Strategies for Discussion
It’s helpful to know in-the-moment discussion-leading strategies – everyday routines as well as those that deal with the “has anyone done the reading??” scenario. I’ll get to those later. My first point is that good discussion leading starts on the first day of section, before any reading is actually discussed. Two fundamentals to remember are community and clarity. If you implement the groundwork for community and clarity effectively, you are well on your way to a successful section.
The qualities that make for good discussions are, to a large extent, ever-changing and unique to the specific combination of individual teaching style, student dynamics, as well as the overall timing/exhaustion level. That said, there is a lot you can do to create an environment that facilitates consistently high-quality discussion.
Community: Establish relationships with your students and facilitate theirs with each other.
Be empathetic. This is not the same thing as being a pushover. It means thinking about how the class, your presence, and your communication would feel from your students’ perspective. Keep in mind that your class probably looms much larger in your life (and emotional health) than it does in theirs.
Classroom structure can encourage or discourage community. Make sure everyone can sit around the table, facing each other. Move the tables if you need to! If your room is too big, ask everyone to sit toward the front/near each other.
Learn your students’ names, and facilitate them learning each other’s. I have found name games effective ice-breakers. First, I tell them that a name game might feel a little like camp, but I explain the pedagogical reasons for doing so (this relates to the clarity point). I ask students to name their favorite American historical figure (broadly defined), and say the name and person for every student who came before them in the circle. I do this the first two sections, as quickly as possible (once is not enough), and it generally provides humorous and interesting results!
Communicate that you are interested in getting to know them as individuals. I have required office hours (at least one visit per quarter), strongly encourage them to come in the first half of the quarter, and have sign-up sheets for specific time slots. I allow 10-15 minutes/student, and make a point of asking how they’re doing before launching into work talk. Having individual contact is extremely rewarding, as well as being very useful pedagogically. It’s also a perfect opportunity to check in and solicit informal feedback about the course.
Establish safe communication. On the first day of section, I pass around index cards (idea courtesy of Prof. Sommer). On one side, they write their name, year, major, and, (if relevant), how many credits they are getting for the class. On the other side, they have the option to write anything they want me to know. This is a great opportunity to tell me if they are non-native English speakers, if they have learning disabilities or special needs, or simply if they’re very excited/very nervous about the class. Or anything else! Whatever anyone shares, I follow up with them on their first office hours visit.
Clarity: Communicate expectations, evaluations, and approaches
Clarify for yourself what your role is and what your goals are. Ideally, you can discuss with the professor how s/he sees your role, and what s/he sees as the main content/concepts of the course. Generally, your role is to facilitate the students’ comprehension of the assigned readings and how they relate to the course. Think about what you want the students to walk away with as you plan each section, and raise any “main ideas” at the end of section that haven’t already been discussed.
Clarify expectations for participation and how they will be graded. I define in my syllabus that participation means demonstrating engagement with the reading through active speaking and listening/responding. I, (thanks to my undergrad prof, Lynn Sharp), ask them to share responsibility for the discussion, and keep in mind that if there are ten people in section, they should each speak about 1/10 of the time.
Students appreciate feedback re: participation. If at all possible, send each student a mid-quarter email, separate from any grade, which offers friendly updates on how you view their performance. You can also check in with them during office hours. I’ve offered occasional very short evaluations at the end of sections, in which I ask them to evaluate the course as well as their own participation and preparation. Simply incorporating self-evaluation into course evals can improve participation. (See my other archive postings re: writing feedback and evaluation.)
Offer suggestions and strategies for how and what to read. Many students may not have heard of a monograph, let alone read one. Tell them your expectations for reading thoroughness, and explain historical writing structure and how to glean information. One of the main causes of lackluster discussion is students feeling overwhelmed by the reading and giving up after the first 50 pages. If there are a lot of readings assigned, tell them what to prioritize for discussion (but remind them to at least skim the rest).
