|
INTRODUCTION
When we were students, many of us had the following
experience: our teacher would start to lead a classroom "discussion,"
but we had a sinking suspicion that it was just a sham. All she
wanted from the class was for us to fill in the blanks of her pre-programmed
curriculum. She would fish around from student to student until
she got the answer she was looking for. So we kids had to make a
choice between sincerely expressing our own thoughts on the subject,
at considerable risk to our grade, or simply giving the teacher
what she wanted to hear. The "smarter" kids chose to play
it safe. Their reward was the teacher's effusive praise for supplying
the "right" answer.
About ten years ago, our experience as producers
of public television programs brought home to us how these pseudo-discussions
were really colossal missed opportunities for learning. This realization
came in 1987-88 in the process of preparing The
Power of Choice, a PBS series of talk shows for teenagers.
We learned what was wrong with these "fill-in-the-blanks"
discussions, and we ended up designing a method for dynamic classroom
discussions.
A CONFESSION
We are dialogue fanatics. We believe that the
true, open exchange of views is fundamental to a democratic society.
Young people need a forum to express their thoughts, but they also
need to be trained to become respectful listeners of diverse opinions.
We believe that the best place to learn this principal is in school.
Good classroom discussions lay the groundwork for democratic participation
throughout life, giving students a sense of power within a community,
and conveying to them the importance of their future role as participants
in society.
A thoughtful classroom discussion helps kids
develop critical thinking. Talking in a group helps students learn
to organize their thoughts and present them coherently. Students
also learn to be active listeners, holding other peoples' ideas
up to critical analysis. They come to see that there are always
alternative ways of looking at a difficult problem or situation.
And later on in life they reap the rewards in the real world from
thinking creatively on their feet. So, classroom discussions yield
very powerful individual and social benefits.
BACKGROUND
Twelve years ago we wanted to make a series
of videos for teens covering a range of topics pertaining directly
and concretely to their lives something that would teach
them that they had the power to make good choices in their lives.
We were inspired by a PBS series produced in connection with the
Columbia University Media In Society Seminars. The series was called
" The Constitution, That Delicate Balance," and was about
values in conflict. It featured a skillful moderator who presented
hypothetical situations to a panel of distinguished participants
representing a range of competing interests. The moderator would
begin with a relatively simple situation and ask the panelists how
they, in their various professional positions, would handle it.
As the story became progressively more complex, the panelists became
increasingly divided. Giving different priorities to different values
produced wildly different choices. It was a very seductive format.
It was almost impossible to watch this conversation without wanting
to participate.
We decided to do something like this series
for teenagers. But could this format be adapted for high school
classroom use? Would teenagers respond to it with the same enthusiasm
we did? Speaking realistically, this talk show was pretty cerebral.
It flamed our passions, but that's because we cared about the ideas
being examined. But what about the high school set?
OUR LABORATORY
We figured we needed two essential ingredients
- a moderator who would appeal to teens and a line of questioning
that would engage them. The first element turned out to be the easiest
for us. We enlisted the involvement of Michael
Pritchard, a very charismatic local comic, who had
made a career out of working with troubled youth. His chemistry
with young people was ideal for our show.
The second element, the questions, proved to
be more difficult. We knew that our line of questioning would have
to accomplish at least three things: 1) It would have to trigger
a great discussion for the cameras; 2) It would have to hold the
attention of teen viewers; and 3) it must deliver solid content
that teachers would want to spend class time on. We approached this
task the old fashioned way by reinventing what others before
us had already perfected. When we began work on the first program
in our proposed series we were really groping. We had little idea
of what was going to work; we just made up some questions and let
the cameras roll. We stumbled from discussion to discussion trying
out different questioning strategies with only marginal or partial
successes. Finally, at the start of the very last discussion we
were to tape, we hit on a hypothetical question that took off like
a rocket. The ensuing conversation was breathtaking both in its
energy and its content. It was as emotionally and intellectually
satisfying as two hours with a group of high schoolers could possibly
be. And it gave us what we needed to make a pretty terrific show.
In retrospect we now know how fortunate we were
to have had only enough money for the first program in the series.
The experience of producing this first program was a hugely important
learning experience for us. It gave us the opportunity to get it
right before we were committed to a long, expensive series of programs.
