next »

[summers_off]

I will be teaching a 2.5 hour discussion-based grad class for the first time this semester. Currently there are about 20 students enrolled.

I am a nervous wreck!  I have always avoided this teaching method because I am terrified that the discussion will go nowhere and, after staring at our bellybuttons for 15-minutes, I will feel compelled to dismiss the class.  Unfortunately, this topic is not conducive to my usual approach of lecture (including short video clips) + application exercises. 

So, what do you do to ensure the discussion flows?  What do you do when there is a lull?  How do you ensure students have learned what they needed from the discussion?  What other advice do you have for me?

[glowdart]

Step one is to make sure that they have prepared.  Discussion classes don't work if they aren't doing the reading, so consider your students:  do they read or do they need quizzes/short papers to get them reading?

Then, a lot of it depends on you and them.  I teach almost nothing but discussion classes, and each class period is always a little different.  You can have lists of questions typed up, or you can have lists of main ideas that you want them to take away from the class, or you can have your text with notes on it.  I always make sure that I have some hefty content that I can deliver for each class period because I like having the safety blanket of content in my hands.  There are days when they are just fried, and it can be hard to predict when the low-energy days will occur; I like having back-up material.

The key is to be comfortable and let the class ebb & flow; nothing's worse than sitting in a class where the prof drones off of a list of questions and the students answer one by one and don't engage with each other. 

Also, you don't need to discuss for the entire 2.5 hours.  If there's a concept or theory that you want them to apply to the texts, then you can lecture on that for 30 minutes.  Then, have them write on how that theory relates to what they read for class for 15 minutes.  Then, use those writings as the basis for your discussion.

Think about your course outcomes, too.  Remember that you're not simply leading a random discussion for two hours -- figure out where you want them to go and then write whatever notes you need to lead them there. 

[big_giant_head]

First of all, calm down. Everything will be OK. Breeeeaaaathe.  Feel better?

All right then. Here's what you do: imagine all the questions students should ask during the discussions, or the major points someone needs to bring up.  Write them down. Then write down some of the best answers to the questions.

As students begin to discuss, wander around the room. Watch to see if someone looks like he or she wants to contribute but seems to shy. Be ready to gently shut down the dominators.  And as the discussion goes wildly off-track, which it will, mildly suggest something that hints at one of the points they need to be discussing.  If necessary--if you can't get them to ask the right questions on their own--go ahead and ask the necessary questions yourself.  

This can seem entirely off the cuff once you get good at it.  Just remember that an in-class discussion only seems unstructured. You're the expert here; you know where they need to go, intellectually, and you know the cognitive moves they need to be making in order to get there.

Essentially, you are the person who is designing the street signs, and pointing to them when necessary.  The students may not know there's a map, but you have it in your head and on that piece of paper you bring to class.

On edit: yes to everything Glowdart says, too.

[erictho]

Unfortunately, this topic is not conducive to my usual approach of lecture (including short video clips) + application exercises.  

Sure it is! You lecture, then the students do application exercises; the students do their readings, and then discuss the readings (apply the readings to the discussion topics). :-)

I would suggest circulating discussion questions ahead of time, to give the students a chance to think and prepare, and then as class begins, get a student to summarize the readings briefly, offer the rest of the class teh chance to add anything to that summary, then you pose the first question based on the readings, then let discussion evolve from there.

Since these are grad students, you can always call on them by name to add to the discussion -- they should be less worried / fearful about speaking in public. And if they are, remind them that such public discussions are valuable experience for them and they should jump at the chance to practice in a friendly environment.

You'll be fine!  

[britmom]

The majority of my teaching is discussion based. (This is a product of my discipline, and possibly the differences between US/UK Universities.) Last semester I had 8 hours teaching a week, of which 7 hours were discussion based classes.

Some suggestions:
1) Have a rough sketch of what you want to cover in the class. Have some questions or discussion points prepared in advance. Ensure that you know how you want the discussion to move, and the topics you want to cover. Aim to have a 'let's recap/conclude' session at the end.
2) Have assigned reading for them to do. Prepare 1 in conjunction with 2.
3) Always have a break half way through. Let them go off and stretch their legs.
4) Don't be afraid to stop someone who's talking crap.
5) Don't panic if nobody talks for a while. Give them a chance to think.
5) Try to have activities that break up the 'you will sit here and talk' approach.

