Classroom Discussions

Other than lecturing, leading discussions is the second most frequently used type of class; it is also the teaching
skill instructors most often say they do least well and in which they need the most help. Whether facilitating the
exploration of a text with a small class of students seated around a table or seeking an exchange of ideas in a
large class of students seated in tiered rows, classroom discussion is indeed the most challenging teaching
methodology facing college and university teachers.

Among the problems that cause teachers to dread discussions are the following: asking an opening question that
evokes responses rather than silence and asking follow up questions to sustain the discussion; handling
digressions and a dialogue with an especially combative student; dealing sensitively with shy, reticent, and
avoidant students as well as with dominating ones; responding to inappropriate statements, either of error or of
outright racism, sexism, or homophobia; suffering through silences; worrying about having to say, "I don't
know"; and bringing closure on a discussion so that students leave class with a clear sense that they have
learned something.

Above all, instructors fear discussions because of two related fears and pressures: the perceived need to "cover"
the material and the terror of losing control. The power of the latter, I believe, subtly works to reinforce the
former. No wonder instructors often lapse back into lectures.

Effective discussions, then, hinge on instructors' learning to become more comfortable with control issues and
with their ability to guide students (and themselves) through the minefield of interpersonal interactions,
especially those in multicultural classrooms. We can reduce these concerns by examining some practical ways of
enhancing instructors' skills and, therefore, their confidence as leaders of classroom discussions. After briefly
exploring the values and limitations of discussions and some different discussion models, I will suggest ten
elements and several strategies or methods for effective discussions.

THE VALUES AND LIMITATIONS OF

DISCUSSIONS
The fundamental value of discussions is that through them students develop a sense of ownership and
responsibility for their own learning. Nearly every study of higher education in recent years has stressed the
importance of participatory student involvement in enhancing cognitive and affective development. Learning is
facilitated by teaching strategies that involve active learning, an open and cooperative climate where diverse
views may be safely expressed, and immediate and frequent feedback. In discussions, students cannot sit back
and wait for the professor's answers but must exert an effort to discover their own answers. Students need
practice in expressing their ideas and beliefs about everything from specific course concepts to fundamental
personal and philosophical questions. Discussions provide students with feedback on their fumbling ability to
articulate how well they understand difficult ideas. "How do I know what I believe or know until I hear myself say
it?"

Discussions further students' appreciation for intellectual complexity. In interaction with others, students realize
that for most academic questions there are no simple answers and that different people can legitimately disagree
about truth. They learn to see how diverse perspectives and experiences lead others to interpret open-ended
questions in different ways. This is particularly important in our increasingly multicultural and age-diverse
classrooms. Moreover, students develop listening as well as expressive skills in good discussions, especially when
confronted with cultural values and points of view different from their own.

Students develop cognitive skills by their participation in discussions. They learn how to read a "text" critically,
looking for a thesis and main ideas, and how the structure of a piece of writing reinforces its argument. They
learn how to formulate questions and to appreciate what the important questions are. They get direct experience
in evaluating evidence and arguments and in taking apart an issue to solve an intellectual problem. In short,
students get practice in critical-thinking skills. For professors, discussions help them determine how well students
understand a particular concept or issue.

Discussions, moreover, have affective value. By practicing these skills in interaction with others, with frequent
positive reinforcement, students develop greater confidence in their mastery of conceptual materials, thinking
skills, and expressive abilities. This boosts self-esteem, which, in turn, has a positive effect on motivation. In
discussions, students not only get to know themselves better but also get to know their professors and fellow
students, whom they discover are struggling with the same issues as they. This, too, increases motivation to
study harder and participate more often. "I feel more comfortable with Professor Jones because she talked about
herself when she was a student trying to learn this same concept." Or, "He complimented me on how well I
struggled to interpret that paragraph, so I think I'll get to Wednesday's reading right away." Discussions,
therefore, have enormous potential to motivate and empower students.

