Structures for small groups reporting out to whole group (Protocols Part 4)

As I've mentioned before in this blog, I like to use small group activities in my courses, both on-campus and online. In my June 27, 2007 post, I described a few common reporting out structures that I use in the classroom. Below I describe the adjusted versions of those structures, used to help avoid boring report outs in online courses. These strategies – Rotating Threads (modified from Rotating Stations), Snowballing Threads, and Jigsaw Threads – involve students in small group discussions, while allowing for the benefits of reporting out in different ways than posting and reading summaries.

Note: The descriptions below assume the use of asynchronous threaded discussion forums, but you can use these same structures for synchronous discussions using chatrooms instead of forums. Especially consider using these structures synchronously when you have limited time.

Rotating Threads

1. Set up threaded discussion forums, with a different provocative issue to discuss in each forum.
   
2. In groups of 4-5, have students rotate to a new forum. In terms of timing, you could have each group spend one day in a forum – e.g., Forum A on Monday, Forum B on Tuesday, and so on.
   
3. Have each group record their ideas about the issue in the forum.
   
4. Once groups have rotated to each forum, give students time to revisit all of the forums to see what other groups posted.
   

Snowballing Threads

1. Discussion starts with small group discussions, with each small group having their own discussion forum.
   
2. After designated amount of time, each small group joins with another group in a new forum.
   
3. After designated amount of time, each larger group joins with another group in a new forum, and so on, until the whole group comes together into the same forum.
   

Jigsaw Threads

1. Groups of 4-5 students become experts on a particular issue/topic. Each group of experts has their own discussion forum to work in as they develop their expertise. Depending on the topic, and level of desired depth of expertise, this could take one week.
   
2. Form new groups. Each new group includes an expert from one of the original groups. These new groups have their own discussion forum.
   
3. Experts lead new group in an online discussion on their area of expertise. Again, depending on the topic and desired depth, each expert could lead a discussion over one day to one week.
   

Related posts in this blog:
Discussion ground rules
Don’t jump into discussions
Engaging quieter online students
Small groups reporting out to the large group?
Karma (or inspiration) points for discussion assessment
Beyond debates and conversational roles (Protocols Part 1)
Structures for asynchronous online discussions (Protocols Part 2)
Structures for synchronous online discussions (Protocols Part 3)

Don't jump into discussions

As the facilitator/instructor, don't jump in immediately. As soon as you start contributing to the discussion, it has the potential of shutting down ideas -- students are less like to share alternative viewpoints.

In my online courses, for example, if students start a discussion on Monday, I will wait until Thursday to post (and I make sure students know this is my plan so they don't think I have disappeared and am not monitoring). This allows the students to post their original position without being swayed by me. I monitor the discussion, even though I don't post, during those first few days to get a sense of who is participating, where the discussion is going, what themes are emerging, what misconceptions need addressing, and so on. Then, on Thursday, I post to threads of discussion instead of to every individual student post. This shows students that I am attending to all of their comments, even though I do not have a 1-to-1 ratio of post/response interactions.

Related posts in this blog:
Discussion ground rules
Engaging quieter online students
Small groups reporting out to the large group?
Karma (or inspiration) points for discussion assessment
Beyond debates and conversational roles (Protocols Part 1)
Structures for asynchronous online discussions (Protocols Part 2)
Structures for synchronous online discussions (Protocols Part 3)
Structures for small groups reporting out to whole group (Protocols Part 4)

Structures for synchronous online discussions (Protocols Part 3)

I'm just starting to use more synchronous discussion tools in my online courses. Besides the fact that the tools have improved and students (and I) have easier access to them, I found inspiration in Brookfield and Preskill's book (Discussion as a way of teaching, 1999) to help me think about some strategies for synchronous discussions.

Here are two ways to structure synchronous online discussions, modified from Brookfield and Preskill, that I particularly like.

Chatroom of Voices
(Modified from Brookfield & Preskill’s Circle of Voices protocol)

Steps:

1. Form students into groups of 4-5, and set up a chatroom for each group.


2. Post a question, a passage, etc. that focuses the chat.


3. After students have a few minutes of quiet time to organize their thoughts (or you can ask students to prepare in advance of joining the chat), each student in the group then has 3 minutes of uninterrupted time to respond (this can be done sequentially, or in whatever order, as long as everyone writes for 3 minutes). Modification: Each student must begin by paraphrasing the comments of the previous student, and must strive to show how his or her postings relate to the comments of the previous student.


4. After everyone in the chatroom has had their 3 minutes, the discussion is opened up with the following ground rule: Students are allowed to contribute to the chat only about other people’s ideas, not expand on their own ideas (unless asked a direct question).

Chatroom Full of Quotes
(Modified from Brookfield & Preskill’s Hatful of Quotes protocol)

Steps:

1. 1. Set up a chatroom for use with groups of 10-20 students.


2. Prepare 5-6 sentences/passages/quotes from the text. Assign each student a number based on the number of quotes you have (e.g., if you have 6 quotes, assign students a number from 1 to 6).


3. Share the quotes and explain that students assigned #1 will respond to quote #1 and so on.


4. Give students a few minutes to organize their thoughts about the quote.
   


5. Call on each student (randomly, by alphabetical order or by entry into the chatroom) to share the quote and comment on it.


6. Each student has 1-2 minutes to respond in the chatroom.


7. Once you have called on all students to participate in the chat, you may want to have them write and post a 250-word summary describing the content of the chat session.

Note: What is interesting about this activity is that since there are only 5-6 quotes that students are reacting to, that they get to read others’ views about the quote they posted on (or will post on).

Related posts in this blog:
Discussion ground rules
Don’t jump into discussions
Engaging quieter online students
Small groups reporting out to the large group?
Karma (or inspiration) points for discussion assessment
Beyond debates and conversational roles (Protocols Part 1)
Structures for asynchronous online discussions (Protocols Part 2)
Structures for small groups reporting out to whole group (Protocols Part 4)