Innovative Discussion Format

Last week, Year 2 Innovation Institute students participated in a cross-curricular collaborative discussion, during which they were expected to reference texts from both their American Literature and their AP US History classes. Tiffany Kelley and Katie Elliott combined their 1B classes so that students could hear a wide range of voices and perspectives in a conversation focused around four guiding questions:

1. How are ecosystems and human society interdependent?
2. What does it mean to be safe in Colonial America?
3. What types of games do societies play?
4. How do power dynamics influence individual and collective action?

Upon entering the classroom students were randomly assigned to be in one of two groups. The fifteen students in the green group started in the inner circle and had approximately 30 minutes to discuss the first two guiding questions. The yellow group began in the outside circle, and each student was assigned to one of three smaller groups. These groups engaged in an online Skype chat that focused on the same two questions, and they also referred to the content and dynamics of the discussion happening in the inner circle. The online format provided an archived record of each student’s participation, allowing the instructors to primarily focus on recording notes about the inner circle students’ comments, questions, clarifications and references to the text. These two pieces of evidence enabled Tiffany and Katie to provide students with individualized feedback about their strengths and where they need to improve.

About halfway through the period, the yellow group moved to the inside circle for their face-to-face discussion of questions 3 and 4. In order to ensure more equitable participation from each individual (an issue that had surfaced in the green group’s discussion), the yellow group decided that they should raise their hands if they wanted to respond to the person speaking, and the current speaker would then call on someone, making an effort to distribute opportunities for participation equitably.

The concurrent online discussion was something that Tiffany had experimented with last year. “As an introvert, I am very interested in exploring ways of engaging all students, not just those most comfortable with sharing ideas aloud,” she says. “Last year I tried using Skype in the classroom, with small groups on Skype having a conversation where they could not only volley ideas digitally but also respond to the ideas being shared orally. This created more depth in our class discussions – as well as a bit of frustration. If the Skype group is too big, ideas are lost. Some students have a hard time listening to the inner, oral discussion and carrying on a digital discussion at the same time. Katie and I tried to use Skype to engage such a large group of students – some students liked it and others didn’t, so we will be refining ways of engaging all students as we continue to team teach and integrate our disciplines.”

Overall, Tiffany and Katie felt that the students did well with this format.  Reflecting on the experience, Katie said, “I was happy with the connections they were making, but felt that some students needed to work on using detailed evidence to support their opinions.” As part of their homework, students also reflected on their part in the discussion in preparation for a debrief of the entire process, which took place during the following class meeting. At that point, they also received individualized formative feedback on the amount and quality of their contributions to the conversation, so that they know what they did well and what they need to work on for the next formal discussion.