Hot Seat Two

Posted on November 13, 2019 by Elizabeth Chaponot

How do you have a successful whole class discussion with 30+
students? The secret is to keep them moving and, of course, having a killer
topic to discuss. The latest format I have found that works well combines the
fishbowl, jigsaw, and Socratic discussion. I call this one Hot Seat Two. I have
already written about my hot seat discussions, thus the “two.”

For this discussion I started with the topic, “Is there a
natural law or a divine law that dictates the predominance of one group of
people over another?” In U.S. History we explore such topics while studying the
Gilded Age.

To prepare for the discussion each student must use two
sources and find at least five relevant and unique quotes from each source. My
students are in teams of five to six students. No member of a team allowed to
use sources chosen by any other team member. When all research is completed,
team resources are combined for a total of at least ten sources and fifty
quotes. The team members then share and discuss their individual work and share
their ideas about how the information might help answer the essential question.

On the day of the discussion desks are arranged in a big
circle like a fishbowl with all team members side by side, but with only one
seat in the inner circle for each team. Team members in the inner circle are
each given two opportunities in a random jigsaw manner to present two arguments
supported by evidence, or to respond to another student with more or
conflicting evidence. No one has to speak, and the discussion order is random.
Students did get points for speaking and none for silence. As soon as the round
is over, another teammate takes the hot seat and the discussion continues.
Between discussion sessions I give about a minute for team members to discuss
what the next speaker might wish to contribute. These team discussions are
short but animated.

Each round goes quickly, about five minutes. I have each new
speaker come from the right hand seat
from the team’s outer circle and have everyone move over one seat to the right.
This, and the one minute reviews, relieves the boredom of sitting for a long
time. The standing and sitting actually encourage team discussion. Short
sessions and moving around keep the discussion fresh and lively. In a long
block everyone gets to join the discussion at least twice, and everyone stays
engaged.

Here are a few typical responses from students’ Friday
Feedback.

“The thing I liked the most is that everyone got an
opportunity to speak during the discussion and no one dominated.”

“Everyone brought up important subjects that we found on our
own and the discussion was productive.”

“I liked hearing everybody’s different perspectives and
gaining new ideas from them. I liked that I was able to have more perspectives
because of this discussion.”

“Whenever I had something to add but wasn’t in the hot seat
I couldn’t. I suggest adding an empty hot seat to the circle that anyone can
jump in.”

“I don’t like class discussions because I’m shy but I think
it worked really well.”

The only negative responses were about not having enough
time to talk more. I think the key factor for the positive responses was the
movement. Complaints in past discussions involved too much sitting and
disengagement through lack of participation. Being able to move and talk about
ideas between each round of discussion keeps the blood flowing and makes
everyone feel more involved. Try a Hot Seat Two and see if it works well for
you.

Hot Seat Discussions

Posted on November 14, 2017 by Elizabeth Chaponot

One challenge to a good class discussion is full participation. One solution is the “hot seat” discussion. Physically I have each team of 5 to 6 students arrange their desks into a horseshoe shape. One desk goes in the middle of the horseshoe facing the center of the room. This usually results in four to five groups facing the center of the room.

I set up this discussion two ways. In the first I keep one speaker in the hot seat throughout the discussion. Whenever team members have information or questions for the discussion they write them down and pass them to the team speaker. I collect the papers at the end of the discussion. Messages can also be passed with blog postings. This type of hot seat discussion works best with broad based questions that allow the discussion to move to a variety of topics.

Let’s say the discussion is about the general topic such as
free speech. This discussion might go in a variety of directions. The designated speaker knows what information his/her group has on the topic but has not delved down into all aspects. When a backup member has specific information from the areas they have studied, it is time for that team member to pass this information on to the speaker. The backup members can also check the Internet when other teams provide information or arguments that are unfamiliar to the team.

Another discussion might look into specific free speech topics such as the freedom to demonstrate, the freedom to expose classified information, or the freedom to espouse unpopular opinions. In such a discussion each group member can take turns in the hot seat as each topic comes up for discussion.

In either format it is easy for the teacher to determine both the depth of knowledge each team brings to the discussion and also the depth of knowledge each team member brings to the discussion.

When discussions become heated I like to take short breaks for team members to discuss the topic among themselves before returning to the general discussion. This a a great way to dissipate energy and to bring depth to the discussion.

Try out the “hot seat” method. It is effective and student responses have been very positive.

Lectures, lessons, and student-centered learning

Posted on November 13, 2017 by Elizabeth Chaponot

I think, in hindsight, I performed a
little educational research last week in my classroom. Nothing groundbreaking,
by any means. Nothing new … not even to me. I heard about all of this last year
in my Ed Psych class and throughout my teacher credentialing program. (You
remember constructivism? Piaget, Vygotsky, and friends?) And I know the concept
is all around us as we design the new STEAM center and the future of
Carondelet.