Some things I use:
- Getting them to work in groups - for example, asking them to discuss their responses to a question in groups, and then asking them to  present their ideas to the rest of the class. If you've picked a question that allows for debate, you should (hopefully) find that the different groups have different ideas; this can then act as the basis for a class discussion.
- With a class of 20 I might break the class in to 4 groups in advance of the class, and assign a different chapter/article to each group. Once in class, I ask the groups to spend 10-15 minutes discussing their reading, and then a spokesperson for each group reports back to the rest of the class. Sometimes I ask them to agree on the 5 most important points in their assigned chapter. If you've chosen the right reading, this will allow the students to compare and contrast the different ideas within each article. I pitch it to them that, in doing this, they get the benefit of 'reading' 4 chapters. Sometimes I ask the spokesperson to prepare notes on their group's reading/discussion for distribution to the rest of the class.
- Have a student prepare a presentation for each class. They can then be responsible for creating discussion questions for the rest of the class. (Just always make sure to prepare some yourself, in case the presentation's crap.)
- I'm a historian, so I often have historical sources for the class to discuss. (This might include audio-visual sources, depending on the subject.) Again, I might divide them in to groups to discuss them.

I tend to use these techniques for undergraduate teaching (esp 3rd and 4th year). Grad classes in my department are small. It's unusual to have more than 3 students so that changes things for me. It's generally much more relaxed; indeed, I tend to teach graduate students in a local coffee house.

How much reading/preparation would you expect a grad student to do each week? Where I am, we require them to read a book a week. That usually provides enough material for a 2 hour long discussion.

[burnie]

FWIW, I loved my discussion classes in grad school.  Grad students, in my experience - might be discipline-specific, love to talk, so I don't think you need to worry about staring at belly buttons.  They want to show off.  The trick is to make sure they've READ and actually contribute something worthwhile.

My profs (and I've used variations on these in my undergrad classes), basically ran the classes using three basic structures:

1) Prof comes with a list of topics and leads the discussions and grades contributions as we went.  If you answered multiple questions out of your ass it was noted.  Once I was in a class that was chucked out and sent to walk in the park to "think about what we should have read."  Any points that were obviously read but not understood by the class would prompt some explanation and sometimes a jigsaw reading to supplement (oh, they sure looked prepared when it seemed like they pulled articles out of the bag after what felt like an impromptu impasse).

2) Class writes and submits discussion questions before class and the prof organizes the questions and uses them to guide discussion.  It was cool because he/she could see what points attracted our interest and then supplemented the discussion with any points we'd clearly missed.  Class was supposed to be 3 hours but generally ended when we ran out of questions.  We were graded on the questions submitted and the quality of discussion.

3) Students are paired up and pairs take turns leading discussion for each session.  We'd have to write a plan for how the discussion should go, and provide a supplemental reading to the class one week in advance (supplemental readings were on the exam).  We were graded on our ability to lead discussion and participation in classmates' discussions.  A plus was that we were all Teaching Assistants, so this process helped us practice a different style of classroom management.  Professor would jump in if the discussion leaders clearly missed the point of something, but usually just saved the last 30 minutes to wrap it up, fill in blanks and answer questions.

I liked all of them, but it depended on the professor.  A couple of things that I strongly recommend regardless of format:

1) Some student just don't process information through discussion - they're caught up in a "sage on the stage" learning style.  For those students, leaving time to explain, answer questions and pull the discussion threads together is really important.  Otherwise they complain that they "didn't know what they should take notes on and didn't know how they'd be tested."  Total BS complaint, but it eases some of their fear if you "lecture" even for 15 minutes.

2) Establish a strict timeline for the discussion and stick to it.  Tell them when to expect breaks, and how the format will go for the semester.  If they know what's expected of them they're going to prep and participate more effectively.

3)  Arrange the chairs in a circle (I'm sure you already do this, but just in case!) and make them shut off their phones, especially if you have student discussion leaders. 

4) I don't think for a grad class you need to "grade" each discussion or assign points per comment or anything super rigid, but definitely give them an updated grade periodically along with suggestions for improving the quality of their discussion.  My very first semester of grad school I had one prof who gave us no feedback on our contributions until the end of the semester, and while the grading was fair in the end, all of us in the class were living in fear of it because discussion was 50% of our grades and we had no idea if we were doing it right.  In hindsight that was silly, but students are crazy.

