43

The Big List of Class Discussion Strategies

 


Listen to this article as a podcast episode:


 

 

When I worked with student teachers on developing effective lesson plans, one thing I always asked them to revise was the phrase “We will discuss.”

We will discuss the video.

We will discuss the story.

We will discuss our results.

Every time I saw it in a lesson plan, I would add a  note: “What format will you use? What questions will you ask? How will you ensure that all students participate?” I was pretty sure that We will discuss actually meant the teacher would do most of the talking; He would throw out a couple of questions like “So what did you think about the video?” or “What was the theme of the story?” and a few students would respond, resulting in something that looked  like a discussion, but was ultimately just a conversation between the teacher and a handful of extroverted students; a classic case of Fisheye Teaching.

The problem wasn’t them; in most of the classrooms where they’d sat as students, that’s exactly what a class discussion looked like. They didn’t know any other “formats.” I have only ever been familiar with a few myself. But when teachers began contacting me recently asking for a more comprehensive list, I knew it was time to do some serious research.

So here they are: 15 formats for structuring a class discussion to make it more engaging, more organized, more equitable, and more academically challenging. If you’ve struggled to find effective ways to develop students’ speaking and listening skills, this is your lucky day.

I’ve separated the strategies into three groups. The first batch contains the higher-prep strategies, formats that require teachers to do some planning or gathering of materials ahead of time. Next come the low-prep strategies, which can be used on the fly when you have a few extra minutes or just want your students to get more active. Note that these are not strict categories; it’s certainly possible to simplify or add more meat to any of these structures and still make them work. The last group is the ongoing strategies. These are smaller techniques that can be integrated with other instructional strategies and don’t really stand alone. For each strategy, you’ll find a list of other names it sometimes goes by, a description of its basic structure, and an explanation of variations that exist, if any. To watch each strategy in action, click on its name and a new window will open with a video that demonstrates it.

Enjoy!

Higher-Prep Discussion Strategies

Gallery Walk >

a.k.a. Chat Stations

Basic Structure: Stations or posters are set up around the classroom, on the walls or on tables. Small groups of students travel from station to station together, performing some kind of task or responding to a prompt, either of which will result in a conversation.

Variations: Some Gallery Walks stay true to the term gallery, where groups of students create informative posters, then act as tour guides or docents, giving other students a short presentation about their poster and conducting a Q&A about it. In Starr Sackstein’s high school classroom, her stations consisted of video tutorials created by the students themselves. Before I knew the term Gallery Walk, I shared a strategy similar to it called Chat Stations, where the teacher prepares discussion prompts or content-related tasks and sets them up around the room for students to visit in small groups.

Philosophical Chairs >

a.k.a. Values Continuum, Forced Debate, Physical Barometer, This or That

Basic Structure: A statement that has two possible responses—agree or disagree—is read out loud. Depending on whether they agree or disagree with this statement, students move to one side of the room or the other. From that spot, students take turns defending their positions.

Variations: Often a Philosophical Chairs debate will be based around a text or group of texts students have read ahead of time; students are required to cite textual evidence to support their claims and usually hold the texts in their hands during the discussion. Some teachers set up one hot seat to represent each side, and students must take turns in the seat. In less formal variations (which require less prep), a teacher may simply read provocative statements students are likely to disagree on, and a debate can occur spontaneously without a text to refer to (I call this variation This or That in my classroom icebreakers post). Teachers may also opt to offer a continuum of choices, ranging from “Strongly Agree” on one side of the room, all the way to “Strongly Disagree” on the other, and have students place themselves along that continuum based on the strength of their convictions.

Pinwheel Discussion >

Basic Structure: Students are divided into 4 groups. Three of these groups are assigned to represent specific points of view. Members of the fourth group are designated as “provocateurs,” tasked with making sure the discussion keeps going and stays challenging. One person from each group (the “speaker”) sits in a desk facing speakers from the other groups, so they form a square in the center of the room. Behind each speaker, the remaining group members are seated: two right behind the speaker, then three behind them, and so on, forming a kind of triangle. From above, this would look like a pinwheel. The four speakers introduce and discuss questions they prepared ahead of time (this preparation is done with their groups). After some time passes, new students rotate from the seats behind the speaker into the center seats and continue the conversation.

