Response to "Discussions as a Way of Teaching Thoughts" by Stephen Brookfield
The purpose of discussion as a teaching tool has been one used for centuries. The methods may have changed and adapted but essentially the end goal is the same: for the students to grasp the concept and to analyze and reflect the reasoning pertaining to the subject. From the student side of the scope, I've been one of the more shier, introverted people in a discussion. Brookefield's quote "The longer this silence endures, the harder it is for these individuals to speak out." (Brookfield 6) is spot on from my past experiences with volunteer directed discussions. Particularly with the uncertainty of who speaks next causing some students to slip between the cracks due to their anxiety to speak or their politeness in waiting for others to go and have what they were going to say be already said.
The introduction of roles in the discussion was my favorite part of the article because it gave it a more organized view and helped each role build more on the discussion and create links between connecting comments covered between each role. Though all roles are important I found that the Reflective Analyst and Devil's Advocate to be the most helpful because of the ability to produce summaries of the conversation to look back upon and continue to ponder and the option to spin it in the opposite view to cover all the bases in the conversation and to prevent complete bias. The speculator is also a vital role in discussion and provides what I consider to be "food for thought" to continue to fuel the conversation. Which I find to be very important to keep the discussion going instead of going stale from a teacher's point of view because sometimes students can become stuck.
I also found the quote "Always allowing students the option to pass in discussion circles means that those who are shy and introverted, or uncomfortable because they perceive themselves as members of a minority race, gender or class, end up not contributing."(Brookfield 10) to be interesting because of its possible reasons why certain students do not contribute to a discussion. Since students come from different creeds and backgrounds, certain topics and not just shyness can deter them from speaking because they feel like what they won't matter. I like the hatful of quotes exercise as it gives students - brave and shy alike to make their own comments about a handful of quotes and have time to think about what they want to say or build on when it is there turn.
The chapter describing the Speech Policy was also a point that I liked. Informing the students that silence isn't a bad thing and allowing them the choice to speak if they wish to but not being penalized with idea of knowing less because of their silence is a good way to make students comfortable. Relinquishing the idea that the only smart students are the ones that choose to speak which is incorrect in its assumptions. There are several students that choose to be silent in discussion but reveal through their work that they grasped and understood the concept just as well as their outspoken peers. Even though this method doesn't mean everyone will speak and share in their thoughts, it still acts as a way for students to have a safe, comfortable environment to speak in.
Gary's story had many interesting points as well. Not only in the divide of race and social class that occurred in his class discussion that seemed to be the main focus of the students though not intended by the professor. The discussion itself had two people that really wanted to speak - John and Janet and those that wanted to say their peace and connect to them personally via their race or gender - Carol, Sonia, Lorraine and Robert. Though not intended, a lot of the discussion and terminology played on several of the students' sensitivities and brought the discussion to a grinding halt because the discussion became an argument fueled by misunderstanding. The CIQ brought together the thoughts on the conversation itself but I think the discussion wasn't just a learning experience for the students involved but for Gary as well and the comments about the situation were all too fervent on that. It was a great example of how not steer and conduct a discussion.
Overall, these different strategies on terminology, method and body language were very informative and I enjoyed reading them. I don't necessarily connect with all of them but they were certainly methods I hadn't considered would prove helpful in a discussion. The importance of clarification, questioning, analyzing, reflecting, and the freedom of silence were the strongest points in my opinion and seemed to bring unity to the process of discussion as a whole when it comes to the participation of students. The example provided with Gary and his class was spot on a lot of issues that teachers face today with discussions. This article definitely increased my understanding of discussions and possible ways to create a safe environment for students for great discussions to occur.
Comments
Post a Comment