problem solving discussion protocol

Search form

• Table of Contents
• Troubleshooting Guide
• A Model for Getting Started
• Justice Action Toolkit
• Best Change Processes
• Databases of Best Practices
• Online Courses
• Ask an Advisor
• Subscribe to eNewsletter
• Community Stories
• YouTube Channel
• About the Tool Box
• How to Use the Tool Box
• Privacy Statement
• Workstation/Check Box Sign-In
• Online Training Courses
• Capacity Building Training
• Training Curriculum - Order Now
• Community Check Box Evaluation System
• Build Your Toolbox
• Facilitation of Community Processes
• Community Health Assessment and Planning
• Section 4. Techniques for Leading Group Discussions

Chapter 16 Sections

• Section 1. Conducting Effective Meetings
• Section 2. Developing Facilitation Skills
• Section 3. Capturing What People Say: Tips for Recording a Meeting

• Main Section

A local coalition forms a task force to address the rising HIV rate among teens in the community.  A group of parents meets to wrestle with their feeling that their school district is shortchanging its students.  A college class in human services approaches the topic of dealing with reluctant participants.  Members of an environmental group attend a workshop on the effects of global warming.  A politician convenes a “town hall meeting” of constituents to brainstorm ideas for the economic development of the region.  A community health educator facilitates a smoking cessation support group.

All of these might be examples of group discussions, although they have different purposes, take place in different locations, and probably run in different ways.  Group discussions are common in a democratic society, and, as a community builder, it’s more than likely that you have been and will continue to be involved in many of them.  You also may be in a position to lead one, and that’s what this section is about.  In this last section of a chapter on group facilitation, we’ll examine what it takes to lead a discussion group well, and how you can go about doing it.

What is an effective group discussion?

The literal definition of a group discussion is obvious: a critical conversation about a particular topic, or perhaps a range of topics, conducted in a group of a size that allows participation by all members.  A group of two or three generally doesn’t need a leader to have a good discussion, but once the number reaches five or six, a leader or facilitator can often be helpful.  When the group numbers eight or more, a leader or facilitator, whether formal or informal, is almost always helpful in ensuring an effective discussion.

A group discussion is a type of meeting, but it differs from the formal meetings in a number of ways: It may not have a specific goal – many group discussions are just that: a group kicking around ideas on a particular topic.  That may lead to a goal ultimately...but it may not. It’s less formal, and may have no time constraints, or structured order, or agenda. Its leadership is usually less directive than that of a meeting. It emphasizes process (the consideration of ideas) over product (specific tasks to be accomplished within the confines of the meeting itself. Leading a discussion group is not the same as running a meeting.  It’s much closer to acting as a facilitator, but not exactly the same as that either.

An effective group discussion generally has a number of elements:

• All members of the group have a chance to speak, expressing their own ideas and feelings freely, and to pursue and finish out their thoughts
• All members of the group can hear others’ ideas and feelings stated openly
• Group members can safely test out ideas that are not yet fully formed
• Group members can receive and respond to respectful but honest and constructive feedback.  Feedback could be positive, negative, or merely clarifying or correcting factual questions or errors, but is in all cases delivered respectfully.
• A variety of points of view are put forward and discussed
• The discussion is not dominated by any one person
• Arguments, while they may be spirited, are based on the content of ideas and opinions, not on personalities
• Even in disagreement, there’s an understanding that the group is working together to resolve a dispute, solve a problem, create a plan, make a decision, find principles all can agree on, or come to a conclusion from which it can move on to further discussion

Many group discussions have no specific purpose except the exchange of ideas and opinions.  Ultimately, an effective group discussion is one in which many different ideas and viewpoints are heard and considered.  This allows the group to accomplish its purpose if it has one, or to establish a basis either for ongoing discussion or for further contact and collaboration among its members.

There are many possible purposes for a group discussion, such as:

• Create a new situation – form a coalition, start an initiative, etc.
• Explore cooperative or collaborative arrangements among groups or organizations
• Discuss and/or analyze an issue, with no specific goal in mind but understanding
• Create a strategic plan – for an initiative, an advocacy campaign, an intervention, etc.
• Discuss policy and policy change
• Air concerns and differences among individuals or groups
• Hold public hearings on proposed laws or regulations, development, etc.
• Decide on an action
• Provide mutual support
• Solve a problem
• Resolve a conflict
• Plan your work or an event

Possible leadership styles of a group discussion also vary.  A group leader or facilitator might be directive or non-directive; that is, she might try to control what goes on to a large extent; or she might assume that the group should be in control, and that her job is to facilitate the process.  In most group discussions, leaders who are relatively non-directive make for a more broad-ranging outlay of ideas, and a more satisfying experience for participants.

Directive leaders can be necessary in some situations. If a goal must be reached in a short time period, a directive leader might help to keep the group focused. If the situation is particularly difficult, a directive leader might be needed to keep control of the discussion and make

Why would you lead a group discussion?

There are two ways to look at this question: “What’s the point of group discussion?” and “Why would you, as opposed to someone else, lead a group discussion?”  Let’s examine both.

What’s the point of group discussion?

As explained in the opening paragraphs of this section, group discussions are common in a democratic society.  There are a number of reasons for this, some practical and some philosophical.

A group discussion:

• G ives everyone involved a voice .  Whether the discussion is meant to form a basis for action, or just to play with ideas, it gives all members of the group a chance to speak their opinions, to agree or disagree with others, and to have their thoughts heard.  In many community-building situations, the members of the group might be chosen specifically because they represent a cross-section of the community, or a diversity of points of view.
• Allows for a variety of ideas to be expressed and discussed .  A group is much more likely to come to a good conclusion if a mix of ideas is on the table, and if all members have the opportunity to think about and respond to them.
• Is generally a democratic, egalitarian process .  It reflects the ideals of most grassroots and community groups, and encourages a diversity of views.
• Leads to group ownership of whatever conclusions, plans, or action the group decides upon .  Because everyone has a chance to contribute to the discussion and to be heard, the final result feels like it was arrived at by and belongs to everyone.
• Encourages those who might normally be reluctant to speak their minds .  Often, quiet people have important things to contribute, but aren’t assertive enough to make themselves heard.  A good group discussion will bring them out and support them.
• Can often open communication channels among people who might not communicate in any other way .  People from very different backgrounds, from opposite ends of the political spectrum, from different cultures, who may, under most circumstances, either never make contact or never trust one another enough to try to communicate, might, in a group discussion, find more common ground than they expected.
• Is sometimes simply the obvious, or even the only, way to proceed.  Several of the examples given at the beginning of the section – the group of parents concerned about their school system, for instance, or the college class – fall into this category, as do public hearings and similar gatherings.