Variations: When high school English teacher Sarah Brown Wessling introduced this strategy in the featured video (click Pinwheel Discussion above), she used it as a device for talking about literature, where each group represented a different author, plus one provocateur group. But in the comments that follow the video, Wessling adds that she also uses the strategy with non-fiction, where students represent authors of different non-fiction texts or are assigned to take on different perspectives about an issue.

Socratic Seminar >

a.k.a. Socratic Circles

Basic Structure: Students prepare by reading a text or group of texts and writing some higher-order discussion questions about the text. On seminar day, students sit in a circle and an introductory, open-ended question is posed by the teacher or student discussion leader. From there, students continue the conversation, prompting one another to support their claims with textual evidence. There is no particular order to how students speak, but they are encouraged to respectfully share the floor with others. Discussion is meant to happen naturally and students do not need to raise their hands to speak. This overview of Socratic Seminar from the website Facing History and Ourselves provides a list of appropriate questions, plus more information about how to prepare for a seminar.

Variations: If students are beginners, the teacher may write the discussion questions, or the question creation can be a joint effort. For larger classes, teachers may need to set up seminars in more of a fishbowl-like arrangement, dividing students into one inner circle that will participate in the discussion, and one outer circle that silently observes, takes notes, and may eventually trade places with those in the inner circle, sometimes all at once, and sometimes by “tapping in” as the urge strikes them.

Low-Prep Discussion Strategies

Affinity Mapping >

a.k.a. Affinity Diagramming

Basic Structure: Give students a broad question or problem that is likely to result in lots of different ideas, such as “What were the impacts of the Great Depresssion?” or “What literary works should every person read?” Have students generate responses by writing ideas on post-it notes (one idea per note) and placing them in no particular arrangement on a wall, whiteboard, or chart paper. Once lots of ideas have been generated, have students begin grouping them into similar categories, then label the categories and discuss why the ideas fit within them, how the categories relate to one another, and so on.

Variations: Some teachers have students do much of this exercise—recording their ideas and arranging them into categories—without talking at first. In other variations, participants are asked to re-combine the ideas into new, different categories after the first round of organization occurs. Often, this activity serves as a good pre-writing exercise, after which students will write some kind of analysis or position paper.

Concentric Circles >

a.k.a. Speed Dating

Basic Structure: Students form two circles, one inside circle and one outside circle. Each student on the inside is paired with a student on the outside; they face each other. The teacher poses a question to the whole group and pairs discuss their responses with each other. Then the teacher signals students to rotate: Students on the outside circle move one space to the right so they are standing in front of a new person (or sitting, as they are in the video). Now the teacher poses a new question, and the process is repeated.

Variations: Instead of two circles, students could also form two straight lines facing one another. Instead of “rotating” to switch partners, one line just slides over one spot, and the leftover person on the end comes around to the beginning of the line. Some teachers use this strategy to have students teach one piece of content to their fellow students, making it less of a discussion strategy and more of a peer teaching format. In fact, many of these protocols could be used for peer teaching as well.

Conver-Stations >

Basic Structure: Another great idea from Sarah Brown Wessling, this is a small-group discussion strategy that gives students exposure to more of their peers’ ideas and prevents the stagnation that can happen when a group doesn’t happen to have the right chemistry. Students are placed into a few groups of 4-6 students each and are given a discussion question to talk about. After sufficient time has passed for the discussion to develop, one or two students from each group rotate to a different group, while the other group members remain where they are. Once in their new group, they will discuss a different, but related question, and they may also share some of the key points from their last group’s conversation. For the next rotation, students who have not rotated before may be chosen to move, resulting in groups that are continually evolving.

