Discussion in Teaching English

Discussion

Discussion from foreign language is “discusum” which meaning thinking or talking. So discussion is a problem, or to understand a problem and look for solution.

There is any kind of discussion.

a. The around table discussion (Diskusi Meja Bundar).

The table around of discussion usually direct characteristic and the group of discussion 5 until 15 person.

b. The group discussion

This discussion usually done if the person very much or there is any many problem so made many group for one problem.

c. Panel discussion

This discussion just 3 until 6 persons as panelist to explain the several problems, and the audiences just giving their opinions or suggestions.

And the kind of discussions which can not write or explain one by one by researcher kind of discussion as follow:

1. Seminar
2. Conference
3. Workshop or Lokakarya
4. Symposium
5. Kolokium
6. Debat
7. Fishbowl

Besides, FALL 2005, NEWSLETTER Vol. 15, No. 1 states that using class discussion to meet your teaching goals teaching speaking is as follows:

“If you ask most instructors what their primary goal during a classroom discussion is, the answer seems obvious: Get students talking and keep them talking. For any instructor who has struggled to break through the stubborn silence of tired, timid, or unprepared students, success may be measured by the minutes of sustained student speaking. However, while student participation is necessary for successful classroom discussions, it is hardly sufficient. Students can talk for hours without learning anything of substance. Truly successful classroom discussions are guided by specific teaching goals such as increasing students’ comfort with the specialized language and methods of a field or developing critical thinking. Each teaching goal will suggest different strategies for guiding a classroom discussion” 

This newsletter reviews several teaching goals that are well-served by discussion: 

• Increase students’ comfort with the specialized language and methods of a field. 
• Develop critical thinking. 

1. Develop problem-solving skills.

Increase Students’Comfort with the Specialized Language and Methods of a Field. All fields have a terminology shared by scholars and professionals in that field, as well as commonly understood approaches to solving problems and discovering knowledge. One of the main goals of both introductory and advanced college courses is to help students learn to think like an economist, a sociologist, a biologist, or an historian by learning the language and methods of a field. Discussion is an excellent forum for learning to think like a specialist by giving students a chance to practice analyzing the world through the lens of a particular field.

2. Exercises and Prompts

Analyzing texts or examples from the field. In class, provide students with a basic framework for analyzing a text, problem, or example in your field. What should students pay attention to? How would a specialist talk about this? A good example for any kind of physical or social science is how to analyze a study. What are the components of a study that students should pay attention to? For the humanities, it can be the process of analyzing a particular kind of text. For engineers, it might be how to begin thinking about a design goal and the specifications given for a project. Allow students to practice talking through a basic analysis by identifying the things that matter and practicing use of the terminology. You can apply this same process to discussing real world events: How would an economist think about this? What issues would the economist be most concerned about? 

3. Comparing texts or examples from the field.

One step up from analysis is comparison. Ask students to compare and contrast two texts or examples. This helps them focus on what matters in your field. What distinctions are most important? Which details are critical? How do you know “good” from “bad”—what are the value judgments made in your field? Should students attend to the elegance of a theory or solution, the logic of an argument, the comprehensiveness of a report, or the lines and color of a painting? After years in your field, this may seem obvious, but it is a perspective acquired only through practice. 

4. Guiding Discussion

It is especially important for the discussion leader to provide both a model for thinking like a specialist and a structure for student discussion. Before starting an open discussion, you might ask students to recall some new terminology introduced in lecture or the reading and walk them through the process of applying that terminology to an example. However, students need more than a review session. They also need a chance to think for themselves and internalize this new way of viewing the world. So you’ll want to walk students through a specific process at least once and then give them many opportunities to practice.

5. Encouraging Participation

All students need a chance to practice using a new language or method. A large group discussion can limit participation, giving only a few students full opportunity to practice. The typical solution to this problem is to have students pair up to discuss a question or problem for five minutes and then bring them back for a full-group discussion. Variations on this theme can maximize each student’s participation and exposure to other students’ ideas: Partner swap. Have students pair up for a series of practice or discussion rounds and rotate partners for every new example or question. This format works well when you want students to practice a simple skill such as analyzing the meter of a line of poetry, but not when you want students to develop a complex skill such as analyzing the historical context of a poem. 

Two, four, six, eight—have students discuss a question in pairs. After a few minutes, have pairs partner up (four students discussing the same question); after a few more minutes, have those small groups pair up. You can do this all the way up to a full group discussion. This format works best when you can create a topic that has many levels of discussion. For example, have the pairs analyze a basic aspect of the text or problem (What is the hypothesis of this study, and how did the researchers test it?). 

