taking, but many students do not know any other alternatives.

The two-column method described above is a good alternative strategy. Another is a concept map, showing how each point is connected to the overall discussion. The notes probably should mirror the purpose and flow of the discussion so there are myriad strategies. Just making the students aware that linear notes may not be their best bet would be a big help. But this next point is a more collaborative way of dealing with notes.

CONDUCTING The Discussion: Minutes, Summaries, and Drawing To a close

One of the problems with discussion is students’ feeling that they have learned less than they have in lectures where they have taken voluminous notes. One strategy that has worked for me is to assign one or two students to be the official minute takers for the class. This frees the other students up to be engaged in the discussion without worrying about get-ting the notes down. I think it is also useful to build in periodic progress checks so that students can see we are not going to go too far adrift before someone brings us back to the point. We can always decide to go ahead and continue our discussion, but I have found that by the time a progress check comes along, most students are ready to move on. At that time, it might be beneficial to give the students a little self-reflection time to note some of their own thoughts or questions. To convince the students that we have made progress, I like to go back to the beginning of the class period to see what goals we had and whether we have accomplished them. Then I like to summarize our progress or ask students to contribute to a summary. Better yet, use the last five to ten minutes for having the students summarize for them-selves what they learned and give the group feedback. For example, ask students to briefly write a summary of the issues discussed, the pros and cons, and their conclusions. If the course schedule permits it, this is also a good time to make some action plans for what we will all bring to the next class discussion.

Student led Discussions

In pioneering experiments in educational psychology and general psychology, Gruber and Weitman (1962) found that students taught in small, student-led discussion groups without a teacher not only did at least as well on a final examination as students who heard the teacher lecture, but also were superior in curiosity (as measured by question-asking behavior) and in interest in educational psychology. In a later study by Phillips and Powers (1979), the amount of student interaction was a function of the discussion leader. When students were leading the discussion, the amount of student participation was almost twice as great as when the discussion was led by the instructor. Phillips and Powers said that it was impossible to tell if this was because students as leaders facilitated discussion, or if the absence of an expert as discussion leader led to less inhibition of discussion, but it is an interesting question to ponder. Having a student as the discussion leader could easily change how the other students perceive their role in the class. In a more recent study, Casteel, and Bridges (2007) found that students did indeed report being more comfortable disagreeing with others when it was students who were leading the discussion. As it is probably the experience of disagreeing that causes the most self-reflection by a learner, and self-reflection causes better learning, feeling freer to disagree could lead to better learning from a discussion. This phenomenon has been described by Johnson and Johnson (1995) and referred to as “constructive controversy.” After an extensive meta-analysis of the literature, Johnson and Johnson reported impressive effect sizes (the amount of difference made by an intervention) for studies that used formats that followed the creative controversy model. Johnson, Johnson, and Smith (2000) provided an excellent analysis of what is probably happening with that model, mentioned earlier. In this model of discussion, students are divided into groups of four and then each group is divided into pairs. One pair of the group researches the pro side of an issue and the other pair researches the con side. The pairs must construct good arguments backed by literature and other forms of evidence. Once this has been done and each side has made its case and refuted the other, the pairs switch sides. They are required to come to some consensus on the best position regarding the problem. Johnson and Johnson pro-pose that such activity not only motivates students to dig deeply into the topic, but also causes them to experience the kind of conceptual conflict that research has shown leads to a re-examination of beliefs and attitudes. To learn more about this very interesting process, I recommend you read the Johnson, Johnson, and Smith (2000) article referenced in the Supplementary Reading list for this chapter.

Online Discussions

This is probably the most rapidly growing type of discussion in our arsenal today. As discussed in chapter 17, “Technology and Teaching,” e-mail, list servers, computer conferences, and other online experiences extend the opportunities for discussion far beyond what is possible in the classroom. Online discussions also provide practice in writing. They can facilitate cooperative learning. The impersonality of e-mail may re-duce the inhibitions of those who are shy in the classroom, but research suggests that it may also reduce inhibitions against rudeness. Thus, in initiating an online discussion, remind your students that respect for others and rational support for arguments are just as important online as in the classroom. For a thorough discussion of this topic, I recommend going to chapter 17 or consulting some of the most recent work on the topic, which has been reviewed by one of the leaders in the field, Alfred Rovai. In a very thorough analysis, Rovai (2007) has recommended some key strategies. For example, he suggested providing rubrics for online discussion to help students understand the kind of thought you expect from them in the discussions. He has also emphasized the im-portance of creating a sense of community for students in courses that depend heavily on online discussion. He has been studying the issue of social presence in virtual classrooms, the idea that there is a real person behind the words on the screen. Although many of his recommendations apply to face-to-face discussions, it is good to remember that the ability to discuss serious issues online is a very different behavior than the social networking that many students are accustomed to, so we cannot just assume that this level of thought will happen automatically.

In Conclusion

Teaching by discussion differs from lecturing because you never know what is going to happen. At times this is anxiety-producing, at times frustrating, but more often it is exhilarating. It provides constant challenges and opportunities for both you and the students to learn. When you can listen for several minutes without intervening, you will have succeeded.

Supplementary Reading

C. C. Bonwell and T. E. Sutherland, “The Active Learning Contin-uum: Choosing Activities to Engage Students in the Classroom,” in T. E. Sutherland and C. C. Bonwell (eds.), “Using Active Learning in College Classes: A Range of Options for Faculty,” New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no. 67, October 1996, 3–16.

S. D. Brookfield and S. Preskill, Discussion as a Way of Teaching: Tools and Techniques for Democratic Classrooms (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999).

J. T. Dillon, Teaching and the Art of Questioning (Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation, 1983).

S. Ezzedeen, “Facilitating Class Discussions around Current and Controversial Issues: Ten Recommendations for Teachers.” College Teaching, 56(4), 2008, 230–236.

T. Gray and L. Madson, “Ten Easy Ways to Engage Your Students.” Col-lege Teaching, 55(2), 2007, 83–87.J. Henning, “Leading Discussions: Opening Up the Conversation.” College Teaching, 53(3), 2005, 90–94.

D. Johnson, R. Johnson, and K. Smith, “Constructive Controversy: The Educative Power of Intellectual Conflict,” Change Magazine, January/February 2000, 28–37.

P. Roehling, R. Vander Kooi, S. Dykema, B. Quisenberry, and C. Vandlen, “Engaging the Millennial Generation in Class Discus-sions,” College Teaching, 59(1), 2010, 1–6.

A. Rovai, “Facilitating Online Discussion Effectively” Internet and Higher Education, 10, 2007, p. 77–88.