Fishbowl >

Basic Structure: Two students sit facing each other in the center of the room; the remaining students sit in a circle around them. The two central students have a conversation based on a pre-determined topic and often using specific skills the class is practicing (such as asking follow-up questions, paraphrasing, or elaborating on another person’s point). Students on the outside observe, take notes, or perform some other discussion-related task assigned by the teacher.

Variations: One variation of this strategy allows students in the outer circle to trade places with those in the fishbowl, doing kind of a relay-style discussion, or they may periodically “coach” the fishbowl talkers from the sidelines. Teachers may also opt to have students in the outside circle grade the participants’ conversation with a rubric, then give feedback on what they saw in a debriefing afterward, as mentioned in the featured video.

Hot Seat >

Basic Structure: One student assumes the role of a book character, significant figure in history, or concept (such as a tornado, an animal, or the Titanic). Sitting in front of the rest of the class, the student responds to classmates’ questions while staying in character in that role.

Variations: Give more students the opportunity to be in the hot seat while increasing everyone’s participation by having students do hot seat discussions in small groups, where one person per group acts as the “character” and three or four others ask them questions. In another variation, several students could form a panel of different characters, taking questions from the class all together and interacting with one another like guests on a TV talk show.

Snowball Discussion >

a.k.a. Pyramid Discussion

Basic Structure: Students begin in pairs, responding to a discussion question only with a single partner. After each person has had a chance to share their ideas, the pair joins another pair, creating a group of four. Pairs share their ideas with the pair they just joined. Next, groups of four join together to form groups of eight, and so on, until the whole class is joined up in one large discussion.

Variations: This structure could simply be used to share ideas on a topic, or students could be required to reach consensus every time they join up with a new group.

Ongoing Discussion Strategies

Whereas the other formats in this list have a distinct shape—specific activities you do with students—the strategies in this section are more like plug-ins, working discussion into other instructional activities and improving the quality and reach of existing conversations.

Asynchronous Voice >

One of the limitations of discussion is that rich, face-to-face conversations can only happen when all parties are available, so we’re limited to the time we have in class. With a tool like Voxer, those limitations disappear. Like a private voice mailbox that you set up with just one person or a group (but SOOOO much easier), Voxer allows users to have conversations at whatever time is most convenient for each participant. So a group of four students can “discuss” a topic from 3pm until bedtime—asynchronously—each member contributing whenever they have a moment, and if the teacher makes herself part of the group, she can listen in, offer feedback, or contribute her own discussion points. Voxer is also invaluable for collaborating on projects and for having one-on-one discussions with students, parents, and your own colleagues. Like many other educators, Peter DeWitt took a while to really understand the potential of Voxer, but in this EdWeek piece, he explains what turned him around.

Backchannel Discussions >

A backchannel is a conversation that happens right alongside another activity. The first time I saw a backchannel in action was at my first unconference: While those of us in the audience listened to presenters and watched a few short video clips, a separate screen was up beside the main screen, projecting something called TodaysMeet. It looked a lot like those chat rooms from back in the day, basically a blank screen where people would contribute a few lines of text, the lines stacking up one after the other, no other bells or whistles. Anyone in the room could participate in this conversation on their phone, laptop, or tablet, asking questions, offering commentary, and sharing links to related resources without ever interrupting the flow of the presentations. This kind of tool allows for a completely silent discussion, one that doesn’t have to move at a super-fast pace, and it gives students who may be reluctant to speak up or who process their thoughts more slowly a chance to fully contribute. For a deeper discussion of how this kind of tool can be used, read this thoughtful overview of using backchannel discussions in the classroom by Edutopia’s Beth Holland.

Talk Moves >

a.k.a. Accountable Talk

Talk moves are sentence frames we supply to our students that help them express ideas and interact with one another in respectful, academically appropriate ways. From kindergarten all the way through college, students can benefit from explicit instruction in the skills of summarizing another person’s argument before presenting an alternate view, asking clarifying questions, and expressing agreement or partial agreement with the stance of another participant. Talk moves can be incorporated into any of the other discussion formats listed here.