In small groups, have students discuss a more complex issue (Do you think the methods are a good test of this hypothesis? What aspects of the study design would you change? What are the ethical concerns in this study?). In larger groups, students can discuss their reactions, share ideas, and build on each other’s suggestions. Trouble-Shooting when students are not already heavily invested in a field, even important exercises can lack intrinsic interest. If students’ participation is lackluster, it can help to have a basic discussion about what makes your field and its approaches unique. An instructor’s enthusiasm for his or her field is probably the single biggest influence on whether students find it equally compelling. By focusing on the big picture, you may be able to interest students in the smaller details. You can also connect what students are doing to the activities of scholars or professionals in your field. 

Students often don’t understand how skills learned in introductory, or even advanced, classes relate to the kinds of original scholarship or careers that they are interested in. Develop Critical Thinking Critical thinking is an important goal in most fields, whether it is used to analyze the logic of a philosopher or to find the potential problems with a proposed healthcare initiative. Discussion is an excellent tool for developing students’ reasoning skills because it gives you access to their thought processes and an opportunity to guide students to a higher level of thinking. Prompts and Exercises Critical thinking can be applied to any text, claim, or open-ended question. Choose topics that are likely to provoke student interest but not necessarily topics that students already have strong and passionate opinions about. To teach critical thinking, you need a window of open-mindedness and curiosity. Stir up controversy. 

Provide students with a provocative or controversial quote from some expert in your field (possibly a guest lecturer or the author of a class text). Use the expert’s claim as a challenge to students: Is this expert right? How would you decide? What information do you need? What information do you have? (Payne and Gainey, 2003) have developed a list of controversial claims in many fields, from marketing to medicine, that may be useful for your course.

Provide alternatives. Give your students two competing claims, conflicting theories, or any set of alternative options. Instead of taking a vote, or asking students

to immediately choose a side, start with a question that encourages open thinking. What is the issue here? or What is this really a choice between? Can launch a deeper conversation than which do you agree with? Ask students to describe the perspectives that inform who disagree with you! Focus your attention on the quality of students’ reasoning, not just the content of their reasoning. Instructors need to be able to recognize both common errors in reasoning (such as making unsupported assertions and using anecdotal evidence) and the signs of high-level reasoning (such as focusing on empirical evidence for a theory and the ability to integrate personal values with evidence). 

(Greenlaw and DeLoach, 2003) suggest that instructors spend time reflecting on what different levels of reasoning look like in their respective fields. What are the most common forms of uncritical thinking in your field? What is the gold standard for critical thinking applied to your field? A discussion leader can then focus on guiding students from common reasoning errors or simplistic reasoning to more complex or high-level reasoning. When students make a claim, ask them for their evidence or logic. Then ask the class to evaluate the evidence or logic. Encourage students who disagree on a point to identify the source of the disagreement (i.e., trusting different kinds of evidence or each alternative and critically discuss those perspectives as much as the actual claims.

6. Guiding the Discussion

Make sure students understand that discussion is not simply an invitation to restate their opinions. Remind them: The goal of critical thinking is to examine your own assumptions and evidence, not just to criticize the thinking of others weighing certain values more strongly) rather than simply the point of disagreement.

Encourage students to talk to each other, not just to you. Keep your own contributions content-neutral. Don’t take a stance; simply probe students’ thinking. If necessary, ask a student to play the devil’s advocate role, rather than playing it yourself.

7. Encouraging Participation

Encourage listening as much as talking. Students often concentrate so hard on what they are going to say, and how to score points, that they fail to really listen to others (Hollander, 2002). To help students develop their listening skills, encourage them to repeat the last important point and then respond directly to it (rather than stating a new opinion). Encourage students to keep building on a particular argument or interpretation.

Make sure that you reinforce all forms of helpful contributions such as asking good questions or connecting points that other students have made. Students rise to the occasion when their peers demonstrate a high level of reasoning (DeLoach and Greenlaw, 2005).When critical thinking is the goal of discussion, it can be helpful to focus first on the “high contributors” in the class, rather than trying to equalize participation among all students. Encourage students who make high-quality contributions and acknowledge what made the contribution useful. Once a norm is established, other students will be more likely to maintain the high standard of discussion. 

If a few students monopolize the discussion, you can invite others to comment or break the class into smaller discussion groups. If you have a hard time starting discussions with your class, ask students to rate their agreement with a claim on a scale of 1-5. Then ask them to write down five reasons that they agree or disagree with the claim. A student with a 2 rating writes two reasons that the claim is compelling and three reasons that the claim is not compelling; a student with a 5 rating needs to come up with five reasons that support the claim. This guarantees that students will have something to say and acknowledges thoughtful ambivalence as an appropriate position. 