But for me, last week was valuable
because I experienced a tangible reminder that what they say is true:
student-centered learning is more effective than teacher-centered. I believed
it in theory; I even believed it in isolated experiences. In fact, every time I
plan my lesson to be student-centered, I see the rewards. Here are some
isolated examples:

For our freshmen, Kate Cutright and
I planned a round-robin sort of discussion for student groups to rotate to
different tables in order to discuss seven different prompts. Within the
groups, there were four rotating roles to be sure that every student would
participate. Another student-led project I conducted this year was a
problem-solving exercise in teams, where students had to choose from a
selection of picture books to find examples of literary devices. Each book
could only be used once, and not every book contained an example of every
device. In both of these examples, the bulk of my teaching was in the preparation;
on lesson day, students guided themselves through their own learning, and they
were actively engaged.

However, the reality is that I’m not
always prepared. There are times when I choose to grade papers, or catch up on
the reading assignment, or enter grades, or email parents, or maybe spend time
with my family, so I don’t front-load the lesson. I find myself wanting to convey
some important ideas, I have 45 minutes or less to do so, and I slip into a
teacher-centered model.

Last Monday was one of those days.
Over the weekend, I had read the two chapters of Jane Eyre assigned to my sophomores. Gosh, I love this book. It’s
an important book. I dutifully annotated those two chapters and figured that I
should prepare some notes so that we could have a class discussion on the reading,
in case anyone came with questions. I noticed some key passages I wanted to be
sure to point out. Monday morning, no one had any questions. Come to think of
it, they were fairly expression-less. I slipped into what’s familiar from my
college English major days: I asked students to take notes, and I pointed out
all of those key passages. I asked some questions. The usual star students
raised their hands. By the end, not everyone had been involved. I wasn’t
exactly sure how many students took notes or tuned me out. That was first
period. During fourth period, I tried something slightly different. I shared
some personal stories about my experience in college lecture halls. I told my
students about how I saved all of my notes from college and now use those notes
to help me be a better teacher (ha!). And then I proceeded with the lecture.

I am being hard on myself; I tend to
self-evaluate and see the worst. Let’s look at the positives of Monday’s lesson.
Okay … I felt a connection with my students, and I could see some genuine
interest out there in the hazy lecture hall of Room 27. I think I saw some
students realize how important it is for Jane and Mr. Rochester to establish
mutual respect despite their class differences. Monday’s lesson hopefully
conveyed my enthusiasm for the material; and I think it’s important for
students to witness that fire in the teacher if they are going to buy in. And hopefully,
I shed light on a difficult text for some of the struggling students. Hopefully,
I modeled close reading for a deeper understanding. But most of this was about
me.

I went to lunch feeling disappointed
in myself. All right. I know I can do better, and it just so happened that I
had already planned for a student-centered discussion on block day, thanks to
Lisa Xavier, who had shared with me about hers the last week. I chose three
relevant topics and divided the class into three groups. Each student needed to
find a quote from Jane Eyre based on
her topic, and she needed to write some analysis on that and come ready for the
discussion.

Block day gave my students a chance
to shine. As each group discussed their topic in fishbowl style, I stayed
quiet, took notes, and marveled at their insights and enthusiasm. I could feel
the energy in the room. Each student participated multiple times. During the
debrief session, the “audience” on the outside provided constructive,
thoughtful, feedback to the group in the fishbowl. I told them I was so, so proud;
and I could see they were proud of themselves. One of my students who sometimes
falls asleep in class was a rock star self-appointed facilitator and received a
lot of positive reinforcement from the class. Another struggler told me it was
fun and she wants to do it again. For homework, every student is writing a
self-reflection about her contribution to the discussion. Jane Eyre is a challenging text, and it was gratifying to listen to
my students analyze it, to share their opinions, and to make connections and
predictions.

This is not rocket science. I’ve
conducted fishbowls and Socratic seminars in the past, also with positive
feedback from students. Like I said, I have experience with student-centered
learning, and I was convinced about it intellectually a long time ago. It’s
just that this week, I saw the contrast between
Monday and block day. Same novel, completely different energy in the classroom.
So, that’s my little retrospective experiment. Not even intended; it just
happened and I noticed the difference. It won’t be published in the latest journal.
But here’s the value: I wasn’t told about it; I learned by experience–and
isn’t that better than learning from a textbook or lecture?

Carondelet Professional Blog

Reflections from our community

Category Archives: discussions

Lectures, lessons, and student-centered learning