Teach-OK >

Whole Brain Teaching is a set of teaching and classroom management methods that has grown in popularity over the past 10 years. One of WBT’s foundational techniques is Teach-OK, a peer teaching strategy that begins with the teacher spending a few minutes introducing a concept to the class. Next, the teacher says Teach!, the class responds with Okay!, and pairs of students take turns re-teaching the concept to each other. It’s a bit like think-pair-share, but it’s faster-paced, it focuses more on re-teaching than general sharing, and students are encouraged to use gestures to animate their discussion. Although WBT is most popular in elementary schools, this featured video shows the creator of WBT, Chris Biffle, using it quite successfully with college students. I have also used Teach-OK with college students, and most of my students said they were happy for a change from the sit-and-listen they were used to in college classrooms.

Think-Pair-Share >

An oldie but a goodie, think-pair-share can be used any time you want to plug interactivity into a lesson: Simply have students think about their response to a question, form a pair with another person, discuss their response, then share it with the larger group. Because I feel this strategy has so many uses and can be way more powerful than we give it credit for, I devoted a whole post to think-pair-share; everything you need to know about it is right there.

 


So what else do you have? I would like to think this is a pretty complete list, but I’m sure more strategies are out there. If you use a discussion strategy that’s not mentioned here, please share it below.


 

Keep in touch.
I would love to have you come back for more. Join my mailing list and get weekly tips, tools, and inspiration—in quick, bite-sized packages—all geared toward making your teaching more effective and joyful. To welcome you, I’ll be sending a free copy of my new e-booklet, 20 Ways to Cut Your Grading Time in Half. I look forward to having you join me.

 

 

Share on Facebook13.6kTweet about this on TwitterPin on Pinterest16.1kShare on LinkedIn200Share on Google+86Email this to someone

Jennifer Gonzalez

Editor-in-Chief at Cult of Pedagogy
Former middle-school language arts teacher and college-level teacher of teachers. NBCT. Mother of 3. All of these experiences have brought me to where I am now: Devoted full-time to helping teachers do their work better.

Jennifer Gonzalez

Former middle-school language arts teacher and college-level teacher of teachers. NBCT. Mother of 3. All of these experiences have brought me to where I am now: Devoted full-time to helping teachers do their work better.

43 Comments

    • These are some great strategies. Not a lot applies to the virtual classroom in science. The online, live classroom is similar to a discussion board. Students talk to each other as well as to the teacher. They can ask questions in the moment and not wait to raise their hand. They can ask privately to each other or the teacher. This is similar to the Backchannel discussion. The class activity is happening alongside the chat discussion.
      The Teach-Okay is a great strategy and can apply to all kinds of classrooms. This is a great teach-reteach method that helps to identify in-the-moment misconceptions and provides students the opportunity to help each other in a very positive way.

      • I agree Dorothy about some of the types of activities described. The on line environment doesn’t allow for many of them. It’s amazing how many students will send a private message to the teacher to ask a basic question or make a comment, the just want to disappear. On the other hand, I think the snowball discussion, affinity mapping and gallery walk are great things we can (and do) use, I just didn’t have a name for them.

  1. Your podcast is no longer refreshing in my Podcasts app. I thought you had taken a break since April! I’ve unsubscribed, deleted all of them, and then resubscribed, and it still won’t show new ones. I really don’t like the new iphone Podcast format. It makes it much harder to find what I want.

  2. Jennifer, your article is so inspiring. I must admit at times I am guilty of being that teacher whose planning shows “discussion after the video”! The thinking routine that we do well in my class are the Gallery walk and the Speed dating (we call it donut talk). But I am so motivated by your article to try different strategies to encourage deeper and meaningful discussions in my class now, that I can’t wait to see it in action! Thank you for sharing your ideas.

  3. I’m one teacher who writes “students will discuss….” in my lesson plan and end up with fisheye teaching. Thank you for pointing out this blind spot, and I’m ready to do my lesson plans different by adding “students will discuss BY….”. I’m gonna try a variation of the philosophical chairs with the talk moves in my next series of lessons.