As we sat in the editing room studying our raw footage, we were
able to closely analyze the dynamics of classroom discussion and
observe how kids responded to different lines of questioning. And,
when our funding was approved for eleven more programs in the series,
we knew what we had to do.
Our goal was to produce a synthesis between
the Socratic Dialogues of Plato, the ethical dilemmas of Lawrence
Kohlberg, and the natural, humorous conversational style of Steve
Allen.
We spent months trotting around to high schools
throughout the San Francisco Bay Area, conducting an extensive series
of rehearsals where we tested and modified and rethought our questions
until we had a working recipe. Even as we traveled across America
videotaping the actual programs, with children who were neither
coached, prompted, nor scripted, we continued to make adjustments
as we learned from each new experience. From this we've been able
to derive a set of guidelines for designing effective questions
and structuring productive discussions. Over the years we have received
feedback from many hundreds of teachers who have viewed our programs
on PBS and on video. They told us that they have used the same facilitation
techniques modeled on the screen with remarkable success in their
classrooms. Since these skills can be demonstrated and taught, we
thought it would be useful to describe our method in this article
for the benefit of all classroom teachers. This article is a summary
of these now well-tested techniques.
HERE ARE THREE THINGS WE HAVE
FOUND OUT:
1. Kids love to engage in conversation if they
feel secure and have the sense that other kids will respect their
views.
2. Virtually anyone can learn to facilitate
a successful classroom discussion, but teachers need to learn some
techniques and practice them with their students.
3. These techniques work especially well for
character education and teaching ethical choices (our area of experience),
but they are also marvelous for teaching the humanities, social
science, and literature.
In the course of a decade, we filmed almost
two hundred student discussions involving ethical dilemmas. In "Acting
on Your Values," one of the programs in The
Power of Choice series, our host launched the discussion
by posing a hypothetical question based roughly on personal experience.
He tells how, when he was a teenager, he found a wallet with a lot
of money in it. It was right before Christmas during a particularly
hard time for his family. This hypothetical triggered the following
discussion:
1st Girl: I sympathize
with you in that situation, because last year my mother was very
ill and our Christmas was shot. We've always had magnificent Christmases
and last Christmas it was like dogged, and I was like unappreciative.
I know if I came across that money I would take it and give it to
my mother, and you know 'you take care of this, you take care of
that with it.' I would not give it back.
2nd Girl: I would have
to give it back, cause I just, I would not feel right. Because number
one, if I even gave it to my mother, she'd go, "whered
you get this? Give it back!" My mother wouldn't even take it.
I'd think about it a long time. But I really wouldn't be able to
take it.
Boy: What about the person
that lost it? They'd have to pay, and they'd be suffering. That's
just like, could you reach into someone's wallet and take 260 dollars?
As you see, the students spoke openly and voiced
honest opinions. They felt free to disagree, never holding back
out of fear that their views would not be appreciated. After the
"teentalks," many students told us that they had never
been asked to think about a situation so in depth, and that their
ideas had never been taken so seriously before. One caveat, however:
in an issue involving right and wrong, it is important to guide
the students to the right conclusion rather than allowing them to
think that whatever they conclude is okay. The art is in asking
questions that help them arrive at the right conclusions on their
own.
OUR METHOD:
1. BEFORE THE DISCUSSION
We spend at least as much time planning the
discussion as we do in conducting the discussion itself. The launch
is the most important part of the entire process. If a teacher launches
a discussion properly, students will jump on-board immediately.
Almost any topic can be made exciting to the students if the teacher
chooses a hot button starting point. 1 The best launch
is a thought-provoking question, such as a hypothetical, or a question
that asks "do you agree or disagree with the following statement."
A provocative opening question can trigger a
spirited and highly productive interchange. A dry, uninspiring question
can reduce the whole thing to a boring, academic exercise. You can
tell a good question by the results it produces. A good question
makes the kids really, really want to answer it. It grabs them emotionally
as well as intellectually. It is challenging and often even fun.
It stimulates critical thinking while promoting cross-talk, or debate
between the students. Above all, it hits the nail on the head with
regard to content. In the end the line of questioning may be disarmingly
simple, but it prods the kids into thinking very deeply and critically
about the topic.
