How to fill 2-hour discussion sections?

[mandarin.orange]

This year I'm a TA leading discussion sections, after a two year break from any sort of teaching after my stint as a high school teacher. Thus far I've run my sections with a combination of slides w/ pics to reinforce lecture topics, discuss these ?s with small groups of peers, me leading a follow-up discussion, going over rubrics for next assignment, and video clips. However, I fear this is the same "mode" I'd used when planning the days for my HS courses. Students today in particular were drifting off or a bit passive, after they felt they'd made their 1 or 2 contributions for their participation points for the day. This may reflect a deeper-seated fear of having to be "on" for the entire 2 hour duration, which strikes me as an awful long time.

 

So, how can I be a better discussion facilitator? Or, any ideas for activities, prep, additional prep students could do (instead of 1 page pre-writing responses) that are more appropriate for college students?

[rising_star]

I would maybe vary the order more. Have you thought about chunking and the whole 8-minute attention span thing? Because maybe some of it is that you need to move between types of tasks more often. Also, perhaps instead of just having them answer discussion questions, you could give them problems to solve or work through in groups? Or any other kind of group activity really. If your library has it, Student Engagement Techniques has a lot of ideas for activities. You can quickly skim through the chapter titles to see which ones appeal to you and then read each chapter (they're like 4-7 pgs each) to see what you'd need to actually implement the activity.

[danieleWrites]

Since you have 2 hours and they seem difficult to fill, you can break them into groups and have them discuss things. They're used to you providing all the stimulation. If they don't stir themselves to do any of the heavy thinking to move the course along, they know you'll jump into the breach, usually with multi-media. In composition, I can stop myself at any time and order the glazed faces and avid texters to write something for a few minutes. Literature is a bit more difficult. I can still have them write for a few minutes on whatever, but literature classes work better with discussion rather than lecture and writing. So, it's a challenge to make it interactive, particularly when most students don't read, or skim, or use spark notes to prepare for class. I got a lot of "I can't read stuff I'm not into." Cue eye roll here. The Socratic method didn't work because, well, not enough students had read the work to talk about it in any depth, and instead they waited for me to take over the discussion again. I didn't get any pedagogy until this semester, and that's when I was introduced to Mazur.

Eric Mazur, the peer instruction pedagogist, might be able to help. Here's a sample of his interactive learning lecture. It's about 8 1/2 minutes long, but it is instructive. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wont2v_LZ1EHis If you have an hour and a half, his Confessions of a Converted Lecturer is really enlightening. It's on youtube.

I know you can't use his exact methods in your discussion section, but his learning by questioning methods can be adapted in many ways. The key that starts his interaction is that he gives them a problem, has them think about it, and then has them spend some time convincing their neighbor that they're correct. He uses clickers because he's go large lectures, but a discussion classroom can change that.

Edited October 26, 2013 by danieleWrites

[mandarin.orange]

Thank you both. I do try to vary activity now, but my morning section really drags. I stare at them for long intervals and wait for someone to speak after I pose questions...works somewhat; generally someone can't take the tension and speaks up. Will check out these resources!

[juilletmercredi]

I do what both of the other commenters suggested - I always have a group activity planned that will take up significant class time and that will get them to think about the material in a different way.  So for example, when my public health seminar had to think about interventions, I made them do a 35-minute activity that involved them getting in groups of 3 or 4 planning their own intervention that combined all of their interests.  I made up a list of questions that they had to answer about the intervention.  These were all kids taking a public health seminar because they wanted to, and doing internships, so they had that knowledge to draw upon - I would alter the assignment a bit for a class that was younger and had less experience.

 

I also try to make my students feel at ease in commenting.  First I tell them that this isn't the kind of class where I get up and talk and they just stare at me and take notes, that they are expected to talk.  I try to give them the opportunity to comment first but if they don't, I tell them that I am just going to call on them.  I usually don't have to - usually the threat of this is enough and the students would rather talk when they can think of something rather than me calling, but I do do it from time to time.  (I try to balance this out with the students' individual needs and personalities - students who I know or sense have anxiety speaking in front of groups, but who contribute in other ways - like small group discussions - I don't call on as much.  The other students don't seem to mind.)  I have also found that when students know that I'm expecting to hear from them and will call them out if I haven't, they tend to be a bit more prepared to say something.