  4. What a great list of classroom discussion strategies! I, too, am guilty of asking my students to ‘discuss … with a partner’ on occasion. I’m looking forward to trying out the fishbowl approach as well as the backchannel discussion next week.
    I’ve had some success using Wechat to report summaries of discussions back to the class using the voice recording function (similar to the asynchronous discussion above but in class time) and the students found the exercise enjoyable as they could give immediate face to face feedback to each others’ responses.

  5. One of my favorites for empowering students is the Harkness Method, named after a teacher at Exeter Academy where it has been used for years. There are plenty of resources for it on the web.

    • I have had “Harkness Table” on my list of things to research forever. I didn’t realize there was a specific method associated with it. Thanks for reminding me!

      • Harkness Discussion has been an anchor in my class and like Peter said has empowered students to be accountable for not what they talk about but how they speak with one another.

          • Thanks for sharing Alexis Wiggin’s Spider Web discussion model. I plan to use it in my college classroom this fall!

  6. A Structured Academic Controversy, or SAC, from David and Roger Johnson (cooperative learning, U of MN) positions students on both sides of an issue and encourages consensus building. There are several resources for SAC’s online. Thank you for the wonderful list of strategies!

  7. Having a class discussion in Mathematics class can be challenging. Students who are not comfortable with Mathematics are not likely to speak up. If you force students to stand and deliver, it can lead to feelings of embarrassment, shame and unnecessary discomfort. So in my search to find new ways to have students discussing Mathematics in Mathematics class I happened upon this podcast.

    I planned a lesson with a hybrid of the Gallery Walk and Concentric Circles. The class I choose was a small class of 12 students. I established six stations, each with a different Mathematics question and I held a number of questions in abeyance anticipating that students would complete questions at some of the stations. Each station started off with two students and they were assigned as “A” group or “B” group. After five minutes with a question all of the “A” group students rotated clockwise to the next question in that direction, leaving the B student at the station to explain, discuss and work on the question with their new partner. Any work that had been done remained at the station to allow students to observe the previous students’ work and as a basis for discussion. After another five minutes the “B” group rotated anti-clockwise. So now the student who had arrived at that station in the first rotation was left to explain to the new arrival.
    If a pair finished a question correctly, then a new question was placed at that station for the students to work on. As anticipated there were questions that were completed, so having extra questions prepared was critical to the continuity of the work.
    During the course of the class there was a lot of discussion and interaction taking place between the pairs. I circulated, observed and answered questions where suitable. I refrained from giving hints or direction, preferring to remind the students that they were responsible for discussing options and working out theories or ideas. At no time did any pair surrender.
    As part of the wrap up of the lesson I asked students how they felt about the activity. They unanimously stated that they really enjoyed it and asked for the opportunity to repeat the activity. In response to a request for specifics some of the positive feedback included seeing a wide variety of approaches to problem solving. One student remarked that she saw approaches to problems that were very different from her way of approaching them and she found that she learned a lot from being able to see the other students’ working. They commented that the opportunity to work with more than one student on the same problem was beneficial. Directly related to the idea of encouraging discussion in Mathematics class, students also mentioned that the need to explain to others was helpful to them.
    I asked students for ideas on how to improve the experience. They all indicated that they would have liked the class to last longer so that they could spend more time working in this way. Another student said that she would have liked an opportunity to work with students who were in her same group. In other words, none of the “B” group got to work with anyone else in the “B” group. When she mentioned this the other students agreed that it would be better to be able to work with “everyone at least once.”

    • I love this idea, and I’m so excited to hear about your students’ reactions! There’s so much value in students being able to watch one another problem-solve. I’ve seen this work with reading in Kylene Beers’ book When Kids Can’t Read: What Teachers Can Do, where the more skilled readers will do “think alouds” while other, less skilled readers observe. The lower-level readers are always surprised by how messy the process is–they believe a good reader just goes straight through, without stopping. I’m sure watching other students solve math problems would have the same enlightening impact. Thanks so much for sharing your experiences here!

