Students lead/facilitate small group discussions, taking ownership of their own knowledge and directing the transition of participation in the learning conversation between other students.
This technique can be used at the beginning of class to help students review their assigned homework, share understanding with other students, and prepare for the following class learning activities.
Having students facilitate small group discussions capitalizes on the importance they see of completing the task well. This importance can stem from a personal belief they can/should do well, the understanding that the task is important educationally (in the current course or others), or that completing the process well is related to success in longer-term professional tasks or choices. (This is the attainment value component of expectancy-value theory.)
Student-led small group discussions often include the assignment of a reading (or other media). It is helpful if students receive, prior to reading, a response worksheet/question set to help focus their critical thinking about the reading, while they are reading. The use of the reading tool also prepares students to successfully facilitate the discussion. Various classroom formats can be used for the discussion itself, one of which has the facilitating student leading by sharing one-two important items from their graphic organizer/response worksheet, fielding 1-2 questions, then facilitating the transitions between other student participants and the sharing of asking/responding to questions. The facilitator has the responsibility for directing the learning conversation.
Effective Student-led Discussions: Edutopia
Facilitating Student-led Discussions: Instructional Moves, Harvard Graduate School of Education
Student-led Discussions that Really Work: Society for the Teaching of Psychology
Personal Experience
To be effective, social workers must have well-developed communication skills. Additionally, social workers must develop the ability to continuously reflect, in the moment, on how successful their communication is. Student facilitation of discussion/seminar groups contributes to both components of student growth. During the course Advanced Social Work Practice II, taken by students in their final semester of the MSW program, students have several opportunities to lead or co-lead small discussion groups.
To prepare for discussions, students are assigned one of two articles to read and complete a written reading reflection submitted prior to class. The reading reflection prepares students to successfully facilitate discussion by clarifying their own learning from the article and the learning processes they used; it does not need to be submitted in paragraph form-bullets work well. Reading reflections include: 2+ pertinent pieces of knowledge to share from the article, 2+ things students were thinking about the content as they read, 2+ additional sources of knowledge they drew upon when thinking critically, and responses to two questions pertinent to the week’s topic (often exploring the relationship of the content to their practicum placement and professional decision-making informed by their cognitive/affective processes).
Students work initially in two-person teams, both members having read the same article. Students share their reading reflections and co-select 4+ key concepts to share with those who read the other article. Next, groups of four students begin working together (2 having read each article). One article at a time is presented with those not responsible for presenting crafting 3 questions to ask the presenters. Groups are not static through the semester; this provides the opportunity for them to learn with, and from, multiple students who may have understanding and insight different from their own. I do maintain a list of who has stepped forward to lead and who need to be provided that opportunity.
When all students are familiar with the content of both readings, I pose 1-2 questions designed to link the academic readings to the students’ practicum placements. These questions are initially addressed in the groups of four and then the entire class reconvenes for any needed large group analysis.
Reference List
Apat, H. C. M., Sarias, K. J. M., Tomarong, M. T., & Bacatan, J. R. (2023). The influence of oral communication on the learning engagement of students. Canadian Journal of Language & Literature Studies, 3(4), 44–58. https://doi.org/10.53103/cjlls.v3i4.104
Emmanuel Manalo. (2020). Deeper learning, dialogic learning, and critical thinking: Research-based strategies for the classroom. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429323058
Hefel, S. (2021). Impact of student-led discussions on student engagement and involvement. (Doctoral dissertation). https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/6710
McMullen, V. B. (2014). Using student-led seminars and conceptual workshops to increase student participation. College Teaching, 62 (2), 62-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2014.885876
Rosenzweig, E. Q., Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2022). Beyond utility value interventions: The why, when, and how for next steps in expectancy-value intervention research. Educational Psychologist, 57(1), 11–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1984242
Schmidt, L. C., & Graziano, J. (2016). Building Synergy for High-Impact Educational Initiatives: First-Year Seminars and Learning Communities. National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience.
Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C., Knight, J. K., Guild, N., & Su, T. T. (2009). Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance on In-Class Concept Questions. Science, 323(5910), 122–124. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165919
Turk, J. K. (2023). Literature circles promote accountability and student engagement with assigned reading in a soil science class. Natural Sciences Education, 52(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/nse2.20103
Vanhorn, S., Ward, S. M., Weismann, K. M., Crandall, H., Reule, J., & Leonard, R. (2019). Exploring active learning theories, practices, and contexts. Communication Research Trends, 38(3), 5–25.
Yilmaz, K. (2008). Constructivism: Its theoretical underpinnings, variations, and implications for classroom instruction. Educational Horizons, 86(3), 161–172. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42923724