Leading Section: Hold students accountable, let them develop ideas, model active listening
Grease the discussion wheels. Even if students have done the reading, they will need mental transition and refresher time. I use “start-ups,” (inspired by Prof. Winterer), which both holds students accountable and efficiently establishes discussion groundwork. I ask a basic comprehension question, ie: “Explain one main point from Gilmore’s chapter on Progressivism.” Students individually brainstorm bullet points that flesh out their ideas (without feeling like a quiz), for 3 to 5 minutes. Then I collect the brainstorms and they share their ideas in groups of 2 or 3 for a few more minutes. Pair work facilitates community, allows quiet people to talk, and briefs those who have not done the reading. When we reconvene, I ask them for their thoughts, and we brainstorm their cumulative main ideas together, with me writing on the board. Thus, in 15 minutes, we’ve accomplished what could take 30 minutes of slower group discussion. Later, I read the brainstorms and write very brief comments (“Interesting point!” or “It seems like this is from lecture, not the reading.”)
Ask “scaffolding” questions. I encourage them to flesh out the historical content, then the historical argument (a new concept for many), then try to put texts in conversation. Start specific, end broad.
Help them with framing. You can ask, “what can we hang this on?,” drawing from lecture, historical timelines, and past readings.
Model active listening. I take notes on students’ ideas on the board, which helps directs other students to their peers’ words, as well as encourages clarity (I can ask, “is this what you meant?”). Be supportive of contributions, and always ask students to respond to each other. I tell them to “pass the torch,” to call on the next student, rather than going through me. You can correct misinterpretations if necessary, but usually other students take care of that if given the opportunity!
Keep students rooted in the texts, and remind them to bring the books and/or notes. If you hit a lackluster discussion, don’t take it personally! Students go through busy periods and might not do the reading thoroughly enough. If that happens, divide them into pairs and have them identify a key sentence(s) from the reading and explain why it is significant. You can then have them relate their pieces to each other, in the larger discussion. (Make sure that students share texts if necessary.)
Stay flexible in your approaches. I’ve included mostly suggestions for more traditional discussion leading. There are great ideas for debates and alternative structures in this hist-grad archive. Some groups may need to use the first 10 or even 15 minutes in a mock debate or role-playing exercise, just to get energized and talking. Others may want to jump straight into the material. Respond to group dynamics and get creative!
Most of all, have fun and enjoy learning from your students! Leading discussion can feel like you’re laying your heart on the table. The plus side of such emotional investment is the possibility of great reward.
The qualities that make for good discussions are, to a large extent, ever-changing and unique to the specific combination of individual teaching style, student dynamics, as well as the overall timing/exhaustion level. That said, there is a lot you can do to create an environment that facilitates consistently high-quality discussion.
Community: Establish relationships with your students and facilitate theirs with each other.
Be empathetic. This is not the same thing as being a pushover. It means thinking about how the class, your presence, and your communication would feel from your students’ perspective. Keep in mind that your class probably looms much larger in your life (and emotional health) than it does in theirs.
Classroom structure can encourage or discourage community. Make sure everyone can sit around the table, facing each other. Move the tables if you need to! If your room is too big, ask everyone to sit toward the front/near each other.
Learn your students’ names, and facilitate them learning each other’s. I have found name games effective ice-breakers. First, I tell them that a name game might feel a little like camp, but I explain the pedagogical reasons for doing so (this relates to the clarity point). I ask students to name their favorite American historical figure (broadly defined), and say the name and person for every student who came before them in the circle. I do this the first two sections, as quickly as possible (once is not enough), and it generally provides humorous and interesting results!
Communicate that you are interested in getting to know them as individuals. I have required office hours (at least one visit per quarter), strongly encourage them to come in the first half of the quarter, and have sign-up sheets for specific time slots. I allow 10-15 minutes/student, and make a point of asking how they’re doing before launching into work talk. Having individual contact is extremely rewarding, as well as being very useful pedagogically. It’s also a perfect opportunity to check in and solicit informal feedback about the course.
Establish safe communication. On the first day of section, I pass around index cards (idea courtesy of Prof. Sommer). On one side, they write their name, year, major, and, (if relevant), how many credits they are getting for the class. On the other side, they have the option to write anything they want me to know. This is a great opportunity to tell me if they are non-native English speakers, if they have learning disabilities or special needs, or simply if they’re very excited/very nervous about the class. Or anything else! Whatever anyone shares, I follow up with them on their first office hours visit.
