This week’s topic is Multimedia and Learning Design.
Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to attend the lecture due to illness, but I still was able to take some valuable information and teaching strategies away from the lesson materials. In particular, I explored Jennifer Gonzales’ “The Big List of Class Discussion Strategies.” This resource stood out to me because previous to exploring it, I didn’t have a good understanding of the breadth of different Class Discussion Strategies that can be employed. I was especially interested in Jennifer’s “low prep” category. I think it would be great to have some of these on-the-fly strategies under my belt as a teacher, in case free time during a block arises, or we have to change the lesson plan for the day due to something unexpected arising. I’d recommend that my fellow students check out Jennifer’s list linked above. To add on from there, I’ve provided a reflection on the pros and cons of each of the “low-prep” discussion strategies Jennifer lists in her article. I used ChatGTP to edit the following pros and cons reflection to make it flow nicely and avoid redundant wording.
LOW-PREP DISCUSSION STRATEGIES
Affinity Mapping (Affinity Diagramming)
Pros: This strategy is highly effective for generating a wide variety of ideas and encouraging creativity. Students visually organize their thoughts, which can help make abstract concepts more tangible. Grouping ideas fosters collaboration and critical thinking as students analyze relationships and create connections. The silent variation can ensure that quieter students contribute without fear of interruption.
Cons: It may be time-consuming, especially if students struggle to categorize their ideas or reach consensus. Some students might find the lack of initial structure overwhelming, and group dynamics can sometimes lead to unequal participation.
Concentric Circles (Speed Dating)
Pros: This strategy is fast-paced and allows students to interact with many peers, promoting diverse perspectives and preventing conversations from becoming repetitive. The rotation ensures every student has a chance to speak and be heard, which is great for building confidence in quieter students.
Cons: Limited time for each discussion can restrict deeper analysis of the topic. The physical setup of circles or lines may be challenging in smaller or crowded classrooms. Additionally, the constant rotation can be disruptive for students who need more time to process their thoughts.
Conver-Stations
Pros: This method combines the depth of small-group discussions with the breadth of hearing multiple viewpoints, avoiding stagnation in group dynamics. Students also practice synthesizing ideas and sharing key points, which reinforces their understanding.
Cons: Rotations may interrupt the flow of conversation, and some students may struggle to adapt to new groups or quickly integrate into ongoing discussions. Keeping track of evolving ideas may become confusing without clear documentation.
Fishbowl
Pros: The fishbowl format encourages active listening and focused dialogue, as participants in the outer circle observe and evaluate the central conversation. This strategy is particularly effective for teaching specific discussion skills or modeling productive conversation techniques.
Cons: Students in the outer circle may feel disengaged or excluded if they are not actively involved. For those in the fishbowl, the spotlight can be intimidating, especially if they are less confident in their speaking abilities.
Hot Seat
Pros: This interactive format encourages students to dive deeply into a character or concept, fostering creativity and possibly empathy. It works well for building understanding of diverse perspectives and practicing critical thinking.
Cons: Students may feel pressured to perform, especially if they are unsure about their role. Without strong preparation or guidance, the discussion can lack depth or veer off-topic.
Snowball Discussion (Pyramid Discussion)
Pros: This strategy starts with intimate discussions and gradually builds to a full-class exchange, allowing students to refine their ideas before presenting them on a larger scale. It promotes consensus-building and ensures every voice is heard.
Cons: The structure requires a lot of time, which might not always be available. The process of merging groups can feel repetitive, and some students may dominate conversations as groups grow larger.
Clearly, each of these strategies offers unique benefits and challenges, making them adaptable to different classroom goals and dynamics. Choosing the right one depends on the desired outcomes, class size, and the students’ comfort with discussion-based activities. The great thing about having this list available to you as a teacher is you can experiment with different formats, hybridizations, or pairings regarding these strategies, to see what works best for you and your group.