Debate vs. Discussion: the trouble with classroom communication.

I don't mean to come off as a total pessimist, but I don't think that I have been in many classes where true discussion was taking place. I have experienced/witnessed debate, leading, prompting... but very infrequently have I come across a class that actually provided opportunity for true discussion--an instance of high participation, deep reflection, and connection making. I know that most of the GE classes I have taken didn't leave much room at all for discussion. Most were in lecture halls with a professor talking at the class--the center of information. Even in many of my core classes, much of the "discussion" that I have experienced is led with definite answers, or at least "right" answers. There is less room for interpretation and reader response.

I guess I am getting a bit general in that observation. I think that in an average "discussion" in class, the majority of it is teacher led. There are answers that the prof leads to and prompts for. I have even experienced profs who take a student's answer and then change the words--and at times even the ideas--around to make it mean exactly what they think it should. Other times, student and student, or professor and student get caught in a debate and fight over meaning.  No one backs down and no connections are made.  These "discussions" do nothing for building meaning and aren't discussion.  They shut off the purpose of learning.  There is no growth.  One person wins, the other loses, and ultimately one idea is determined as right.  But, even when these things are happening, I think there are still flickers of true discussion. Moments where individuals tune into the deeper thread of the conversation and start to weave a blanket of meaning that brings together perspectives, influences, ideas, and alternate opinions. At these moments, student and professor work together to create meaning that connects each individual and his/her experiences to a possible meaning. Yes, the meaning is unique and possibly alternative, but it still aligns with academic interpretation and is backed by the text/anecdotes/knowledge being discussed. (I am not saying this critique applies to all classes.  I have had those that had true discussion often.  And I think I gained the most in those classes)

I think that as a future teacher I am going to have to teach my students how to have true discussion. I know that there isn't a single instance where I can remember someone teaching me how to really listen and make connections between what I hear, what I feel, what I know, what I have read, and what I learn. These things are all important and through listening, an individual can gain insight into a concept that she/he may never have considered before. Also, through talking about these concepts and the new knowledge that has arisen, students can make connections and help to build meaning through combined perspectives.

I think that the reading that really pulled this idea out for me was the Speaking to Think/Thinking to Speak reading. I got so much from this piece (mostly because it informed my rationale) but also because it really drew out some of the ideas I have been percolating. I know that some of this teaching will be informal and will just be process based—I’ll simply throw students into a situation where they have to experience the roles and expectations. However, I feel that this is almost tricking them into an experience they may not really gain from. Therefore, I would also prep students for discussion by asking them to record thoughts and questions and then after with reflective writing on what they have gained and how their thinking has changed through the use of discussion. I wouldn’t use this method with every discussion, but I do think it would be useful to implement occasionally to enforce the purpose and goals of discussion.