8. Trouble-Shooting

The most common anxiety instructors have about critical discussions is that they will turn into emotionally

charged debates. If you manage to find a topic that truly engages students, you do

9. Exercises and Prompts

Choose a problem relevant to your field, preferably one with more than one correct answer. Describe the problem in enough detail to interest students— explain why it matters, what is at stake,

10. Encourage listening as much as talking.

run the risk of having personally invested students feel attacked by students who disagree with them.

If a discussion turns into unproductive debate, take the power away from the students who are most involved. Ask other students, not involved in the current debate, to identify the issue that seems to be causing the conflict: What do you think they are really arguing about? Does anyone see any common ground between the two? Let these students analyze the discussion, with less emotional charge. If the debate turns into a personal attack, the best response is to clearly state that personal attacks are inappropriate in the classroom and quickly refocus the class. You can speak with students involved after class or even have the entire class reflect on the incident in a writing assignment, but it is not usually productive to pursue the issue during class discussion.

Moreover, Kenneth O. Gangel in Teaching by Discussion describes as the following statements: Discussion teaching differs from question and answer teaching primarily by the kind of questions used. In discussion it is our purpose to get students to think through the issues rather than verbalize memorized data or repeat right answers. Most often discussion will center on the solution to a problem or perhaps the interpretation of a verse of Scripture. Discussion can also be thought of as an attempt to interact with others toward arriving at a solution based on thoughts and ideas expressed by members of the group.

In the Christian classroom, thoughts and ideas are not merely opinions based on personal experience or perhaps prejudice. Rather, they are understandings of the meaning of those portions of Scripture which have a bearing on the problem at hand. AU those meanings are made clearer to the discussants by the ministry of the Holy Spirit (“He will guide you into all truth,” John 16:13).

Basic to a good discussion is a problem which is clearly defined. The problem must be limited in scope so that it can be understood by members of the group and satisfactorily dealt with in the allotted time. When used as a teaching method, discussion is not conducted for the sake of therapy but rather for the sake of pinpointing answers and solutions.

As the group approaches the problem (s) at hand, the members seek to analyze the issues involved in the light of biblical* evidence. Possible solutions may be presented by the members of the group as they weigh and consider ideas and viewpoints. Through this process a line of reasoning or logical thought should emerge and lead to one or more solutions to the problem.

These solutions are then examined to determine their validity and implications. Remember that discussion is not debate. It is not the purpose of the class to “win” an argument or to establish one way of thinking. Teacher and students are engaged in a cooperative effort to seek for truth, knowing in advance that truth and its application to life can be found in God’s Word :

a. Values of the Discussion Method

Teaching by discussion utilizes one of the best principles of the learning process, namely, the involvement of students in active participation in the learning experience. A good discussion will help students express themselves verbally, crystallize their thinking in conjunction with the thinking of their peers, and develop a tolerance for those with whom they may disagree.

Management research teaches us that people change most rapidly and completely in proportion to the amount of interaction which they have with other people. People who tend to isolate themselves physically or mentally will become set in their ways and resist innovation in their lives or thought patterns. On the other hand, people who engage in open exchange of ideas with others will learn both the existence and validity of other points of view and will more readily moderate, or perhaps even drastically change, their own ideas.

Teaching by discussion is a motivational technique which encourages a student to think through concepts which have been hazy. Wrong conclusions may be corrected through the influence of the group rather than the unilateral actions of the teacher. Problem-solving techniques are learned which can be applied not only in the search for knowledge, but in all aspects of life. Creative thinking may also be stimulated.

A discussion setting also provides an atmosphere which can enhance group rapport and camaraderie. The informality of the situation (when properly conducted) allows group members to sense how other people feel, and identification with the group begins to emerge. In a good discussion session, one soon learns that the questions which have been bothering him are not unique but are problems faced by many of his friends. The humanness and concern of the teacher comes through much more clearly in a discussion than it can in a lecture.

One of the essential factors in the communication process is the securing of feedback. In lecturing or storytelling the teacher is dependent upon nonverbal feedback (unless he can combine those methods with supportive dialogical techniques). In discussion, however, if the teacher is asking the right questions and soliciting genuine thought and honest expression on the part of the class, he will soon learn whether they understand the subject matter or further clarification is necessary. Good discussion questions will capture a mind that might wander to more attractive mental pastures during a monological form of teaching.

b. Problems of the Discussion Method

Small group study is very popular in the church today. Yet it detracts from our purposes when it becomes a substitute for rather than a supplement to the proclamation of the Word of God. Some want to avoid such a dangerous tendency by steering away from dialogical teaching altogether. But such a reactionary swing of the pendulum is also unfortunate. Discussion teaching does not have to degenerate to a pooling of ignorance. Only two things are necessary to avoid this problem: a teacher-guide who genuinely knows how to use the Bible; and a commitment on the part of the group members to search for biblical answers rather than experiential opinions to problems.