  8. I’m new to listening to podcasts and I felt I have struck gold. I have just listened to two of yours after getting on to the 40 hour group. After holidays it is great to have the fresh mind to be motivated to beginning again. Thanks.

    • Thank you so much, Louise! I’m thrilled to hear that you are enjoying the podcast. I hope you go back into the earlier episodes and keep listening! Enjoy the club!!

  9. I just used two different discussion techniques for A Midsummer Night’s Dream that I came across through Engage New York resources. One activity was a written conversation and the other was a “world cafe” discussion. I loved it. It was a little tough to make sure the students transitioned smoothly from one station to the next, but they did have engaging conversations and a variety of kids were able to take leadership roles.

  10. Hi Jennifer,
    I enjoyed this post and will “steal” some ideas. However, several of the strategies you describe come from Critical Friends and other sources. As someone who also does research and development, I would encourage you to acknowledge the hard work of others by citing your sources. Thank you!

    • Hello Elisabeth. Thanks so much for the tip. I certainly do not mean to avoid giving due credit. I was not aware of the origins of many of these. Would you mind telling me which ones you had in mind? I’m happy to look into their sources if I know which ones you’re thinking of. Thank you!

  11. In the Uk people say ‘pedagogy’ because they are too nervous to find out how to pronounce it and it’s absurdly tolerated out of politeness. No-one says ‘anthropology’ like that, or ‘pharmacology’ or any other word whatsover that ends with ‘ogy’. It’s not accepted, it’s tolerated rather ambivalently. Then sometimes, rarely, people who insist on the hard ‘g’ actually get insistent in the same way that people who drink a lot insist you have a drink. At this point the person being corrected smiles politely and thanks them, and everyone else edges away nervously.
    Don’t do it folks. You might as well hang a sign around your neck saying ‘I don’t have a clue, and I don’t even realise it’. It’s ‘pedagojy’.

  12. I teach 6th grade health. How or which one of these could I use for my students since most health issues are pretty black and white for discussion?

    • Hey Denise,

      I would think one way to apply these in health would be to have students talk about how to apply certain health concepts to their own lives, think of real-world examples of the things you’re teaching, or evaluate how well they are already doing with certain health practices. You could also stop periodically during instruction and have students paraphrase something they just learned in a think-pair-share. Does that help?

    • Keep in mind that the Teach-Okay method can really apply to any classroom and any activity. If planned right, it can be fast and break up the monotony of the classroom. It will help those kids understand the black/white concepts and help break up misconceptions. You might be surprised what they still think, even after being told. Teaching HS science and biology never ceases and to amaze me.

  13. Another very effective strategy is the World Cafe format. There is a book you can purchase, but there are also many resources on the web. It works well to keep students on task while at the same time allows for the generation of new ideas by reconfiguring the group composition. The trick is for the teacher to come up with an excellent question–one that has no clear answer and that can keep the conversation going for a considerable length of time. I use this technique frequently in my undergraduate nursing and public health classes.

  14. Nice list, Jennifer. Thanks for sharing. I just added you on Twitter.
    Rob
    Chennai, India
    @DigitalNomadRob

  15. There are a lot of ideas to try to get kids engaged. Some of these activities I could have tried in the traditional class setting, but the groups would have had to be much larger as there were often nearly 30 kids per class. I now teach in the on line environment. I like the ideas of snow ball discussions, students can be in groups, add their ideas and move to the next area. All ideas can then be shared. Affinity mapping and a gallery walk would work as well. Students don’t have to feel the “burden” of speaking or contributing a whole lot. Once they share one idea, their apprehension may lesson and they’ll be more apt to share the next time. Students can see many different topics with which to share and not “hide” in the back row while the teacher dominates the discussions.