Why would you specifically lead a group discussion?

You might choose to lead a group discussion, or you might find yourself drafted for the task.  Some of the most common reasons that you might be in that situation:

• It’s part of your job .  As a mental health counselor, a youth worker, a coalition coordinator, a teacher, the president of a board of directors, etc. you might be expected to lead group discussions regularly.
• You’ve been asked to .  Because of your reputation for objectivity or integrity, because of your position in the community, or because of your skill at leading group discussions, you might be the obvious choice to lead a particular discussion.
• A discussion is necessary, and you’re the logical choice to lead it .  If you’re the chair of a task force to address substance use in the community, for instance, it’s likely that you’ll be expected to conduct that task force’s meetings, and to lead discussion of the issue.
• It was your idea in the first place .  The group discussion, or its purpose, was your idea, and the organization of the process falls to you.

You might find yourself in one of these situations if you fall into one of the categories of people who are often tapped to lead group discussions.  These categories include (but aren’t limited to):

• Directors of organizations
• Public officials
• Coalition coordinators
• Professionals with group-leading skills – counselors, social workers, therapists, etc.
• Health professionals and health educators
• Respected community members.  These folks may be respected for their leadership – president of the Rotary Club, spokesperson for an environmental movement – for their positions in the community – bank president, clergyman – or simply for their personal qualities – integrity, fairness, ability to communicate with all sectors of the community.
• Community activists.  This category could include anyone from “professional” community organizers to average citizens who care about an issue or have an idea they want to pursue.

When might you lead a group discussion?

The need or desire for a group discussion might of course arise anytime, but there are some times when it’s particularly necessary.

• At the start of something new . Whether you’re designing an intervention, starting an initiative, creating a new program, building a coalition, or embarking on an advocacy or other campaign, inclusive discussion is likely to be crucial in generating the best possible plan, and creating community support for and ownership of it.
• When an issue can no longer be ignored . When youth violence reaches a critical point, when the community’s drinking water is declared unsafe, when the HIV infection rate climbs – these are times when groups need to convene to discuss the issue and develop action plans to swing the pendulum in the other direction.
• When groups need to be brought together . One way to deal with racial or ethnic hostility, for instance, is to convene groups made up of representatives of all the factions involved.  The resulting discussions – and the opportunity for people from different backgrounds to make personal connections with one another – can go far to address everyone’s concerns, and to reduce tensions.
• When an existing group is considering its next step or seeking to address an issue of importance to it . The staff of a community service organization, for instance, may want to plan its work for the next few months, or to work out how to deal with people with particular quirks or problems.

How do you lead a group discussion?

In some cases, the opportunity to lead a group discussion can arise on the spur of the moment; in others, it’s a more formal arrangement, planned and expected.  In the latter case, you may have the chance to choose a space and otherwise structure the situation.  In less formal circumstances, you’ll have to make the best of existing conditions.

We’ll begin by looking at what you might consider if you have time to prepare.  Then we’ll examine what it takes to make an effective discussion leader or facilitator, regardless of external circumstances.

Set the stage

If you have time to prepare beforehand, there are a number of things you may be able to do to make the participants more comfortable, and thus to make discussion easier.

Choose the space

If you have the luxury of choosing your space, you might look for someplace that’s comfortable and informal.  Usually, that means comfortable furniture that can be moved around (so that, for instance, the group can form a circle, allowing everyone to see and hear everyone else easily).  It may also mean a space away from the ordinary.

One organization often held discussions on the terrace of an old mill that had been turned into a bookstore and café.  The sound of water from the mill stream rushing by put everyone at ease, and encouraged creative thought.

Provide food and drink

The ultimate comfort, and one that breaks down barriers among people, is that of eating and drinking.

Bring materials to help the discussion along

Most discussions are aided by the use of newsprint and markers to record ideas, for example.

Become familiar with the purpose and content of the discussion

If you have the opportunity, learn as much as possible about the topic under discussion.  This is not meant to make you the expert, but rather to allow you to ask good questions that will help the group generate ideas.

Make sure everyone gets any necessary information, readings, or other material beforehand

If participants are asked to read something, consider questions, complete a task, or otherwise prepare for the discussion, make sure that the assignment is attended to and used.  Don’t ask people to do something, and then ignore it.

Lead the discussion

Think about leadership style

The first thing you need to think about is leadership style, which we mentioned briefly earlier in the section.  Are you a directive or non-directive leader?  The chances are that, like most of us, you fall somewhere in between the extremes of the leader who sets the agenda and dominates the group completely, and the leader who essentially leads not at all. The point is made that many good group or meeting leaders are, in fact, facilitators, whose main concern is supporting and maintaining the process of the group’s work.  This is particularly true when it comes to group discussion, where the process is, in fact, the purpose of the group’s coming together.

A good facilitator helps the group set rules for itself, makes sure that everyone participates and that no one dominates, encourages the development and expression of all ideas, including “odd” ones, and safeguards an open process, where there are no foregone conclusions and everyone’s ideas are respected.  Facilitators are non-directive, and try to keep themselves out of the discussion, except to ask questions or make statements that advance it.  For most group discussions, the facilitator role is probably a good ideal to strive for.

It’s important to think about what you’re most comfortable with philosophically, and how that fits what you’re comfortable with personally.  If you’re committed to a non-directive style, but you tend to want to control everything in a situation, you may have to learn some new behaviors in order to act on your beliefs.

Put people at ease

Especially if most people in the group don’t know one another, it’s your job as leader to establish a comfortable atmosphere and set the tone for the discussion.

Help the group establish ground rules

The ground rules of a group discussion are the guidelines that help to keep the discussion on track, and prevent it from deteriorating into namecalling or simply argument.  Some you might suggest, if the group has trouble coming up with the first one or two:

• Everyone should treat everyone else with respect : no name-calling, no emotional outbursts, no accusations.
• No arguments directed at people – only at ideas and opinions .  Disagreement should be respectful – no ridicule.
• Don’t interrupt .  Listen to the whole of others’ thoughts – actually listen, rather than just running over your own response in your head.
• Respect the group’s time .  Try to keep your comments reasonably short and to the point, so that others have a chance to respond.
• Consider all comments seriously, and try to evaluate them fairly .  Others’ ideas and comments may change your mind, or vice versa: it’s important to be open to that.
• Don’t be defensive if someone disagrees with you .  Evaluate both positions, and only continue to argue for yours if you continue to believe it’s right.
• Everyone is responsible for following and upholding the ground rules .