Sorry if this is way more than you needed - I'm sure you've got most of this planned out and I hate overstepping, but I LOVED this class format as a student and get excited to see people use it!  Good luck!!!

[cogprof]

I do the following in my grad seminars:

1) If you're in a science-based field, you should consider assigning empirical articles rather than literature reviews ; the former seem to inspire more critical discussion because there are procedural and analtyical specifics to hang arguments, criticisms, and questions on (although the latter may be useful as "background reading," especially for students with less experience in the field). I usually assign 3-4 empirical articles per 2.5 hr class session.

2) During the previous class, I get a volunteer to lead discussion for each of the articles the following week (or just rotate systematically through all students). Each discussion leader is to prepare a 5 minute (and only 5 minute) oral summary of their article to get everyone on the same page, and a set of discussion questions for the class to entertain. We usually take each article in turn, with the summary occurring just before we discuss that particular article.

3) By 5 pm the day before class, all students must submit a 1-2 page reaction paper to the entire class via email (or CMS). The reaction papers should *not* be summaries, but should reflect critical reactions to one or more of the assigned articles (discussion leaders are not to write about their to-be-summarized article). All students are expected to read all the submitted reaction papers and to use those as fodder for discussion. If a student does not submit their reaction paper on time, they are not permitted to attend that class (except under rare, excusable circumstances).

4) If a student does not contribute much during a given lecture, I take them aside afterwards and kindly ask that they prepare better and participate more from then on. This almost always works.

Good luck, and have fun! Grad seminars are a lot of work to prepare, and to guide, but they usually end up being stimulating and rewarding.

[geogeek]

There are some great ideas here, which I have used successfully in similar courses with 10-15 students.  Has anyone run a similar class with just 3 (rather inexperienced) students?  I'm debating whether or not to drop the course, which is one of many available electives.

[grendel]

I would add a couple of ideas to the general pool:
1) Write out in advance some clear takeaway points, which you know you will emphasize and pause over, so that students know what the key "take-home" messages are supposed to be. Then you can prepare a couple of leading questions that will get you there, in case the discussion doesn't head in that direction initially. You can let the conversation run its initial course and then, at a pause, start your leading questions to make sure you land on those take-away ideas.
2) Don't be afraid to call on people. I've found that some students find it socially awkward to leap into a discussion, but you can see in their eyes that they're thinking about an answer. That's easier to assess in small groups, of course. I also keep in mind which students submit terrific written work but then never speak up in class -- I rely on calling on them when the discussion is at an ebb, and they rarely disappoint. If they're shy, they may not relish being made to speak up, but their insights certainly help keep things moving along.

[punchnpie]

There are some great ideas here, which I have used successfully in similar courses with 10-15 students.  Has anyone run a similar class with just 3 (rather inexperienced) students?  I'm debating whether or not to drop the course, which is one of many available electives.

I have had 2 and 3 (and 4 and 5) in my grad classes. The OP could have been me, in terms of how I usually run a class. When I realized that whether there were 2 or 10 people in class, they still don't know anything and I owe it to them to teach as necessary, rather than just let them sit there and 'discuss' a topic about which they know nothing (this is a graduate professional program, unless someone is working as a paraprofessional already, there is no undergrad knowledge we can build on; it's all new to students). So:

1. I still lecture. Sometimes I use the smaller classes to lecture on an aspect of the topic that I omit for the larger classes since we have more time for discussion. After I lecture, I sit down with them for the discussion, rather than running the class from the podium as I do with larger classes (if for no other reason, than for students in the back to be able to see me).

2. I still have student-led discussion of at least one reading per class. Gets me off the hook for a few minutes and assures that the students don't just skim the articles. You can get by in a larger class if some students skim, but in a small discussion, you are screwed if they didn't do the readings.

3. I prepare questions for the readings in case of dead air. Also, since I've read more on the topic then they have, now is the time for me to comment on their comments, suggest other readings/authors, and to point out how what they've read fits into the practitioner and research literature.

4. I recognize when we've done it to death and it's time to go. I'm not afraid of dismissing early.

Even with only 2 students in one class this term, we almost always went to the end of our 2.5 hrs as there was usually enough material for a good discussion - as long as they'd done the readings. One benefit of a professional program is that even if students haven't worked in the field before, they've worked, and for the classes I teach, they can bring in that work experience and apply it to most topics. That also extends the discussion so that we used up the class time. YMMV depending on your field.