  16. Hi Jennifer! This article was my first online podcast I’ve ever listened to, at least related to education. I am a middle school special education teacher and I co-teach in Math, Language Arts and Social Studies. In my US History class, my co-teacher and I are always looking for ways to have good discussions amongst the students, so that they learn and understand the information more in-depth, think critically of decisions which were made hundreds of years ago, etc. We often go the approach of what would be closest to the Socratic Circle, where the students all sit in a circle. However, we haven’t gotten to the point of letting them speak “out of turn”- they pass around a ball/fidget which then the person who catches it, is the only person who gets to speak. It is a little elementary, but we notice our students struggle with handling even just that activity. I really would like to try the speed dating discussion technique sometime- this would be like you said, way more of an intimate conversation and I’m betting more students will open up more on a 1 on 1 basis, rather than whole group. I also like the affinity mapping idea, especially since it is an independent, quiet thinking like activity at first, and then becomes a group discussion and involves teamwork to categorize the sticky notes/answers. Lastly, as a special education teacher, I found that the Talk Moves discussion technique would be extremely beneficial for my special needs students. They really need the structure, especially with knowing how to properly verbalize their sentences aloud, and communicate their thoughts on how to agree, disagree, or challenge others. Thank you for providing such helpful strategies!! I will definitely share these with my co-teachers and am sure we will incorporate some of these into our classes in the near future!

  17. I have a question about the Teach-Okay strategy. What happens in between the teacher teaching and the student teaching? How does the teacher know that the students are ready to teach their peers? Does the teacher do more than the basic checking for understanding?

  18. Thank you for this repertoire of discussion strategies! I think its a great summary of tools and it has definitely inspired me to try out new methods in class.

    Wanted to ask for your advice on a 40-student classroom. We face the challenge of engaging every student given the constraints of the class size and time. What would, in your opinion, be the best strategy for engaging a class of that size in meaningful discussion?

    Thank you v much!

    • Hi Ian! Quite a few of these would work beautifully with a large class, because they offer many students the opportunity to talk at the same time, rather than waiting for one student to talk at a time. I would say Gallery Walk, Conver-Stations, Concentric Circles, and good old Think-Pair-Share will give lots of students a chance to have meaningful discussions.

  19. I’m midway through a graduate thesis on developing a rubric to comprehensively address all the elements of a conversation, and these formats are going to be really, really useful. Do you know of articles that describe research on any of them, particularly the low-prep ones?

    • Gene, off the top of my head, I can’t refer you to any research on any of these, but I’m sure it exists. If I happen to come across anything, I’ll link to it here.

  20. I just stumbled across your site and have been bingeing on the podcasts. They’re wonderful! One thing you might want to include in an update on conversation in your “high prep” category are two types of debates: one is a formal debate like you’d have on a debate team, and the other is a debate modeled after presidential debates in which a moderator (me at the beginning of the year, confident students who need a challenge later in the year) asks questions. Because students will be standing up in front of the class (and usually before a few administrators invited in to judge the debate), they talk a LOT, and very on task, in preparation before the debate, and then, of course, the debate itself involves some back and forth as well. It’s less collaborative and more stressful for the students than Socratic, but those competitive kids just SHINE and love them. (A fun modification is to allow strong students to come back the next year and judge the debate they did the year before. They usually have to miss a class, so have to make up that work, but it’s one of those times when talented students are asking for more work, rather than having it crammed down their throats in the guise of differentiation.) Another word about differentiation and debates: it’s worked well for me to put the groups together with two strong groups debating each other on a question and two weaker groups debating each other on another question, and the groups are made up of mostly homogeneous students. This works well because everyone thinks it’s fair (they know who’s “smart” by 8th and 11th grades, the two grades I’ve taught) and no one sandbags. In fact, I often group like this and the weaker students complain about not being able to sponge off the stronger kids (sometimes right in front of the class, which makes for some awkward hilarity). It’s amazing what weaker students can bring to the table when they can’t rely on stronger kids, but that’s a topic for another day. Thanks again for your work. It’s great!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *