1. Strategies for Engaging Students in Civil Discourse Seminars and Deliberations

2. Why Lead Students from “Idiocy to Citizenship” F F Helps students understand the value of public interest versus personal interest F F Promotes appreciation of diversity in ideas F F Teaches Perspective-taking F F Promotes Moral Development F F Promotes better understanding of academic content F F Makes connections to life outside of school

3. Forms of Discussion F F Cognitive-Moral Dilemma Discussions (Kohlberg, 1971) F F Seminars and Deliberations (Parker, 2003) – –Structured Academic Controversy (Johnson and Johnson, 1995; Larson, 1996) – –Socratic Seminar (Adler, 1982)

4. Source Parker, Walter C. (2003). Teaching Democracy: Unity and Diversity in Public Life. New York: Teachers College Press

5. Socratic Seminar F F Purpose: enlarged understanding of the ideas, issues, and values in or prompted by the “text” F F Text Can come in different forms: – –historical novel – –primary source document – –Essay – – photo – –Film – –Play – –painting

6. Selecting a powerful text F F One that arouses discussants intellectually and morally F F Disagreements about meaning broaden horizons as a shared meaning is constructed F F Typically deal with text excerpts (4-5 pages) which leads to more intensive work over a smaller ground.

7. Preparing to lead a seminar: classroom management decisions F F Arrangement of students – –Whole-class – –Fish bowl – –Microseminars F F How to hold students accountable for completing the reading? F F Is participation in the seminar required and graded?

8. Preparing to lead a seminar: classroom management decisions F F What norms will be posted – –Don’t raise hands – –Listen to and build on the comments of others – –Invite others into the discussion – –Support opinions by referring to passages in the text – –Tie your knowledge of the struggle for civil rights into your interpretation of King’s letter. F F Teaching students how to challenge or seek clarification from one another – –“I have a different opinion” – –“I disagree, let me explain”

9. Preparing to lead a seminar: the opening question F F Most important part of seminar facilitation F F Should be interpretative not factual or evaluative F F Is concerned with the meaning of the ideas, issues, and values in a text. F F Other questions (e.g., evaluative) can be used later.

11. Debriefing a Seminar F F Did we achieve the “purpose” F F Ask for each participant to make an observation about the seminar F F Problems that can be addressed immediately or in the next seminar should be clearly identified and addressed. F F Students could be asked to write a follow-up essay expanding on their original understanding.

12. Deliberative Discussion F F Purpose: Deciding on a plan of action to solve a problem F F Central Activity: – –Clarifying the problem – –Considering Alternatives F F Opening Question: What should we do about this? F F Some overlap with Seminars but the purposes and emphases are distinct

13. During a Discussion of a Controversial Issue Am I listening to what other people are saying or am I missing important points? Am I making claims clearly and supporting them with facts? Am I critiquiting ideas not individuals and being respectful of other’s viewpoints? Am I helping to develop a shared understanding of the problem or issue

14. During a Discussion of a Controversial Issue Provide an overview of the controversy: pro and con Assign students evenly into pro or con position and groups of four (with a pair representing each position) In pairs of similar position discuss best reasons for support (or not) Reassign students into pairs of opposing positions and explore best reasons for support (or not) Invite students to establish their own position and hold large class discussion Write a dialogic essay reflecting on the controversy

15. 5 Conditions for Ideal Deliberation 1. 1. Students are engaged in integrated decision-making discussions that involve genuine value conflicts that arise out of relating to one another at school 2. 2. Discussion group is diverse enough that students have the benefit of reasoning and social perspectives different from their own. 3. 3. The discussion group is free of domination -- gross or subtle 4. 4. The discussion leader is skilled at comprehending and presenting reasoning and perspectives that are missing, countering conventional ideas with critical thinking, and advocating position that are inarticulate or being drummed out of consideration 5. 5. Discussions are dialogic Source: Parker, Walter (2005). Teaching against idiocy. Phi Delta Kappan. January

16. Bibliography   Adler, M. (1982). The paideia proposal. New York: McMillian   Kohlberg, L. & Turiel, E. (1971). Moral development and moral education. In G. Lesser, ed. Psychology and educational practice. Scott Foresman.   Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Creative controversy: Intellectual challenge in the classroom (3rd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.   Parker, Walter C.(2003). Teaching Democracy: Unity and Diversity in Public Life. New York: Teachers College Press.

17. Resources F For Discussion Strategies –Kohlberg’s Cognitive-Moral Development http://tigger.uic.edu/~lnucci/MoralEd/ – –Deliberation: Structured Academic Controversy http://www.cooplearn.org/pages/academic.html –Seminars: Socratic Seminar http://www.studyguide.org/socratic_seminar.htm   Sources for Powerful Texts – –Zinn, Howard and Anthony Arnove (2004). Voices of the American People. Seven Stories Press: New York. – –Ravitch, Diane. (1990). The American Reader. Harper Collins: New York   Sources for films, books and other materials – –http://socialstudies.com/