Leading
a Good Discussion
Of course not all people like to perform in front of groups, but there
are a few things to keep in mind while planning your discussion week that
might make it more effective, smoother and even fun.
1) Start Preparing Early! Give yourself time to ACTIVELY read and
digest the assigned readings for that week, along with any supplementary
and contextualizing materials you might want to add.
- Read required readings
very carefully, take notes and cross-check the readings with any handouts.
- Check out the supplementing
links for that week on the website (further reading/films, links).
- Make sure your
understanding of the writers' arguments is well-situated in time and
space (i.e., when was he or she writing? where are they based or where
did they do fieldwork? what other theorists are they most indebted to?
What historical situations might be influencing his/her stances?).
- Sit down and ponder. This step is crucial, for out of it will come interesting and to the point discussion questions for the class. Make a time to meet with your discussion co-leader and brainstorm together. What do particular terms mean, anyway? How does their use of these terms compare with others we've read? How do we assess this argument? What are his/her sources or evidence?
2) Come up with six discussion questions for the class to post to the Course Moodle Page. To make this more than just a rote exercise, give some thought to how people read and respond to questions.
- Start Basic!
Many students will be reading about China for the first time. Devise
one or two openers that encourage people to consider the basic contexts
and structures of the arguments.
- Stay Brief!
On email people tend to tune out after a few sentences. Your questions
should be no more than 3 lines long.
- Be Specific!
Give
us some page numbers to refer to when you pose a question so that we
can directly respond to your thinking on the writer's point.
- Be a Balanced
Critic. Devise one or two questions that get people to the heart
of the article or theorists' arguments and their implications. Good
critique considers both the strong points (i.e., contributions to the
field, strong evidence, amazing logic, excellent writing) and weaknesses
(i.e., weak evidence, faulty logic, racist assumptions)