Clarity: Communicate expectations, evaluations, and approaches
Clarify for yourself what your role is and what your goals are. Ideally, you can discuss with the professor how s/he sees your role, and what s/he sees as the main content/concepts of the course. Generally, your role is to facilitate the students’ comprehension of the assigned readings and how they relate to the course. Think about what you want the students to walk away with as you plan each section, and raise any “main ideas” at the end of section that haven’t already been discussed.
Clarify expectations for participation and how they will be graded. I define in my syllabus that participation means demonstrating engagement with the reading through active speaking and listening/responding. I, (thanks to my undergrad prof, Lynn Sharp), ask them to share responsibility for the discussion, and keep in mind that if there are ten people in section, they should each speak about 1/10 of the time.
Students appreciate feedback re: participation. If at all possible, send each student a mid-quarter email, separate from any grade, which offers friendly updates on how you view their performance. You can also check in with them during office hours. I’ve offered occasional very short evaluations at the end of sections, in which I ask them to evaluate the course as well as their own participation and preparation. Simply incorporating self-evaluation into course evals can improve participation. (See my other archive postings re: writing feedback and evaluation.)
Offer suggestions and strategies for how and what to read. Many students may not have heard of a monograph, let alone read one. Tell them your expectations for reading thoroughness, and explain historical writing structure and how to glean information. One of the main causes of lackluster discussion is students feeling overwhelmed by the reading and giving up after the first 50 pages. If there are a lot of readings assigned, tell them what to prioritize for discussion (but remind them to at least skim the rest).
Leading Section: Hold students accountable, let them develop ideas, model active listening
Grease the discussion wheels. Even if students have done the reading, they will need mental transition and refresher time. I use “start-ups,” (inspired by Prof. Winterer), which both holds students accountable and efficiently establishes discussion groundwork. I ask a basic comprehension question, ie: “Explain one main point from Gilmore’s chapter on Progressivism.” Students individually brainstorm bullet points that flesh out their ideas (without feeling like a quiz), for 3 to 5 minutes. Then I collect the brainstorms and they share their ideas in groups of 2 or 3 for a few more minutes. Pair work facilitates community, allows quiet people to talk, and briefs those who have not done the reading. When we reconvene, I ask them for their thoughts, and we brainstorm their cumulative main ideas together, with me writing on the board. Thus, in 15 minutes, we’ve accomplished what could take 30 minutes of slower group discussion. Later, I read the brainstorms and write very brief comments (“Interesting point!” or “It seems like this is from lecture, not the reading.”)
Ask “scaffolding” questions. I encourage them to flesh out the historical content, then the historical argument (a new concept for many), then try to put texts in conversation. Start specific, end broad.
Help them with framing. You can ask, “what can we hang this on?,” drawing from lecture, historical timelines, and past readings.
Model active listening. I take notes on students’ ideas on the board, which helps directs other students to their peers’ words, as well as encourages clarity (I can ask, “is this what you meant?”). Be supportive of contributions, and always ask students to respond to each other. I tell them to “pass the torch,” to call on the next student, rather than going through me. You can correct misinterpretations if necessary, but usually other students take care of that if given the opportunity!
Keep students rooted in the texts, and remind them to bring the books and/or notes. If you hit a lackluster discussion, don’t take it personally! Students go through busy periods and might not do the reading thoroughly enough. If that happens, divide them into pairs and have them identify a key sentence(s) from the reading and explain why it is significant. You can then have them relate their pieces to each other, in the larger discussion. (Make sure that students share texts if necessary.)
Stay flexible in your approaches. I’ve included mostly suggestions for more traditional discussion leading. There are great ideas for debates and alternative structures in this hist-grad archive. Some groups may need to use the first 10 or even 15 minutes in a mock debate or role-playing exercise, just to get energized and talking. Others may want to jump straight into the material. Respond to group dynamics and get creative!
Most of all, have fun and enjoy learning from your students! Leading discussion can feel like you’re laying your heart on the table. The plus side of such emotional investment is the possibility of great reward.