Ground rules may also be a place to discuss recording the session.  Who will take notes, record important points, questions for further discussion, areas of agreement or disagreement?  If the recorder is a group member, the group and/or leader should come up with a strategy that allows her to participate fully in the discussion.

Generate an agenda or goals for the session

You might present an agenda for approval, and change it as the group requires, or you and the group can create one together.  There may actually be no need for one, in that the goal may simply be to discuss an issue or idea.  If that’s the case, it should be agreed upon at the outset.

How active you are might depend on your leadership style, but you definitely have some responsibilities here.  They include setting, or helping the group to set the discussion topic; fostering the open process; involving all participants; asking questions or offering ideas to advance the discussion; summarizing or clarifying important points, arguments, and ideas; and wrapping up the session.  Let’s look at these, as well as some do’s and don’t’s for discussion group leaders.

• Setting the topic . If the group is meeting to discuss a specific issue or to plan something, the discussion topic is already set.  If the topic is unclear, then someone needs to help the group define it.  The leader – through asking the right questions, defining the problem, and encouraging ideas from the group – can play that role.
• Fostering the open process . Nurturing the open process means paying attention to the process, content, and interpersonal dynamics of the discussion all at the same time – not a simple matter. As leader, your task is not to tell the group what to do, or to force particular conclusions, but rather to make sure that the group chooses an appropriate topic that meets its needs, that there are no “right” answers to start with (no foregone conclusions), that no one person or small group dominates the discussion, that everyone follows the ground rules, that discussion is civil and organized, and that all ideas are subjected to careful critical analysis.  You might comment on the process of the discussion or on interpersonal issues when it seems helpful (“We all seem to be picking on John here – what’s going on?”), or make reference to the open process itself (“We seem to be assuming that we’re supposed to believe X – is that true?”). Most of your actions as leader should be in the service of modeling or furthering the open process.

Part of your job here is to protect “minority rights,” i.e., unpopular or unusual ideas.  That doesn’t mean you have to agree with them, but that you have to make sure that they can be expressed, and that discussion of them is respectful, even in disagreement. (The exceptions are opinions or ideas that are discriminatory or downright false.)  Odd ideas often turn out to be correct, and shouldn’t be stifled.

• Involving all participants . This is part of fostering the open process, but is important enough to deserve its own mention. To involve those who are less assertive or shy, or who simply can’t speak up quickly enough, you might ask directly for their opinion, encourage them with body language (smile when they say anything, lean and look toward them often), and be aware of when they want to speak and can’t break in.  It’s important both for process and for the exchange of ideas that everyone have plenty of opportunity to communicate their thoughts.
• Asking questions or offering ideas to advance the discussion . The leader should be aware of the progress of the discussion, and should be able to ask questions or provide information or arguments that stimulate thinking or take the discussion to the next step when necessary. If participants are having trouble grappling with the topic, getting sidetracked by trivial issues, or simply running out of steam, it’s the leader’s job to carry the discussion forward.

This is especially true when the group is stuck, either because two opposing ideas or factions are at an impasse, or because no one is able or willing to say anything.  In these circumstances, the leader’s ability to identify points of agreement, or to ask the question that will get discussion moving again is crucial to the group’s effectiveness.

• Summarizing or clarifying important points, arguments, or ideas . This task entails making sure that everyone understands a point that was just made, or the two sides of an argument.  It can include restating a conclusion the group has reached, or clarifying a particular idea or point made by an individual (“What I think I heard you say was…”).  The point is to make sure that everyone understands what the individual or group actually meant.
• Wrapping up the session .  As the session ends, the leader should help the group review the discussion and make plans for next steps (more discussion sessions, action, involving other people or groups, etc.). He should also go over any assignments or tasks that were agreed to, make sure that every member knows what her responsibilities are, and review the deadlines for those responsibilities.  Other wrap-up steps include getting feedback on the session – including suggestions for making it better – pointing out the group’s accomplishments, and thanking it for its work.

Even after you’ve wrapped up the discussion, you’re not necessarily through. If you’ve been the recorder, you might want to put the notes from the session in order, type them up, and send them to participants. The notes might also include a summary of conclusions that were reached, as well as any assignments or follow-up activities that were agreed on.

If the session was one-time, or was the last of a series, your job may now be done. If it was the beginning, however, or part of an ongoing discussion, you may have a lot to do before the next session, including contacting people to make sure they’ve done what they promised, and preparing the newsprint notes to be posted at the next session so everyone can remember the discussion.

Leading an effective group discussion takes preparation (if you have the opportunity for it), an understanding of and commitment to an open process, and a willingness to let go of your ego and biases. If you can do these things, the chances are you can become a discussion leader that can help groups achieve the results they want.

Do’s and don’ts for discussion leaders

• Model the behavior and attitudes you want group members to employ . That includes respecting all group members equally; advancing the open process; demonstrating what it means to be a learner (admitting when you’re wrong, or don’t know a fact or an answer, and suggesting ways to find out); asking questions based on others’ statements; focusing on positions rather than on the speaker; listening carefully; restating others’ points; supporting your arguments with fact or logic; acceding when someone else has a good point; accepting criticism; thinking critically; giving up the floor when appropriate; being inclusive and culturally sensitive, etc.
• Use encouraging body language and tone of voice, as well as words .  Lean forward when people are talking, for example, keep your body position open and approachable, smile when appropriate, and attend carefully to everyone, not just to those who are most articulate.
• Give positive feedback for joining the discussion .  Smile, repeat group members’ points, and otherwise show that you value participation.
• Be aware of people’s reactions and feelings, and try to respond appropriately . If a group member is hurt by others’ comments, seems puzzled or confused, is becoming angry or defensive, it’s up to you as discussion leader to use the ground rules or your own sensitivity to deal with the situation. If someone’s hurt, for instance, it may be important to point that out and discuss how to make arguments without getting personal.  If group members are confused, revisiting the comments or points that caused the confusion, or restating them more clearly, may be helpful.  Being aware of the reactions of individuals and of the group as a whole can make it possible to expose and use conflict, or to head off unnecessary emotional situations and misunderstandings.
• Ask open-ended questions .  In advancing the discussion, use questions that can’t be answered with a simple yes or no.  Instead, questions should require some thought from group members, and should ask for answers that include reasons or analysis.  The difference between “Do you think the President’s decision was right?” and “Why do you think the President’s decision was or wasn’t right?” is huge.  Where the first question can be answered with a yes or no, the second requires an analysis supporting the speaker’s opinion, as well as discussion of the context and reasons for the decision.
• Control your own biases .  While you should point out factual errors or ideas that are inaccurate and disrespectful of others, an open process demands that you not impose your views on the group, and that you keep others from doing the same.  Group members should be asked to make rational decisions about the positions or views they want to agree with, and ultimately the ideas that the group agrees on should be those that make the most sense to them – whether they coincide with yours or not.  Pointing out bias – including your own – and discussing it helps both you and group members try to be objective.

