Key ideas
Core concepts
- Only one student talks at any time, and techniques for listening accountability ensure all students actively listen rather than merely wait to participate.
- Taking many answers from different students, and asking for agreement or disagreement, builds discussion from multiple perspectives.
Class discussion is structured whole-class conversation where multiple students contribute whilst all others actively listen and engage with ideas shared.
Connected to
Check for Understanding | Cold-Call | Turn and Talk | Don’t Round Up | No Opt-Out
Managing attention
Effective class discussion requires deliberate management so that all students engage with the ideas shared. Only one student should talk at any time, and no students should work ahead whilst ignoring the discussion. Regular reminders to stop and listen maintain focus.
Listening accountability needs more than one technique. Cold-Call can be used to ask students to repeat what another student said, catching those not paying attention through listening checks. Feedback should address both the student and their work, and following up with previously accountable students ensures improvement.
Building on contributions
Beyond managing attention, discussions depend on gathering and building upon multiple student contributions. Take many answers from different students, ask whether they agree or disagree with previous responses, and build on student thinking rather than immediately evaluating contributions.
When students give almost correct answers, ask the class to Turn and Talk about what could be added to complete the answer. Maintain standards by refusing to round up, pushing for precise and complete answers. Opt-out is not permitted; all students must engage with the thinking.
Running a discussion
Before discussion, ensure all students are ready to listen and participate. During it, monitor for engagement and redirect attention as needed. Afterwards, check that key points were understood across the class. Substance matters more than participation: discussions should advance mathematical understanding rather than just generate talk.
References
Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Heinemann.
Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87-114. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X01003922
Lemov, D. (2015). Teach like a champion 2.0: 62 techniques that put students on the path to college. Jossey-Bass.
Michaels, S., O’Connor, C., & Resnick, L. B. (2008). Deliberative discourse idealized and realized: Accountable talk in the classroom and in civic life. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 27(4), 283-297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-007-9071-1
Rowe, M. B. (1986). Wait time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up! Journal of Teacher Education, 37(1), 43-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248718603700110
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 261-292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5
Webb, N. M. (1991). Task-related verbal interaction and mathematics learning in small groups. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(5), 366-389. https://doi.org/10.2307/749186