There are, of course, limitations to these ideal values of a discussion. Like any teaching and learning strategy,
discussions should be used as one approach among many--the choice depending on goals. Discussions are
inappropriate for providing an overview of the structure of a course, for introducing unfamiliar material and
explaining difficult concepts, and for doing a literature review. Discussions cannot provide charismatic inspiration
to undertake a new and difficult unit or learning project.

Another set of familiar challenges to fulfilling the values of a beneficial exchange of ideas centres on the two basic
models of a discussion:

1) teacher-centred and

2) student-centred.

In instructor-centred discussions the focus of attention (80% in one review of 12 studies) is on the professor,
who has the most talking time. In its worst form, what is called a "discussion" is really an excuse for lecturing. In
the question-and-answer variety of this format, the professor invites student questions and gives minilectures in
response, while students take notes.

Teacher-centered discussions have enormous value in large classes and in those disciplines (e.g., the sciences) in
which there are pressures to prepare students for the next level--and in which there are, more or less, "right"
answers. In a large survey class, even where students are sitting in tiered rows, a minidiscussion in the middle of
a lecture can be an effective way to reinforce student learning. Studies are clear that after twenty minutes of
presentational material, retention begins seriously to decline. After about fifteen to twenty minutes of lecture,
then, the energy of the class should be shifted by giving students time, either in pairs or small groups, to discuss,
to apply, or simply to restate in their own words the important concept or themes of the lecture. Listening to how
well students do this gives professors immediate feedback on how well they have explained the material. Active
learning exercises in the middle or end of a class, such as the "one-minute [feedback] papers," tell teachers how
best to use the rest of the class. These exercises also reenergize students.

There are two basic models for effective student-centred discussions:

1) Developmental problem solving and

2) Open-ended discussions.

In the first, a problem is defined, broken into its component parts, and then analyzed and interpreted. "What are
Jefferson's challenges and purposes in constructing the arguments of the Declaration of Independence, and how
does he handle them?" "What is racism, where does it come from, and what are some ways of eliminating it?"
"Why do you think the experiment failed?" "What are some possible next steps in solving this proof?" "How does
Gilligan construct her argument showing how women's moral development is 'in a different voice?" For each of
these examples, many students participate actively in the process of diagnosis, analysis, and the search for the
pattern of an argument and for possible solutions. There is room for different perspectives and approaches, and
students need each other in analyzing and solving the problem.

A second student-centred discussion is a more open-ended one. An unsolvable question is posed and explored in
a process that at best, ends up clarifying the issues involved, usually controversial ones involving diverse
perspectives and a personal investment of values. "Would you have signed the Declaration of Independence?
Why or why not?" "Has this scientific discovery benefited or harmed humankind?" "In deciding how you would
rule in the Baby M case, is your moral thinking more like Gilligan or Kohlberg, and what makes it so?" "Even
though we are a multicultural society, what common values and political ideals do we all share?" Questions such
as these will invariably involve students in discussions that both compel them to think through their own values
and positions on important issues and to learn how to listen to and respect the differing ideas of others.

THE ELEMENTS OF AN EFFECTIVE DISCUSSION

Quality "Texts"

The first and perhaps most important ingredient in ensuring a good discussion is the selection of a quality text or
topic to discuss. Such texts or issues will invariably be those that connect with and validate student life
experiences, particularly developmental issues of identity, autonomy, self-esteem, as well relationships and
career aspirations. No matter what the text or topic, a teacher can always usefully ask: "How does this relate to
my knowledge of what my students have done and what is important to them right now?" Good texts are also
invaluable in grounding potentially emotional and heated discussions of multicultural texts and issues. As Elie
Wiesel has said, in enjoining colleges to educate against "hate" there is no better approach than "to study
together" and to especially study "good texts."

