Class Discussion Teaching Strategy

There was a point in my career where I walked away from class discussions. The large-group conversations didn’t achieve what I wanted: all students included and conversing without my mediation. In small groups, students were more likely to participate, but they still avoided authentic conversation, just sharing round-robin style without any actual discourse. I began to wonder what the point of letting them talk was. It seemed like a waste of time compared to teaching reading and writing.

Then I learned that class discussion IS teaching reading and writing. 

What is Academic Discussion?

The Common Core for English Language Arts (ELA) includes three key shifts for ELA instruction. Two of these have direct implications for discussion.

Regular practice with complex texts and their academic language.

Practicing with complex texts and their academic language can take the form of reading and writing, but it cannot be done without speaking and listening, as people’s oral vocabulary is typically larger than their print vocabulary. In order to internalize academic language, students need to manipulate it in a variety of ways. This includes

• Reading 
• Language instruction
• Answering discussion questions that contain the language
• Using the language in those discussions
• Writing

All of these forms are necessary for deep knowledge and understanding of key academic concepts and language. This intentional building of vocabulary supports comprehension and fluency. It also helps students wield “the language of power” as their own. This language can still take many forms (a topic I’ll save for another post), but we all know the feeling of entering a conversation where we don’t know the language (e.g. walking up to a group of golfers, gamers, or dare I say, teachers). Domain language, and in the case of a school, academic domain, cannot be dismissed as unnecessary complexity. The learning is in the complexity.

Reading, writing, and speaking grounded in evidence from texts, both literary and informational.

For this shift, the demand is stated directly, that students must speak using evidence. This can be done through speeches, but a daily, practice-focused form of this is discussion. There are so many benefits to centering discussions on evidence.

1. It’s an authentic activity that can promote better relationships. How many times do we, in navigating understanding with another person, go back to the evidence to prove our points? Hopefully a lot! it is a great practice in using a “third point.” Not understanding a friend or family member? Find something outside of you both (in this case, a text) to consult to diffuse conflict and create a sense of collaborative meaning-making. 
2. Going back to the evidence requires micro-rereadings that build fluency and comprehension. Asking questions that demand re-readings gets less resistance from students than “hey, read this whole thing again.” It is reading with a purpose, especially if the questions are interesting and debatable. I often put parts of the text in the question, so even the students who resist using the text must use it. Ha!
3. Grounding discussions in evidence provides a platform for all students to participate. If the discussion is not grounded in this way, only those with the privilege of certain background knowledge may feel entitled to participate. 
4. Discussion allows me to take up less space in the classroom while providing a structure for students to learn with and from each other. Much of my greatest teaching comes from students examining the evidence without any verbal interjections from me. Sometimes they’ll call me over, and we can engage in a conversation, but it is as a thought partner rather than an expert.

Evaluating an Academic Discussion

In short, academic discussion is rooted in academic language and textual evidence. The actions of academic discussion are also stated in the Common Core. 

SL.1 Prepare for and participate effectively in a range of conversations and collaborations with diverse partners, building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively.

I have a set of checklists for grades seven, eight, nine/ten, and eleven/twelve that address the sub-points given at each grade-level for SL.1. They include teacher evaluations, as well as self and peer checklists, alongside sentence frames for instruction and support.

Class Discussion Formats

There are many ways to facilitate discussions. Here are some of my tried-and-true favorites.

Large-Group Discussion

• Kahoot. This form is a little bit closed, because you have to have multiple-choice answers, but if the questions are a little controversial, the room will be energized after each “right” answer is announced. Let the students defend their “wrong” answers using evidence from the text after each question. Students who may not typically like the formal large-group circle may have no problem piping up with Kahoot points on the line.
• PearDeck. This is great if you have a really quiet class because students participate through writing. They can also participate through polls, moving dots, underlining evidence, and multiple choice. You can display students’ answers anonymously for discussion (but you know who posted what, just in case).
• PopUp Debate: This Dave Stuart Jr. gem is best for questions that have an evidence base but require inferring. It is a great introduction for confident public speaking too. The duration is so short that I have not had much trouble with students being willing to participate. In this form, students stand one at a time and say their answer (with text evidence). I like to add 
• Socratic Seminar (Triad Formation). In this version from AVID, one-third of the class discusses questions. Each person is assigned two co-pilots that sit behind them. At certain points in the discussion, the person checks in with their co-pilots for feedback/input. In the version that I got from a colleague, one of the co-pilots is rating the student on discussion using a checklist and the other student is on a backchannel chat with me. 