Another possible drawback to teaching by discussion is the amount of time required to cover any given amount of material. It will take longer to teach the same material by the discussion method than by the lecture method. On the other hand, students will be learning technique as well as content, and both the retention and comprehension levels may be markedly increased because of participation in the interaction. But discussion does take time, and the teacher who is intent on “getting over the lesson” will not be as committed to teaching by discussion as the teacher who wants to “get the lesson over.”

Sometimes reticent or bashful students may be embarrassed in a discussion situation. This may be true of an entire class on occasion if that class has not had opportunity to experience dialogical teaching techniques. Teachers should be careful not to publicly humiliate a student by asking an unusually difficult question or forcing his involvement when he clearly does not wish to participate.

Rambling or wandering from the subject at hand is another common problem in many discussion situations. Here again the leadership of the teacher is essential. Sometimes teachable moments will arise, and the teacher will deliberately allow discussion to wander into a bypath that might seem profitable for learning. Generally, however, he will keep the group from being diverted.

Some teachers feel safer with the lecture method. If a teacher has only a shallow understanding of the subject or has prepared inadequately, he will be threatened by the possibility that students may ask questions he cannot answer. Many teachers are insecure in their classroom situations and find safety in a kind of teaching which allows them to stick strictly to “the script” and avoid having to think on their feet. Most teachers fear discussion, however, because they simply do not know how to employ the techniques.

A class should be reasonably small in order to use the discussion method. To involve the entire class with as many. as possible participating in a given hour, 20 to 25 students is probably the maximum number for effectiveness. However, there are various subcategories of discussion teaching which can be used with much larger numbers. These will be discussed as separate teaching methods in this book.

c. Principles for Effective Discussion Teaching

Probably one of the most important factors in securing a good discussion is framing the problem or question. Just getting people to talk does not guarantee that a genuine learning-by-discussion situation is in effect. Application of biblical truth is essential. The questions themselves must be worded to produce thought rather than factual response. Many good discussion-type questions begin with the words why or how.

The arrangement of the room is a significant factor in discussion. Although it is possible to have effective discussion with participants in rows or pews, the group dynamics necessary are more likely to be achieved by the use of a circle. The teacher should be part of the circle, sitting with the students to engage in “the cooperative search for truth.”

Attitudes are very important in discussion teaching. The teacher must have the disposition of a co-learner rather than that of a lecturer or a scholar. He must be a goad and guide rather than a teller and transmitter. The attitude of all group members must be one of receptivity and openness to new ideas. They should not be afraid to share ideas, confident that no one will laugh at their contributions or harshly criticize their conclusions.

About 10 years ago I was conducting a Christian Education Conference in a church in downstate Illinois. At the last minute I was asked to teach a young adult Sunday School class. I decided to attempt a dialogical approach, just to see what would happen. My first question, “What have you been studying this quarter?” brought no response whatever from the 20 young adults. I then asked, “Is it in the Old Testament or the New Testament?” I still got no response. After two or three more questions a lady in the back row timidly raised her hand and volunteered a piece of information.

That class was communicating to me their ideas of what Sunday School ought to be. It was clearly a place where the students sat and listened while the teacher spoke. Classes like this do not change their attitudes easily nor quickly.

It will be essential to deal with certain problems which arise in discussion situations. The silent member must be encouraged to contribute. The overbearing monopolizer must be curtailed in his efforts to dominate the group. Solving this problem may require some personal counseling outside of the classtime itself. Tension and conflict in the group may not always be bad. Sometimes these elements help stimulate thinking.

Do not forget evaluation. At the end of the discussion time, the group should collectively measure its effectiveness in reaching biblical solutions to the problems posed at the beginning.

The technique itself should be evaluated, seeking ways in which procedures could be improved the next time. Sometimes it is helpful for group members to talk about how they felt when certain ideas were introduced or certain conclusions drawn by the group.

The modern church which employs the small discussion group in its instructional organization will go far toward establishing the type of personally focused group life which gave the Gospel its start in the world. Christian education has been effective where the small group was vitalized by a Christian personality able to communicate biblical truth to others with warmth of spirit and depth of insight. Can you be that kind of teacher?

Posted by Unknown on Thursday, 11 September 2014 - Rating: 4.5

Title : Discussion in Teaching English
Description : Discussion Discussion from foreign language is “discusum” which meaning thinking or talking. So discussion is a problem, or to unde...

Tweet