A constant question that leaders – and members – of any group have is what to do about racist, sexist, or homophobic remarks, especially in a homogeneous group where most or all of the members except the leader may agree with them.  There is no clear-cut answer, although if they pass unchallenged, it may appear you condone the attitude expressed. How you challenge prejudice is the real question.  The ideal here is that other members of the group do the challenging, and it may be worth waiting long enough before you jump in to see if that’s going to happen.  If it doesn’t, you can essentially say, “That’s wrong, and I won’t allow that kind of talk here,” which may well put an end to the remarks, but isn’t likely to change anyone’s mind.  You can express your strong disagreement or discomfort with such remarks and leave it at that, or follow up with “Let’s talk about it after the group,” which could generate some real discussion about prejudice and stereotypes, and actually change some thinking over time. Your ground rules – the issue of respecting everyone – should address this issue, and it probably won’t come up…but there are no guarantees.  It won’t hurt to think beforehand about how you want to handle it.

• Encourage disagreement, and help the group use it creatively .  Disagreement is not to be smoothed over, but rather to be analyzed and used.  When there are conflicting opinions – especially when both can be backed up by reasonable arguments – the real discussion starts.  If everyone agrees on every point, there’s really no discussion at all.  Disagreement makes people think.  It may not be resolved in one session, or at all, but it’s the key to discussion that means something.

All too often, conflict – whether conflicting opinions, conflicting world views, or conflicting personalities – is so frightening to people that they do their best to ignore it or gloss it over.  That reaction not only leaves the conflict unresolved – and therefore growing, so that it will be much stronger when it surfaces later– but fails to examine the issues that it raises.  If those are brought out in the open and discussed reasonably, the two sides often find that they have as much agreement as disagreement, and can resolve their differences by putting their ideas together.  Even where that’s not the case, facing the conflict reasonably, and looking at the roots of the ideas on each side, can help to focus on the issue at hand and provide solutions far better than if one side or the other simply operated alone.

• Keep your mouth shut as much as possible .  By and large, discussion groups are for the group members.  You may be a member of the group and have been asked by the others to act as leader, in which case you certainly have a right to be part of the discussion (although not to dominate).  If you’re an outside facilitator, or leader by position, it’s best to confine your contributions to observations on process, statements of fact, questions to help propel the discussion, and clarification and summarization.  The simple fact that you’re identified as leader or facilitator gives your comments more force than those of other group members.  If you’re in a position of authority or seen as an expert, that force becomes even greater.  The more active you are in the discussion, the more the group will take your positions and ideas as “right,” and the less it will come to its own conclusions.
• Don’t let one or a small group of individuals dominate the discussion .  People who are particularly articulate or assertive, who have strong feelings that they urgently want to express, or who simply feel the need – and have the ability – to dominate can take up far more than their fair share of a discussion.  This often means that quieter people have little or no chance to speak, and that those who disagree with the dominant individual(s) are shouted down and cease trying to make points.  It’s up to the leader to cut off individuals who take far more than their share of time, or who try to limit discussion.  This can be done in a relatively non-threatening way (“This is an interesting point, and it’s certainly worth the time we’ve spent on it, but there are other points of view that need to be heard as well.  I think Alice has been waiting to speak…”), but it’s crucial to the open process and to the comfort and effectiveness of the group.
• Don’t let one point of view override others , unless it’s based on facts and logic, and is actually convincing group members to change their minds.  If a point of view dominates because of its merits, its appeal to participants’ intellectual and ethical sensibilities, that’s fine.  It’s in fact what you hope will happen in a good group discussion.  If a point of view dominates because of the aggressiveness of its supporters, or because it’s presented as something it’s wrong to oppose (“People who disagree with the President are unpatriotic and hate their country”), that’s intellectual bullying or blackmail, and is the opposite of an open discussion.  As leader, you should point it out when that’s happening, and make sure other points of view are aired and examined.

Sometimes individuals or factions that are trying to dominate can disrupt the process of the group. Both Sections 1 and 2 of this chapter contain some guidelines for dealing with this type of situation.

• Don’t assume that anyone holds particular opinions or positions because of his culture, background, race, personal style, etc .  People are individuals, and can’t be judged by their exteriors.  You can find out what someone thinks by asking, or by listening when he speaks.
• Don’t assume that someone from a particular culture, race, or background speaks for everyone else from that situation .  She may or may not represent the general opinion of people from situations similar to hers…or there may not be a general opinion among them.  In a group discussion, no one should be asked or assumed to represent anything more than herself.

The exception here is when someone has been chosen by her community or group to represent its point of view in a multi-sector discussion.  Even in that situation, the individual may find herself swayed by others’ arguments, or may have ideas of her own.  She may have agreed to sponsor particular ideas that are important to her group, but she may still have her own opinions as well, especially in other areas.

• Don’t be the font of all wisdom .  Even if you know more about the discussion topic than most others in the group (if you’re the teacher of a class, for instance), presenting yourself as the intellectual authority denies group members the chance to discuss the topic freely and without pressure.  Furthermore, some of them may have ideas you haven’t considered, or experiences that give them insights into the topic that you’re never likely to have.  Model learning behavior, not teaching behavior.

If you’re asked your opinion directly, you should answer honestly.  You have some choices about how you do that, however.  One is to state your opinion, but make very clear that it’s an opinion, not a fact, and that other people believe differently.  Another is to ask to hold your opinion until the end of the discussion, so as not to influence anyone’s thinking while it’s going on.  Yet another is to give your opinion after all other members of the group have stated theirs, and then discuss the similarities and differences among all the opinions and people’s reasons for holding them. If you’re asked a direct question, you might want to answer it if it’s a question of fact and you know the answer, and if it’s relevant to the discussion.  If the question is less clear-cut, you might want to throw it back to the group, and use it as a spur to discussion.

Group discussions are common in our society, and have a variety of purposes, from planning an intervention or initiative to mutual support to problem-solving to addressing an issue of local concern.  An effective discussion group depends on a leader or facilitator who can guide it through an open process – the group chooses what it’s discussing, if not already determined, discusses it with no expectation of particular conclusions, encourages civil disagreement and argument, and makes sure that every member is included and no one dominates.  It helps greatly if the leader comes to the task with a democratic or, especially, a collaborative style, and with an understanding of how a group functions.