Small-Group Discussion

• I love the Kagan strategy, Fan and Pick. If you put the questions you want students to discuss on individual cards, you create a more structured way to get all students involved. It’s set for groups of four, but it can work for groups of three by combining two roles. In this strategy, each student has a role that rotates. 
  • Student 1 fans a deck of discussion cards. 
  • Student 2 picks one and reads it to student 3 (the students 1 and 2 roles could be combined).
  • Student 3 answers the question.
  • Student 4 finds evidence from the text to support or fact-check the answer.
  • Roles rotate. Try experimenting with the roles. Maybe there is a card reader, answerer, text supporter,  and a final role that has to clarify, question or disagree with, or otherwise respond to the answer so there’s a little more interaction happening.

• Threaded discussions. If you have a quieter class or you want students to practice writing in short spurts, give each student in a group a different question to write at the top of their paper. They write their answers and rotate papers, with each student adding (e.g. evidence, question, summarize, modify, disagree). You could do this via discussion posts on an LMS, but I like getting students off the computer sometimes, plus it helps me make sure they are on task.
• Timed essay prep. I end each unit with a timed essay about the text, and the day before I have students work together to prepare graphic organizers. Students are still responsible for their own essay, but collectivism is so important to me. Learning does not happen alone in a vacuum.
• Challenges. I love emphasizing cooperative styles, but there’s no denying my students like to compete with one another. One of my hallmarks is silly competitions. I’ve talked before about using small-group relay writing, which inherently involves talk. I also did a no-prompt challenge with a group of reluctant discussers. The group that kept discussing the longest without needing a prompt from me won.

Flexible Size

• Yes, And. I am an improv coach, and I love making up games for my students, which I also pull into the classroom. Yes, And is typically played by having one person tell a sentence of a story. The next person must say, “yes, and,” and build on the story. It goes on until the story reaches a natural end. This concept can be taken with discussion too. Start with a discussion question. The first student answers the question. Additional students must “yes, and” by giving quotes from the text, more explanation, or making additional connections or modifications. If the student thinks the answer is done, they can end the game by summarizing what everyone said.
• Circle. In Classroom meetings: Your most powerful tool for creating a respectful, inclusive class culture, I detail how to use meetings to build classroom communities. On the podcast, Angela asks me about using them for academic purposes, which you can totally do (and which further legitimizes the use of circles for community-based problem-solving and restorative practices). The blog post describes the structure of a circle. In an academic circle, the questions are what you want students to discuss. This can be done whole-class or in a small group.

Why Do Teachers Ask Questions?

All of these suggestions operate on the assumption that questions will be provided for students. These provided questions are more than just a low-level pitstop on the way to the ultimate goal of students asking their own questions. When used well, the questions are the teacher. 

In this video, I show how I use scaffolded questioning to prepare students for independent writing.

My questions are never a “gotcha.” They are asked to normalize the confusing parts of the text and address them head-on. They are asked to help students notice and internalize key evidence for independent thought. These practices build students’ confidence as scholars and cohesive understanding of a new text.

Teaching Students to Ask Questions Instead of Answering Them

In a longer text, students have more time to get their “sea legs” with the language, syntax, and ideas. These texts are the perfect opportunity to turn over question-generation to them. 

Oftentimes, we ask students to write different levels of questions, but I have found their questions so scattered that they don’t help anyone really make meaning or enjoy the text more. Instead, I give the students the prompt that will serve as the day’s exit slip. If this is what they need to know, then they should be reverse-engineering questions that will lead them to that answer. Then, we talk through the questions that would help them answer that prompt. I may assign or let them choose from the kinds listed below, based on what I think the text will demand or where their interests lie. Here are sample definitions and question frames for students.

For Socratic Seminars, which I do over larger chunks of a book, I like having everyone brainstorm as many synthesis or interesting questions as they can and submit their best one to a Google form. Then, students vote on the ones they want to discuss. The top nine vote-getters I have them brainstorm answers to (with text evidence) as preparation for the Socratic Seminar, which they do the next day. They can prepare together or individually.

What Discussion Everyday Does

Imagine that students discuss everyday for 175 (or so) days. They practice listening, building a coherent point-of-view, and co-constructing meaning. Of the four moves every literacy lesson plan needs, this is the one that gives me the most hope for democracy. These skills, which are the foundation of every fulfilling family, workplace, and society are necessary for our survival. Freed reading for all cannot happen without community. To bring these experiences into class each day, check out my FREE guide to the four moves every literacy lesson plan needs.