Preparation

An effective discussion, like almost anything, depends first of all upon careful, advance planning. This means
deciding which among many discussion strategies is most appropriate to meet the particular goals and teaching
style and strengths of the teacher for a particular group of students for a particular text or topic at a particular
point in the term. This means, for a Monday-Wednesday-Friday class, deciding on Tuesday night what strategy to
use on Friday so that one can tell students on Wednesday what to read, what to look for, and how to prepare for
the discussion on Friday. "When you walk in next time the first thing I am going to ask is to identify the three
major sections of the Declaration and how Jefferson used each to advance his argument." "Decide before Friday
whether you think Nat Turner's revolt was justified, and why or why not." "Think about your definition of justice
as you read Plato's chapter for Friday." "Come prepared to tell a story from your own life that connects to the
issues in this novel." Obviously, none of these discussions on Friday will go well if students have not done the
reading; good planning helps them do that.

Clarity of Purpose

Whatever the good text or topic, it helps to focus on an identifiable problem or issue and to make one's purposes
clear. These might include understanding the meaning of a paragraph, page, or chapter; identifying the several
component parts of an argument; exploring the range of opinions on an issue; probing the values, beliefs, and
feelings of the group on some issues; or debating two sides of a question. Whatever the purpose and focus,
students know what it is at the beginning of the class and are reminded of it from time to time during the hour. It
is helpful to write the focused goal or goals of a discussion on the board at the start of class and perhaps a brief
three-or-four-point outline of the major issues to be explored. Thus, if the discussion begins to digress, the
teacher need only point at the board to refocus the group's attention on the main purpose and order of the day.

Common Focus

Discussions go better when there is a common visual focus; students should bring their books to class. If not a
reading, the focus could be some other vivid impetus to discussion: a few powerful quotations; a series of slides;
a story, a speech or piece of music; or a blackboard with terms, ideas, or tables or with two columns
representing a dichotomous tension between two ideas or positions. Implicit behind the principle of a common
focus is that several different people have come together to learn from each other in decoding or exploring the
implications of a single common "text." This unifies the group as a community even as differing interpretations
reveal the importance of diversity.

Even more powerful is the single representational image, often created by students themselves. We are all
aware, for this television generation of students, how important it is to provide visual images for abstract ideas
and concepts. We need also to find ways to make visual the verbal themes of a discussion. When students "see"
ideas unfolding on the board, they can more easily talk about them. Teachers should ask students to design a
logo or representational image that summarizes the essence of a text and its themes. When students discuss
these word pictures, or draw them on the board, the discussion always stays more focused and concrete.

Going to the Text

Implicit in this last element of an effective discussion is the importance of going concretely to the text and
reading passages out loud--in effect, modeling for students how to do a close reading of a passage. One reason
these discussions lag is that instructors have assumed better readers than their students have been taught to be.
Instructors need, in short, to teach students how to read. When breaking a large class into smaller groups to
interpret a particular passage or text, the instructor should ask the students to find two or three crucial themes,
with appropriate illustrative quotations. When the class is reassembled, the instructor should go around the table
and have each student mad a sentence or an important passage, stopping when necessary to ask, "Now what's
Morrison saying here?" "In your own words, rephrase Bellah's point." Or just, "Responses? Comments? Does
everyone agree?" Teaching students the skill of close reading of texts often goes beyond skillbuilding to a lively
discussion of substantive issues.

Summary Interventions

Sustaining a discussion often requires timely interventions to clarify what is being learned during a discussion.
From time to time, the teacher interrupts to ask, "OK, where are we?" "Recalling our purpose, what have we said
so far?" "Who would like to summarize three main points made so far?" Using the board helps, as well as asking
designated observers and recorders to keep a written record of major points made during the discussion.
Different students should, of course, be asked, but I especially like to invite a particularly dominant student to
keep notes as a way of reducing his (or, less often, her) participation.