A good group discussion leader has to pay attention to the process and content of the discussion as well as to the people who make up the group.  She has to prepare the space and the setting to the extent possible; help the group establish ground rules that will keep it moving civilly and comfortably; provide whatever materials are necessary; familiarize herself with the topic; and make sure that any pre-discussion readings or assignments get to participants in plenty of time.  Then she has to guide the discussion, being careful to promote an open process; involve everyone and let no one dominate; attend to the personal issues and needs of individual group members when they affect the group; summarize or clarify when appropriate; ask questions to keep the discussion moving, and put aside her own agenda, ego, and biases.

It’s not an easy task, but it can be extremely rewarding.  An effective group discussion can lay the groundwork for action and real community change.

Online resources

Everyday-Democracy . Study Circles Resource Center. Information and publications related to study circles, participatory discussion groups meant to address community issues.

Facilitating Political Discussions from the Institute for Democracy and Higher Education at Tufts University is designed to assist experienced facilitators in training others to facilitate politically charged conversations. The materials are broken down into "modules" and facilitation trainers can use some or all of them to suit their needs.

Project on Civic Reflection provides information about leading study circles on civic reflection.

“ Suggestions for Leading Small-Group Discussions ,” prepared by Lee Haugen, Center for Teaching Excellence, Iowa State University, 1998. Tips on university teaching, but much of the information is useful in other circumstances as well.

“ Tips for Leading Discussions ,” by Felisa Tibbits, Human Rights Education Associates.

Print resources

Forsyth, D . Group Dynamics . (2006). (4th edition).  Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth. 

Johnson, D., & Frank P. (2002). Joining Together: Group theory and group skills . (8th edition).  Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Making Protocols Work

Challenge 1. getting it off the ground, challenge 2. pushing through initial discomfort, challenge 3. getting past a plateau, challenge 4. remembering the real goal, authors' notes:.

Two Useful Protocols for Looking at Student Work

The tuning protocol, developed by joseph mcdonald; revised by david allen.

A protocol designed to look at particular teacher-created or school-created tasks, projects, and assessments in order to improve them.

Introduction. Facilitator briefly introduces protocol goals, norms, and steps.

Presentation. Presenter shares the context for his/her work, supporting documents, and a focusing question for which he/she wants feedback.

Clarifying questions. Participants have an opportunity to ask factual informational questions to better understand the work. Presenter answers briefly.

Examination of the student work. Participants look closely at the presenter's student work samples, as well as task, project, rubric, etc., and prepare to offer warm and cool feedback related to the focusing question. Presenter is silent.

Warm and cool feedback. Participants share feedback. The feedback generally begins with "warm" feedback (observations about how the work relates to the goals), then moves on to "cool" feedback (possible disconnects, gaps, or problems, sometimes phrased in the form of probing questions). Presenter is silent.

Reflection. Presenter reflects on what he or she heard in participants' feedback.

Debrief. Facilitator leads reflection on the process of using the tuning protocol.

The Collaborative Assessment Conference

Developed by steve seidel and colleagues at harvard project zero.

A protocol for learning in-depth about a particular student's understanding, interests, or skills. It provides a structure for teachers to look at a piece of work together, first to determine what it reveals about the student, and then to consider how the student's issues and concerns relate to the teacher's goals for the student. The facilitator begins by reviewing the steps of the protocol as well as group norms.

Getting started. The presenter shares the student work but says nothing about it, the context in which it was created, or the student. Participants observe or read the work in silence, making notes if they choose.

Describing the work. The facilitator asks the group: "What do you see?" Participants respond by describing the work in specific terms, without interpreting or making judgments about the quality of the work. (Presenter listens.)

Raising questions. The facilitator asks, "What questions does this work raise for you?" Participants state any questions they have about the work, the student, the assignment, and the circumstances under which the work was carried out. (Presenter listens.)

Speculating about the student's focus. The facilitator asks, "What do you think the student is working on?" Participants share ideas about the challenges or issues that the student might have focused on as he/she carried out the work. (Presenter listens.)

Hearing from the presenter. The presenter provides his/her perspective on the student's work, describing what he/she sees in it, sharing a bit about the context and responding (if he/she chooses) to one or more of the questions raised. The presenter also comments on anything unexpected that he/she might have heard during the previous steps.

Discussing implications for teaching and learning. The facilitator invites everyone (participants and presenter) to share any ideas or questions that the conversation has raised for them about their own teaching, their students' learning, or ways to support this particular student in future learning.

Debriefing. Facilitator leads the whole group in reflecting on the process of using the protocol.

Tina Blythe is a senior developer at Project Zero and adjunct lecturer at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Sh e is coauthor of  Facilitating for Learning: Tools for Teacher Groups of All Kinds  (Teachers College Press, 2015).

David Allen teaches English education at the College of Staten Island, City University of University of New York. He is coauthor of  Facilitating for Learning: Tools for Teacher Groups of All Kinds  (Teachers College Press, 2015).

ASCD is a community dedicated to educators' professional growth and well-being.

Let us help you put your vision into action., from our issue.

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Lead an Effective Problem-Solving Meeting

There’s nothing worse than getting a group of smart people together to solve a problem and having the discussion devolve into chaos. This usually happens when people are at different stages of the problem-solving process. To get everyone on the same page, take a methodical approach and conquer one step at a time. First, ask: […]

There’s nothing worse than getting a group of smart people together to solve a problem and having the discussion devolve into chaos. This usually happens when people are at different stages of the problem-solving process. To get everyone on the same page, take a methodical approach and conquer one step at a time. First, ask: Does the team genuinely understand the problem it’s trying to solve? If you can’t clearly articulate it, draft a succinct problem statement. If the group understands the problem, but hasn’t yet produced a set of potential solutions, concentrate on generating as many quality options as possible. If you already have solutions, assess their strengths and weaknesses, and develop a list of pros and cons. Then you can use your time together to do the often difficult work of choosing a solution — and make sure that the final decision is in writing. The last stage, once you’ve selected the solution, is to develop an implementation plan. While conquering just one problem-solving stage at a time may feel a bit underwhelming at first, this methodical approach will often help the group leapfrog ahead, sometimes to the end of the problem-solving cycle.

Source: This tip is adapted from “Why Groups Struggle to Solve Problems Together,” by Al Pittampalli

Partner Center

By School's Out Washington

Celebrating the legacy of YDEKC, a pivotal King County coalition and convener 

When Youth Development Executives of King County (YDEKC) was created in 2010, the youth development sector in King County was made up of loosely connected agencies, often competing for scarce funds and ill equipped to stand in equal partnership with other youth-serving sectors. From the beginning, YDEKC’s goal was to organize, activate, and empower our sector to achieve more equitable results for King County’s young people. It developed into a diverse coalition of leaders representing youth-serving community-based organizations. Its members partnered with schools, communities, and families to ensure every young person has what they need to learn, grow, and thrive. 