 

But I also give them this little speech about how all knowledge is valuable and they are all coming from diverse backgrounds and theoretical orientations, and all of that is necessary in the classroom.  It's an attempt to get them to ease up and not be afraid to say something wrong.  In general, it's worked...I think?

 

The other thing I do is vary how we do our discussions.  It's an extension of the chunking rule.  Even I get bored talking about the same thing for 2 hours straight.  One example is - We spend 15 minutes doing some summary/recap/questions, then I split them into large groups (5-7 per group) to summarize different aspects of the paper/discussion (i.e. one group gets to identify all of the major players in our weekly case study; one group talks about the locations; one group talks about the organizations involved, etc.).  Maybe that takes 15 minutes, and I bring them back together to brief each other and discuss the findings and add to each other's material.  Then we spend, I don't know, 20-30 minutes discussing it as a group.  Then I split them into different small groups (3-5 people each) and give them some questions to ponder or an activity to do - like the intervention above, or writing a mini-grant proposal, or whatever.  Or one time I staged a debate between sides and the groups were larger, and they had to come up with arguments to make.  Then we come together for the last 30 minutes and discuss the activity, or have the debate, or sum up whatever it was I made them do.

 

The idea is to keep them moving around, changing the mode or method of discussion, switching gears of the topic.  It also helped the shy students - the students who are shy about speaking in front of 15 or 20 students often are more talkative in groups of 3 or 4.

[gubidal092]

Definitely break your class up into chunks: I would avoid one "chunk" of activity or instruction being longer than 15 min max. Also, I don't know if you are doing breaks in your 2 hour sessions, but you might want to consider building in a 5-10 minute break halfway through. It will help some of the students come back in focused for the last hour. 

 

Another thing I have learned (I taught a couple adult classes that were 2h 30 this summer) was to not be afraid to cold-call on students. There is no reason to wait for students to volunteer. Cold calls keep them engaged. You might have one or two students who a chronically shy or afraid to speak, and you can always make arrangements with them in particular for credit outside of class somehow (if you do that already with those students), but most will do well. The students will  figure out early on that they have to pay attention the whole time, and it also reinforces that you are leading the class. 

[lifealive]

Two-hour classes are particularly cruel. I taught them for years (well, 1 hr and 50 min twice a week, with 50 students). If it's possible, I would recommend starting off each class with a quiz or something else to get them "back into" the material that they read or reviewed for that day. This eats up 10-15 minutes at the beginning of the period and forces them to actually produce something. In my class we would then go over the quiz as a way of launching into discussion, or I'd bring the quiz up little by little throughout the discussion.

 

Group work is also good, but you have to be careful with it--i.e. don't overuse it, and try to exert some control over the formation of the groups. I would often form groups at the beginning of the semester by cutting up their names and pulling them out of a hat or something right in front of them, so they'd know it was at random. But if you let students form groups on their own, they stick with their friends (of course) or they get pulled passively into a group with whoever is around them and don't tend to get invested. But if you make them physically get up and move around and actually meet new people, then they're often forced to actually work at it. Then they get to know the people in that group and form a working relationship with them (rather than a social relationship).

 

In terms of group work--I also try to change things up with the format. Sometimes I make them put together a quick presentation and get up in front of the class. Sometimes I make them write their findings on the board. Sometimes I make them designate one person as the "recorder" who simply writes down everything people say in stream-of-consciousness fashion, and then they report back on that. I almost ALWAYS make them keep a record of what they've talked about and hand it in to me, even I don't grade it.

 

Lastly, it's okay to end class a few minutes early if you feel things have run out of steam. Better to confidently call an end to class on a good note than try to force it to keep going.

[dr. t]

Group work is also good, but you have to be careful with it--i.e. don't overuse it, and try to exert some control over the formation of the groups. I would often form groups at the beginning of the semester by cutting up their names and pulling them out of a hat or something right in front of them, so they'd know it was at random. But if you let students form groups on their own, they stick with their friends (of course) or they get pulled passively into a group with whoever is around them and don't tend to get invested. But if you make them physically get up and move around and actually meet new people, then they're often forced to actually work at it. Then they get to know the people in that group and form a working relationship with them (rather than a social relationship).

 

You! You are the person I always hated as an undergraduate! The three most terrifying words in the English language: "Everybody form groups."

 

P.S. 

 

P.P.S. Seriously though.

Edited September 22, 2014 by telkanuru

[jujubea]

I like this thread! It's making me excited to be a TA! *fingers crossed!*

It sounds challenging!