Rosemary Logan, Ph.D, is a lecturer for the First Year Seminar Program and the Sustainable Communities Masters Program.
Discussion is a key component of collaborative learning, one of the “pedagogies of engagement” (Edgerton, 1997, p. 32), and yet lively discussions are a common challenge in the higher education classroom. While there are some great resources that go into depth about how to engage students in classroom discussions (Nilsen, 2010; McKeachie, 2011; Brookfield and Preskill, 2005; Burbule, 2003), I’d love to offer a few ideas that have helped me to ensure that everyone speaks and no one ever gets too comfortable in my class. Combined with effective strategies that build a sense of classroom community, these strategies, listed below, help students to participate actively and take more risks during classroom discussions.
- Everyone speaks: I would argue that measure of a “good discussion” occurs when every student has the opportunity to give voice to the questions at hand. There is a common misperception among professors that their “classes are too big” or their “students are too shy” or “there is just not enough time for everyone to have the chance to speak.” These comments operate from an assumption that discussions only take place when the whole class discusses a topic together. However, a simple Think-Pair-Share format allows each student to process the information you are throwing out to them, verbalize their thoughts on that topic with a partner, and then more safely risk sharing their or their partner’s thoughts with the larger group. Every student may not feel very comfortable speaking up in front of the entire class, but nearly every student will feel comfortable engaging in a simple discussion with one other person. More info here.
- Mix it up: From NAU’s undergraduate to graduate classes, how many classes follow the exact same discussion format? Even in an upper level graduate level class, we may model and then entrust our graduate level students to do the readings, design thoughtful questions, and facilitate their own discussions. I would argue that the greatest growth in our students happens at the edges. There are SO MANY great ways to engage students. Varying how you facilitate questions keeps students on their toes and forces them to form a position, argue for that position, and support those arguments with evidence. Here are a few of my favorites:
- Stand Where You Stand: This is great for getting conversations rolling in the beginning of introducing a new, often controversial topic. I use this activity to help students make a connection between a topic we are discussing and their own personal lives. Working with first-year students, I continue to be surprised at how many students have not thought critically about so many issues. Forcing them to examine their own assumptions and air (and challenge) those assumptions is a great first step to guiding them through the process of academic thinking and learning. More on this topic here.
- Socratic Seminar: This discussion format takes its foundation from a rich text that has layers of meaning. A discussion format (the “rules of engagement”) is agreed upon and there is a clearly-defined structure for how to conduct the discussion and often some questions pre-established by instructor or students that build from simple to complex, in order to get the conversation rolling. I love to use this discussion format to peel back layers of meaning and significance. Students are generally given the text in advance, given time to digest the material, and asked to generate a question for further discussion. I require my students who want to make a point to support that point with evidence (and make a direct reference to the text). I keep a close watch on time; every student has a chance to speak and must make at least two points. I prefer to conduct Socratic Seminars in the fishbowl format, because it lets students step outside of the oftentimes more adrenaline-producing or heated discussion and just practice listening—good practice for our more vocal students to undertake.
- Fishbowl: A smaller group of students sits in the center with chairs facing each other. These are the students engaging in the discussion. The outer circle of students may not talk and are prompted to observe not only what the people in the inner circle are saying, but also how they are saying it: for example, body language, volume, and word choice.
- Roleplaying Activities: Roleplaying can often be a powerful way to bring in multiple perspectives on complex and often polarized issues such as hunger or immigration. In a perfect world, you would be able to bring in a diverse group of panelists to represent these diverse perspectives for your students. However, a thoughtful roleplaying activity can serve as a primer for opening a discussion about complex issues. Just as panel discussions can allow students to begin to see the areas of grey (versus polarized and politicized black/white positions), participating in a roleplaying activity allows students to capture a sampling of the diversity of perspectives. The trick with this format is to absolutely commit to representing multiple perspectives as fairly and accurately as possible. It is also important to stress that the roleplaying activity can be an imperfect simplification of a much more complex debate. In order to represent a diversity of perspectives fairly, it is important to pull from a diverse set of news sources/organization or to reach out directly for an authentic narrative from the organizations/people themselves. I like to use this approach as an introductory way to explore some of the layers of complexity centered on issues of hunger in across the state of Arizona. More info here.
- Debate: Once per semester in my classes that engage in more “hot topic” issues, we will conduct a classroom debate. I use this as a teaching strategy later in the semester (once students have become more comfortable with each other) to liven things up. Students are given an entire class period to conduct their research and work on their positions; then, in their next class, they are provided with prompts—which I’ve created in advance—to discuss. I like to do the debate in a fast-paced and fishbowl format with no more than four people in the center debating at a time. Every student must speak at least twice and cite their points with evidence. Then as the discussion picks up and almost everyone has had the chance to speak, I may increase the number of students in the center and let it get a little out of hand. Students consistently cite the “GMO debate” from my food systems class as one of the highlights of the semester. More info here.
A Tip: Be sure to evaluate the level of application your discussion format requires. During the first two weeks of class, you may want to avoid throwing your students into a full-on debate and instead start with simple Think-Pair-Shares. With the appropriate scaffolding and efforts at building community in your classroom, I think it is pretty incredible what risks students are willing to take, once they know that it is safe to speak up and that their voice truly matters.
References
Barkley, E. (2010). Student Engagement Techniques: a handbook for college faculty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brookfield, S., & Preskill, S. (1999). Discussion as a way of teaching: tools and techniques for democratic classrooms. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Burbules, N. C. (1993). Dialogue in teaching: theory and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Edgerton, R. (1997). Higher education white paper. Pew Charitable Trusts.
McKeachie, W. J., & Gibbs, G. (1999). McKeachie’s teaching tips: strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (10th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Nilson, L. B. (2003). Teaching at its best: a research-based resource for college instructors (2nd ed.). Bolton, MA: Anker Pub. Co.
Pascarella, E. T. and Terenzini, P.T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.