Over the course of its 13-year history, YDEKC helped to advance: 

• A Whole Child, Whole Day Vision in the region 
• The Collective Power of the youth development sector 
• Strong, Networked Leadership within the sector 
• Deeper and more equitable Cross-Sector Collaboration  
• Research-Informed Practice within and beyond its member organizations 

For the story, timeline, and milestones of the first 10 years of YDEKC’s journey, check out this video describing the Story of YDEKC or read the 10-Year Report on Sway.  

In the final three years of its organizational journey, YDEKC embraced a new mission to connect, strengthen, and amplify the leaders of youth-serving organizations so that all Black, Indigenous, and youth of color thrive. Highlights from those years include:   

• The Youth Development Strategy Table (YDST), for which YDEKC served as a co-lead, gained considerable influence and momentum starting in 2020. Learn more about the YDST here.  
• YDEKC, with generous support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, implemented an innovative Thriving Leaders of Color Fund , which invested in projects designed to advance, rejuvenate, and celebrate leaders of color. 
• The School and Community Partnership Toolkit became more accessible and integrated in local systems through projects and initiatives including as YDEKC served as a Capacity Builder for King County Best Starts for Kids and adapted its resources to create a Partnership Playbook for Seattle Public Schools.  

After unsuccessful efforts to obtain sustainable funding, YDEKC will close its doors on October 2, 2023. However, its legacy, network, and resources live on. For the Measurement and Evaluation Toolkit, School and Community Partnership Toolkit, and an array of youth development resources, including learnings from YDEKC’s work around equity and social and emotional learning, check out School’s Out Washington’s Resource Library . 

For some great memories shared by YDEKC members, partners, and colleagues, please enjoy YDEKC’s Farewell Celebration Kudoboard or YDEKC’s 10-Year Kudoboard featuring historic photos and stories. 

• Our Mission

How to Promote Productive Discussion in Math

A three-part protocol for collaboration in heterogeneous pairs pushes middle school students to a deeper understanding of math.

One day, students in my eighth-grade math class were working in pairs. Two boys, Nainoa and Keoki, called me over to resolve their dispute over differing answers. After reviewing their work, I confirmed that Nainoa was correct. Nainoa shouted, “Ha, told you so!” Keoki dropped his head to his desk, whispering, “Whatever.” I scolded Nainoa, but it was too late—the damage was done, and Keoki shut down for the rest of the class period.

Later that day, I reflected on the incident. The lack of humility and detrimental effects of Nainoa’s words lingered. Keoki, shamed for one incorrect response, was now less likely to take mathematical risks. The person who used the most cognitive energy? Me, the teacher, since I was the one who did the work to determine which student was correct.

The Value of Productive Discussion in Math

Putting that poor result aside, the scenario of two students discussing different answers is exactly what we want in math classrooms. Common Core Standard of Math Practice 3 is: “construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others.” Such discussions create the perfect opportunity to challenge students like Nainoa to extend their understanding beyond getting the correct answer or doing the task.

Nothing is more challenging for a student who has the correct answer than to explain why someone else is incorrect in their reasoning because alternative methods, especially those that generate incorrect responses, are hard for the student with the correct answer to make sense of.

What happens when we’re able to make sense of such alternative understandings, viewpoints, processes, or methods? We become more intelligent human beings, with more holistic conceptual understandings of content. In addition, we utilize and develop the essential 21st-century communicative skill of empathy and are better suited to thrive in our increasingly diverse society.

So what went wrong in the scenario with Nainoa and Keoki? I had not set up an effective routine to optimize their interaction. In order for an academic discussion routine to work effectively, I found that I needed these three elements:

• heterogeneous grouping of students to ensure greater opportunities for discourse around diversity of understandings,
• student understanding of the value of heterogeneous grouping for their development, to motivate them to engage in productive discussions, and
• a protocol for discussion that ensures all students are supported in these discussions.

I was lucky enough to have Nainoa and Keoki arrive at different answers, but to ensure that productive discussion happened on a regular basis, I needed to start intentionally using heterogeneous grouping. To help students see the value of collaboration in heterogeneous groupings, I came up with the following “Tiers of Understanding,” which I put up on a poster for my students to reference:

Tier 1: Do—complete the task.

Tier 2: Explain the process used to complete the task.

Tier 3: Empathetically explain the thought processes used by another student to complete the task.

Doing a task is the lowest level of understanding—explaining is higher, and the highest is explaining empathetically. Through heterogeneous grouping, the student struggling in their ability to do the task is supported by the higher performing student, who seeks opportunities to empathetically explain. This creates differentiation through inclusivity—personalized value for the mixed levels of learners in working together.

If I had known to teach Nainoa and Keoki the value of empathetic explanation, they would have looked at their different answers as a learning opportunity.

Teaching Students to Empathetically Explain

I now teach students a three-part protocol for discussing divergent answers when they’re working together.

1. Listen to the other person.

2. Try to see how they could be correct—maybe you’re both correct. Math is not fixed, as there are many avenues to arrive at one solution, and solutions can appear in many equivalent forms.

3. If you believe the other person is incorrect, explain how you are correct, and/or how they are incorrect. It is the responsibility of the person with the correct answer to rectify the misunderstanding.

The most valuable part of the protocol is the last part—that it’s the responsibility of the student with the correct answer to help their partner correct their misunderstanding. It was not Keoki’s fault he had the wrong answer, and since Nainoa had the correct answer, he could have tried to assist Keoki through empathetic explanation. Even in a case where the student with the incorrect answer initially thinks they are correct—which was the case for Keoki—the three steps above will lead them to realize where they went wrong.

Sentence stems such as “You were thinking... because...” or “I can see how you tried to...” are excellent scaffolds to help students start crafting empathetic responses.

It’s now been six years since, in my second year of teaching, I started intentionally grouping students heterogeneously and generated the 3 Tiers of Understanding and the protocol for empathetic explanation to guide students in their collaborative work. These steps have helped me create a more engaging, student-centered classroom by requiring that more of the cognitive work of coming to terms with math concepts be done by the students.

After I had been using this process for a while, I saw my students gravitate toward collaborating with each other. They recognized the value that empathetic discourse had for both students in heterogeneous grouping. Most significantly, this created a class culture grounded in kākou , Hawaiian for “we’re all in this together,” which is what the culture of classrooms should be.