It is also important to summarize the main points of a discussion at the end of the class. Students will more likely
feel that the session has been a valuable one, even with some digressions, if the teacher, with the help of the
student recorder, synthesizes what has been learned as a means of bringing closure on the class. "We have seen,
then, that the value of Malcolm X's autobiography is in the following four ways." Or, "Although we do not agree
on which of the six persons is the essential Malcolm X, we understand that our differences depend on our racial
identity and on how we feel about black anger."

Staging

The seventh element of an effective discussion is how teachers plan and conduct the flow of the class period.
Whether starting with the initial stimulation of a text, demonstration, or problem, the discussion usually moves
from the concrete to the abstract, from "what" to "why," from description to analysis, and finally to evaluation.
Since students are more often concrete than formal and abstract and need to be reminded of the basic substance
of the assigned reading for the day, it is important to begin the discussion with the group's collective recollection
of the content of the assignment. When a common ground of the group's understanding has been established,
the discussion can move to analysis and evaluation. "Now that we understand Marx, how have historical events
proved him right and wrong?" Or, more openly, "What do you think of Marx's argument?"

The staging of a discussion moves from lower order questions like "What is happening here?" to higher order
ones like "Why did it happen?" and "What do you think about it?" My rule of thumb for dividing class time in
introductory courses is to spend roughly 50 percent on description and 50 percent on analysis and evaluation. In
a typical 50-minute class, teachers should plan 20 minutes for each, saving 10 minutes for flexibility, digressions,
and closure. This, of course, varies depending on the topic, text, and level of the class. With more sophisticated
upper-class students, one spends more time on analysis, differing perspectives, and evaluation.

Flexibility in breaking this basic pattern is important. There may be occasions, particularly with an emotional
topic, when it is preferable to begin with students' immediate affective responses and then to examine the issue
in a more detached, reflective way. In this way, a student's own life issues can be connected to those in the text.
Trust your intuition in deciding whether to begin with emotional responses or detached description.

Shifts of Energy and Voice

Effective discussions will usually include several shifts of energy and voice during the period. Sometimes, to a
teacher's despair and delight, several students will be participating all at once. Energy shifts usually occur
verbally but could also be expressed in physical movement, as in literally taking opposite sides of the table or
room in a debate. "All the 'Hawks' favoring intervention on this side of the room and all the 'Doves' on that side."
"Those who support Booker T. Washington's program on one side and those favoring Du Bois on the other."
"Those who find Socrates guilty over here and those for acquittal over there." Discussions go better when the
question discussed is grounded in a prior analysis of the text or issue and when the format is designed to bring
out divergent, even dichotomous, viewpoints.

Having said that, in structuring dichotomous debates teachers should note that several students, often bright
ones, will refuse forced polar choices but will argue the legitimacy of a more complex middle position. Of course
they will be right. It is, however, pedagogically clarifying to begin by forcing only two choices and to let those
opting for a middle ground (or the developing debate) make the case for complexity.

Whether ending up with two, three, or several groups, students will put their bodies literally behind their beliefs
by physically moving to a spot in the room defined by their choice. If the question posed has been a good one
and the options are equally attractive, there should be a reasonable distribution of students to each position. The
question, then, is quite simple: "Why have you chosen to sit where you are?" Take two or three statements from
one side, then from the other, and let the discussion proceed from there. Making closing arguments is usually
appropriate, although there may be times when there is so much energy that the class might better end without
closure, hopefully guaranteeing discussion outside of class and eager anticipation of the next class.

We need to be careful not to turn too many of our discussions into debates. The learning style of some students,
often women, thrives not in a competitive atmosphere but in a collaborative one. Students should be encouraged
to build on one another's ideas as well as to critique them, to validate and affirm each other as well as to
disagree. To ensure shifts of energy that empower different voices, students need their fears of being wrong
acknowledged, as well as their concern that there is a single right answer that the teacher is looking for. I like,
therefore, to start discussions with instructions such as the following: "Emerson's argument in this essay is very
difficult; I'm not sure I entirely understand it. We need each person's help in figuring out what he is saying. Can
some brave person start with a partial statement of what you think is going on here, and then someone else build
on it?" Or, alternatively, "Let's get three or four different answers or explanations out first, and then try to sort
out what's being said here." Instructions like these are intended to help students, especially Perry dualists,
understand the complexity of truth as well as to invite collaboration and the willingness to take modest risks.

