"Discussion As A Way of Teaching"

            Throughout my years as a student, I’ve been a part of many different discussions.  Stephen Brookfield’s “Discussion as A Way of Teaching” portrays various methods used by teachers to help students learn through discussion.  At first, Brookfield outlines two important things to keep in mind when discussing “discussion” as a method of teaching.  The first is that Brookfield gives his reader the definitions of critical terminology needed to understand discussion such as conversation, dialogue, and discussion.  Brookfield also provides his reader his goals or his “aims” – that is to say what he hopes his reader will take away from the reading.  The second bit of information that Brookfield gives his reader is a list of why discussions fail.  While rules in this list include “unprepared students” and “reward system askew,” as a future educator, I noticed one rule that seemed important to analyze for a more in-depth meaning: “Unrealistic expectations.”  By setting unrealistic expectations, some teachers who follow their student’s line of reason and train of thought, will understand that their students fall short of where their teachers wanted them to be.  By doing this (setting unrealistic expectations for class or group discussion) a teacher or educator has already set up their students to fail.

            In “Discussion as A Way of Teaching” there are several methods of discussion that I believe would be beneficial to my future students.  One of these methods discussed early in the reading is called “The Circle of Voices.”  I know that I’ve heard of this method of teaching before from my Survey of American Literature I class: to put it simply, students take three to five minutes to gather their thoughts and ideas together for discussion.  After this time is up, the teacher sets up students into groups as large as five.  Within their groups, one-by-one, students will go around and openly talk about their thoughts and ideas about the topic at hand.  The most important rule about this is “[D]uring the time each person is speaking no one else is allowed to interrupt.”  I know that politicians would benefit greatly from participating in that last rule, for sure.  If this method is teachable in a high school English class, I believe that it is also beneficial for future brainstorming work outside of the classroom, too.

            Something else that Brookfield discusses that I believe is helpful for his readers to understand is the thought and behind his claims for discussion.  Brookfield’s claims help his readers to see the multitudes of effectiveness to discussion as a method of teaching.  These claims include students being able to “explore a diversity of perspectives,” increase their “awareness of, and tolerance for, ambiguity or complexity,” and also “shows respect for student’s voices and experiences.”  While these claims are simple in understanding, they justify and open up the possibilities of how and why these methods are used in different classrooms.