Discussion Techniques

Goal: Analysis and critical thinking

Engagement techniques:

• Classify: Identify a category of information that’s important to understand and have the students brainstorm the principles of that category, possibly concerning questions, topics, or artifacts.
• Believing and doubting: Students are asked to be “believers” and read a text empathetically, making a conscious effort to understand the author’s perspective and values, listing arguments to support the author’s views. Students become “doubters,” rereading the text for weaknesses, listing objections. 
• Academic controversy: Student partners review material on a controversial topic and brainstorm arguments to support their assigned position. Pairs then split up and move around the room, talking to other students on the same side to strengthen their position. In quads, pairs present their arguments, then switch sides and argue the opposite side. Then they work together to come to a consensus position. 
• Split-room debate: After presenting a controversial topic or case, assign students to one side of the room based on their given position on the issue. Students, not the teacher, select who on the other side speaks next. Students then alternate stating their stances and responding to their opponents. 
• Analytic teams: Break students into groups with several roles each – summarizer, connector,  proponent, example giver, questioner, critic – and have each group discuss a specific topic. Each group member should stay within their role and present back to the entire class on their discussion topic. 

Goal: Problem-solving

Engagement techniques:

• What’s the problem?: Help students identify a problem by giving them two or more types of problems that are difficult to distinguish, with several examples of each type. In groups, have them identify which example fits which situation and discuss their thinking when finished. 
• Think again!: Present students with a common misconception in the discipline and then give them a poll asking them to agree or disagree. Then tell students the statement is untrue and ask them to prove why it is untrue. 
• Think-aloud-pair-problem solving: Give pairs of students a series of problems and have each half of the pair alternate between being the problem solver and listener. The problem solver thinks aloud, talking through the problem, while the partner listens, follows the steps, and attempts to understand the reasoning, offering suggestions if there are missteps. 
• Proclamations: Have students identify and analyze a problematic situation in the local or national community, then write a speech for a government official that persuades others of the problem’s urgency and strategies for solving it. Then discuss different takes on the problem and solution. 
• Send-a-problem: Groups of students each receive a problem, try to solve it, then pass the problem and solution to the next group. Without looking at the previous group’s solution, the next group works to solve the problem. After as many passes as seem useful, groups analyze, evaluate, and synthesize the responses to the problem. 
• Case studies: Create an in-depth, real-world scenario or situation that students must read about and analyze as an example of a concept discussed in class. Cases may involve unresolved problematic situations in need of solutions where students identify with the roles of decision-makers and stakeholders in the situation.

Goal: Attitudes and values

Engagement techniques:

• Autobiographical reflections: Ask students to write short or long essays reflecting on their own personal experiences with a specific course-related topic or question. This can surface misunderstandings, expertise, biases, insights…. 
• Dyadic interviews: Student pairs take turns interviewing each other, asking questions that address individual values, attitudes, beliefs, and prior experiences related to course content or learning goals. The instructor should design interview questions to relate clearly to the course themes. 
• Circular response: Students sit in a circle and take turns expressing their thoughts in response to an instructor-designated prompt and briefly summarize the preceding speaker’s comments. 
• Ethical dilemmas: Present students with a real-world, ethics-based scenario related to a course topic to which they must design a solution. Students then anonymously submit their own decisions of the correct path to the instructor, who then culls and uses the responses to address common challenges.  
• Connected communities: Students in different courses come together to discuss instructor-developed prompts, exposing students to a broader range of views. 
• Stand where you stand: Students read two opposing articles on a controversial issue. In a face-to-face classroom, the instructor reads a statement supporting one argument. Students stand in an area of the class associated with their position: Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree. Students then articulate their rationales and can change sides if they feel persuaded. In an online setting, discussion forums can recreate this activity.