Immediate Inclusion

For students to feel safe participating in discussions it is important to devise ways in which each person has an
opportunity to say something early in the class period. If students hear their voice at the beginning of class (or
term) they are more likely to participate later. Brainstorming associational imagery is one way to let many people
talk in a short amount of time. The teacher should invite students to call out "words, themes, or feelings" that
they associate with a key concept, topic, text, or issue on the agenda that day and, without judgment, fill the
board with the diverse responses. In a smaller class the teacher should go around the table and have each
student suggest "one concrete image, scene, or moment that had power for him or her from the reading for
today." Again, this fills the board with a collage of rich specific images as a descriptive, even factual, backdrop for
the discussion that follows.

These strategies have the value of letting students become fully present in the classroom--and letting them feel
included. The use of rituals is a powerful way to help students center themselves and be "present" in class.
Brainstorming, or a brief meditation, can be a ritual if done regularly. Another is to ask students to write for a few
minutes at the beginning of class or to pair off or get in small groups in order to prepare for the ensuing
discussion. Even quizzes can be used ritualistically, especially if playful and nonpunitive. Whatever the approach,
rituals provide space and time for students to prepare for the class discussion. Rituals are intended to make
students feel included and safe, both prerequisites for lively discussions--that is, for learning.

Classroom Climate and Evaluation

For effective discussions it is important to establish an open and comfortable classroom based on trust, support,
acceptance, and mutual respect. When students feel that their participation is valued, by other students as well
as the teacher, they begin to develop the self-confidence that increases their willingness to risk and, therefore, to
learn, but how to evaluate? These include a definition of a good discussant (involving both speaking and
listening), advice about attendance and how to read in preparation for discussions, and the high value I place on
students getting to know each other as a prerequisite for collaborative and safe learning. WE acknowledge
student anxieties about speaking in groups and invite them to take the opportunity to work on their group
discussion skills as they would their writing or quantitative skills.

And when it comes time to state exactly how WE arrive at a student's grade, imprecise as it is, the following
represents my latest version: "I know that your discussion grade is important to you. You will do best when you
do not let worrying about grades get in the way of enjoying and learning from our discussions, but rather
participate as if them were no grade involved. For my part, We do not assign daily grades. Rather, We gradually
develop a best judgment of your contributions as a participant (both as speaker and as listener) in our
discussions. I will, from time to time, give you feedback on your participation, but please feel free to ask me
about it or talk about the group's process at any time. Your voice is precious; your thoughts and feelings have
value: let's hear them!"

This seems to work, and students especially like the feedback, which takes two forms. One is frequent affirming
comments, publicly and privately. The other is brief written "pep talks" about every three or four weeks, giving
each student specific praise for his or her discussion participation, with suggestions about what to work on. The
advice includes statements such as "Your comments were really helpful in our discussion of Lakota Woman, but
we needed to hear more of what you thought about Momaday." "I sensed from your comments and questions
about Silko the other day that you have a deep interest in spirituality. Would you like us to deal more with those
issues in class?" Or, to a dominant student, "I appreciate how well you am always prepared to participate, and I'd
like you to help me by also asking questions so that more people in the class can talk about their ideas too."

While teaching at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, James Baldwin observed that "a young person
doesn't really want you to answer his question, he wants you to hear it, then he or she can deal with it . . . If you
hear it, the question is real." In short, a discussion--indeed, learning--goes better when students feel heard and,
therefore, empowered. Of all the elements in leading effective discussions, perhaps no single one is as important
as this.