• 0 items $0.00

• Best Practice in Teaching and Learning
• Teacher Leaders
• Mentoring and Induction
• Instructional Leadership
• Culture and Collaboration
• Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners
• Supervision and Evaluation
• Facilitator’s Handbooks
• Collections
• Other Products
• Consulting Engagements
• Case Studies
• Mentoring Resource Collection
• e-Newsletters
• Instructional Leadership Resources
• Sneak Peeks
• Teaching and Learning Resources
• Quickwrites: Boost Writing Production and Engagement
• The New Normal Using Lessons Learned to Promote 21st Century Learning
• Planning and Teaching Mini-lessons
• Tips for Promoting Student Engagement
• Tips for Recording and Using Instructional Videos
• The Writer’s Notebook
• Classroom Community Building Circles
• Classroom Meetings
• Math Fact Fluency
• Mindfulness for Students
• Becoming More Mindful
• Current Issue
• Messages from the Children
• Just ASK 2020 Opening of School Checklist
• Parents as Partners 2020
• Stop… in the Name of Learning 2.0
• Nothing Changes if Nothing Changes
• Ten Reasons Teachers Are Heroes
• Levity With Brevity – Part I
• The Best Educational Advice of 2020
• If There’s a Silver Lining
• The More the Merrier Levity with Brevity Part II
• Ten Success Stories in the Age of COVID-19
• 2021 Closing of School Where Do We Go from Here?
• The 2021 Opening of School Checklist and More
• 2020 Closing of School What Do We Do Now?
• Quips and Quotes
• Evidence-Based Interventions
• Optimizing Classroom Observations
• Educational Sound Bites
• If I Could Do It Over Again
• The Just ASK 2019 Closing of School Checklist
• Meaningful Data We Might Be Missing
• Points to Ponder – We Should Appreciate Teachers 24/7
• The Just ASK 2019 Opening of School Checklist
• The Best Management Program Is a Strong* Instructional Program
• A Few Tips from the Field – Ways to Enhance Teaching and Learning
• What’s a Principal to Do?
• Hot Topics: Words of Wisdom
• We Are The Champions!
• Meeting the Diverse Needs of Teachers
• Creating a Culture of Inquiry: A Focus on Data Teams
• The Best of 2018
• Making Rigor a Reality
• eVALU(E)ation & superVISION
• Teachers as Leaders
• Timely Tips for New Principals and Teachers
• Hiring Coachable High Performers
• Mentoring Memo
• PLC Resources

Follow Just ASK

Common Core

Creating a Culture for Learning

Best Practice in Instruction

Making Assessment a Learning Experience

Opening/Closing of School Checklist

Motivational and Thought Provoking

Volume III, Issue IV

Keys to Productive Discussions in the Math Classroom

To listen well is as powerful a means of influence as to talk well and is as essential to all true conversation.

– Chinese Proverb

A challenge faced by math educators of all levels is how to engage students in their mathematical content through rich discussion or discourse. In classrooms where there is high-quality mathematical discourse, teachers and students ask challenging and thought-provoking questions, and there is skillful facilitation of meaningful discussions focused on the mathematics. The discussions emphasize reasoning, proof, evaluation, and justification. Students learn from one another and value the thinking of their peers. The focus of the conversation is not simply the answer to the problem, but also the students’ strategies, discoveries, conjectures, and reasoning.

The third Standard for Mathematical Practice places a strong emphasis on meaningful discourse. In this standard, students are expected to construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others. Meaningful discussions in the mathematics classroom rely on purposeful instructional moves from the teacher, as well as a clear understanding of the demands that are placed on students. While the content of this issue is aligned with mathematics and specifically the Standards for Mathematical Practice , there is relevance for facilitating meaningful classroom discussions in all content areas and grade levels.

The Common Core places a strong emphasis on mathematical reasoning and deep content understanding. Creating the right conditions for these discussions and facilitating conversations that emphasize a deep study of the mathematics is a challenging task. The following keys can help teachers ensure that the discourse in their mathematics classrooms is rich and extends the learning of students. The single most important thing teachers should do to ensure the success of discussions is to ask meaningful questions and facilitate the dialogue among students. The goal in any mathematical discussion is to support the students’ in constructing viable arguments and critiquing the reasoning of others.

Keys for Preparing for the Discussion

Anticipate the strategies students might use, how they will represent their thinking, and predict students’ misconceptions. In addition to drawing on their knowledge of mathematical content, teachers must also bring to classroom discussions an understanding of their students’ prior knowledge and experiences. Once the task has been designed, the teacher must be ready to handle the different strategies that the students will propose. One way to prepare is to draft all possible student strategies, prioritize how those will be shared with the class, and anticipate places where there may be flaws in students’ thinking or misconceptions. By making these predictions in advance of the class discussion, teachers will have a clear sense of the critical “look-fors” as the students are working and an idea of how they wish to shape the classroom discussion. Undoubtedly, students will come up with strategies that the teacher has not predicted; however, teachers will be far more prepared to make sense of these approaches to problem solving when they have thought ahead about what students might bring to the experience.

For instance, consider the following problem:

Anna is collecting pennies for a school-wide penny drive. She has 357 pennies saved in the first week and 225 pennies saved in the second week. Her goal is to donate 1,000 pennies. How many more pennies will Anna need to reach her goal?

Plan questions that will guide students in answering both how they solved a problem and why they chose the solution they used. Preplanning thought-provoking questions will ensure a high level of intellectual engagement during the lesson. Including the context of the problems is essential when forming these questions. By asking students to use the context of the problem when determining their solutions, they are more likely to have solid reasoning for why they solved the problem in the way that they did. For instance, the teacher might ask:

• Why did you _____________ when the problem asked for _____________?
• What does _________ mean in terms of _________________ as it stated in the problem?
• Does this solution make sense given what the problem is asking?
• Why are we ______________ in this problem?

Decide which strategies should be prioritized when sharing with the whole class. It can be overwhelming for students to hear and understand the reasoning behind too many different strategies at once. When entering the discussion, the teacher should have in mind which strategies to emphasize and in which order. For instance, if it is a problem dealing with subtraction, the teacher may choose to emphasize the use of an unmarked number line or adding up before having discussions about adding or subtracting the same number from the minuend and subtrahend in order to create an easier problem and not change the answer.

Keys for Facilitating Discussion

Establish a safe environment where students can take risks and where there are norms for classroom discussions. In order for students to openly share their thinking and risk-making mistakes in front of their peers, it is imperative that there is a supportive classroom environment. Everyone should understand their role in the classroom through the development of classroom norms. The teacher is expected to pose thought-provoking questions, support students’ conversations, listen carefully to monitor students’ understanding and misconceptions, encourage student participation in discussions, and promote student reflection about the learning experience.