We have discovered some questions that almost
always produce dividends. If the student takes a personal stand,
a good thing to do is ask, "How does that choice make you feel
about yourself?" or "What would you think of a character
in a movie who made the same choice?" Other golden questions
include "What would be the right thing to do?" and "Why
or why not?"
In our videos we ask "why" or "why
not" questions because we think they often produce the best
results. Anybody can give a simple, unsupported answer to anything.
Asking a student to justify an answer forces reflection, analysis,
and critical thinking; while it often results in the student modifying
her initial position. This is the part of the questioning process
where learning most actively takes place. It also stimulates the
interchange between the students, because, when a student is required
to voice the reasoning behind her answer, she reveals her underlying
assumptions and beliefs. That gives the discussion leader and the
other participants a lot more to talk about, and the students so
much more of an opportunity to learn about the topic and themselves.
2. DURING THE DISCUSSION
Armed with our line of questioning, we are ready
to face the students. Before introducing the main topic, we always
warm up the students with what we call "party game" questions.
These are fun situations in which kids can express themselves without
having to think really hard. The party game is usually on a topic
somewhat related to the central issue. For example, if the main
topic is teen pregnancy, we might start by asking "Girls, what
do boys do on a date that really annoys you?" Then we pose
the same question to the boys. The light, bantering conversation
builds trust within the group, so that even shy kids become more
willingly to participate. We have discovered that almost any subject
can be introduced successfully with a party game.
At this stage it is often very helpful if the
discussion leader shares a personal experience with the students.
Being honest with the students encourages them to express themselves
honestly in return. It also makes the students feel that they are
in a safe place and that the situations being discussed are real
and carry personal weight. While producing our character education
videos we asked our host to share with the kids some of his own
fears and insecurities. That helped the teenagers to understand
that they are not alone and that they are not the only ones who
may be unsure, doubtful, and perplexed.
Over the years we have discovered some things
that help to set a comfortable conversational tone for the discussion.
We frequently use humor, surprisingly even when we are discussing
serious issues. As our moderator Michael Pritchard says, "the
shortest distance between two people is a good laugh." Humor
can break down communication barriers while making everyone feel
at ease. Also, we recognize and respect children's opinions and
their concerns and fears. It is important to be non-judgmental of
the students themselves while at the same time holding their choices
up to critical analysis by the group. That way students begin to
take responsibility for their choices and their actions. And because
the learning experience is so personal, it will be most memorable.
3. AFTER THE DISCUSSION -- CLASSROOM
ACTIVITIES
In converting the techniques we learned in the
production of our videos to classroom use, we want to mention one
additional thing that we see as necessary for the completion of
the learning process. When we distribute our videos, we always include
a facilitation guide for the teachers. This guide includes classroom
projects and activities. To insure that the students derive the
most from the classroom discussion, the teacher will need to have
some challenging follow-up projects, including writing assignments
and organized group activities. These will reinforce the key learning
objectives while making the discussion memorable for a long time
to come.
CONCLUSION
Spirited classroom discussions are valuable
for encouraging critical thinking. They promote articulate speech
and respectful, active listening. They also can be a lot of fun,
even for kids who are not usually at ease speaking in a group. When
students participate in a real discussion, in which they formulate
their thoughts on a topic, express their personal judgments, and
are respected for their opinions by the other participants, then
real learning takes place. In these kinds of discussions people
have a more memorable experience. Moreover, group discussions serve
as a learning lab for democratic principals that really pay off
later in life when, as adults, the students participate in the society
at large. Therefore, the entire process is good for the students
and for the society as a whole.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
David H. Elkind, a television/video producer and educator,
and Freddy Sweet, Ph.D. a television/film producer and a former
Assistant Professor of Comparative Literature at the University
of California at Berkeley, are co-Presidents of Live Wire Media
and Elkind+Sweet Communications, Inc., 3450 Sacramento St., PMB
619, San Francisco CA 94118. (e-mail: elkind@livewiremedia.com
and sweet@livewiremedia.com).
FOOTNOTE
1 David H. Elkind and Freddy Sweet, Ph.D.,"The
Socratic Approach to Character Education" Educational
Leadership 54 (May 1997): 56-59.

273 Ninth Street
San Francisco, CA 94103
Fax (415) 552-4087
(415) 564-9500
(800)359-5437
e-mail
Return
to Live Wire Media Home Page
|