Nancy Anderson, one of the authors of the National Council of Teacher of Mathematics’ book entitled, Classroom Discussions: Using Math Talk to Help Students Learn , suggests that teachers instruct their students on the importance of and expectations for mathematical conversations at the start of the school year. She explains how talking like mathematicians can enable students to be stronger mathematical thinkers. As Anderson tells her students:

• Talking and thinking together can help all students understand math better
• It is necessary for more than one person to help solve challenging problems
• There is a great deal to be learned from listening to how other’s think
• Talking about your thinking helps you to clarify your own thoughts
• When talking about the mathematics, you practice using important math vocabulary
• You can learn a great deal about what it takes to understand the ideas of others.

Along with establishing a rationale for mathematical discussions, it is also critical to establish expectations for respectful listening. Students need to be seated where they can see and hear the speaker, and they are expected to listen actively and be prepared to respond to the ideas of others. Students are taught how to respectfully disagree and question one another. Above all, there is acceptance of all ideas and all contributions to the discussion are honored. Once the school year is under way, it is important to revisit the established norms in order to maintain the quality of conversations.

Teach students the expectations for classroom discussions. Despite efforts to establish a rationale for discussions and expectations for listening, rich discussions in mathematics do not happen by chance. The explicit teaching of how students are expected to respond and interact during a classroom discussion in mathematics is necessary. students sharing their thinking should know that their explanations require more than just a description of the strategy they used to solve a problem. Rather, students need to include some sort of visual representation, along with an explanation of how they solved the problem and why they chose to solve the problem in that way.

Students who are listening should be attentive to the thinking of others, reflect on the ideas they have heard to evaluate their efficiency, determine if they agree or disagree, if they understand the thinking of their peers, and what similarities and differences they see between their own thinking and the thinking of others. Students need to be taught how to agree and disagree and how to ask questions for clarification. Provide students with prompts to use during discussions. For instance, students might say:

• The way ______ solved the problem makes sense to me because…
• ______’s strategy was similar to mine because…
• ______’s strategy was different than mine because…
• What I don’t understand about ______’s explanation is why _______.
• I will need to hear _______ explain how _________ again.
• Why did you _____ when you were solving this problem?
• I understand how you ______, but why did you ______?

Present meaningful problems. Teachers should focus on assigning mathematical tasks that are appropriately challenging and enhance students’ learning. Mathematical tasks should investigate important mathematical ideas and have authentic contexts and relevance for students. The problems posed should have multiple solution strategies, encourage investigation, promote reasoning, and require students to provide justifications for their thinking. Ultimately, mathematical tasks should be worthy of student discussion and emphasize important mathematical concepts.

Build in opportunities for independent work and partner or small group work. In order to help students summarize and understand their thinking as well as the thinking of others, it is essential to provide opportunities for students to “turn and talk” about their ideas. For instance, after presenting a problem, students may be asked to represent or state in their own words what the problem is asking, then share that with a partner. After finding an entry point and solving a problem independently, students should share their strategies with a partner or in a group, prior to sharing with the whole class. This gives students practice constructing arguments, providing justifications, and critiquing the thinking of others. Students learn how to listen in a way that prepares them to restate their partner’s thinking in their own words, as well as listening to understand and pose questions of their partner. Partnerships ensure a higher level of accountability and student engagement than is possible with only whole class discussions.

Facilitate the sharing of strategies with the whole class. While students are engaged in discussion, it is the teacher’s role to promote students’ reasoning, ensure that multiple solutions and answers are considered, hold students accountable for sharing both how they solved a problem and why they solved it using a specific strategy, and to make sure that students are actively listening and responding to each other. Teachers can do this is through the use of meaningful questions that will support and extend students’ understanding of the reasoning of others, along with the important mathematical ideas.

The teacher should begin by collecting all students’ answers and encouraging students to think about whether or not more than one answer could be correct given the context of the problem. Then, as chosen students defend their solutions and share arguments for their strategies, the teacher ensures active listening and reflection through the use of guiding questions. For instance, the teacher might ask the student who is sharing:

• Why did you ______?
• Where did ______ come from?
• Where are the original numbers in the problem?
• How did you represent your thinking?

Questions to ask the rest of the class might be:

• Could somebody repeat what _____ has shared in their own words?
• Is _______’s reasoning reasonable? Why or why not?
• Is _______’s strategy an efficient way to solve this problem? Why or why not?
• Do you agree with ______? Why or why not?
• What do you wonder after hearing ______’s thinking?
• Can you think of a counter example? In other words, can you think of an example that would disprove an idea that has been presented?

Promote student reflection on the different strategies. A powerful instructional move after students have heard the thinking of others is to send them back to work in partners or in small groups to reflect on the arguments of others. Carefully crafted questions such as the following can help guide these discussions:

• Which strategy have you heard is the most efficient for solving this problem? Why?
• What are some similarities you have seen between the strategies being used? What are some differences?
• What new ideas did you hear today?
• What confused you?
• What strategies do you think you could try when solving future problems?

In summary, how successfully a teacher facilitates a discussion drives how mathematically rigorous the work is for students. In order for students to be successful with constructing viable arguments and critiquing the reasonableness of answers, students need ample practice solving problems in a variety of ways and defending their thinking with others. Equally important is that students know how to listen to the thinking of others, and pose questions and counter examples as a way of deepening their mathematical understanding. The success of these small and large group discussions rests on the ability of the teacher to plan thoughtfully and facilitate purposefully.

Permission is granted for reprinting and distribution of this newsletter for non-commercial use only.

Please include the following citation on all copies:

Clayton, Heather. “Keys to Productive Discussions in the Math Classroom.” Making the Common Core Come Alive! Volume III, Issue IV, 2014. Available at www.justaskpublications.com. Reproduced with permission of Just ASK Publications & Professional Development (Just ASK). ©2014 by Just ASK. All rights reserved.

• In the News
• Shipping and Handling
• Permissions
• Privacy Policy
• Manage Your Subscriptions

Just ASK Publications & Professional Development 2214 King Street, Alexandria, VA 22301 Phone: 703-535-5434 Fax: 703-535-8502

Professional Learning Services

The SRI community of knowledgeable consultants offer customized professional learning experiences that provide the skills, habits of mind, knowledge, and tools to develop core collaborative learning practices in your educational setting. Continue Reading...

Triad Protocol

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• CLEE Services
• Other Resources
• Contact CLEE

[ Placeholder content for popup link ] WordPress Download Manager - Best Download Management Plugin