Whenever I have introduced a class debate to my students, there are two standard audible reactions: the low, drawn-out “Yeeeeeesssss” and the equally drawn-out, but more defeated-sounding, grown.
“I’m going to win!”
“This is going to turn into a fight”
“I want to be on her side. She’s good at arguing with people.”
But I don’t want anyone to argue. Sure, they’ll have to make and defend an argument, but I don’t want a classroom brawl. And this label of “debate” always seems to prepare them for one. As much as debates feel more like fights in the current political climate, it is NOT the type of civic discourse we want to foster in our classrooms.
After reading The Political Classroom by Diana Hess and Paula McAvoy, I began to think a bit more about labeling a classroom exercise as a “debate.”
There are a lot of words we use to describe the exercises that require our students to engage in discourse. Though teachers sometimes use them synonymously, the particular words we use frame the overall way students will approach it. Four such activity labels—conversation, discussion, deliberation, and debate— reflect different frameworks for having students talk to each other, each with different implications.
So, what do they each mean in practice? Below, I’ve provided my definition for each, along with the corresponding purposes and outcomes. These are, by no means, definitive, but rather a particular way to provide a framework for students.
Conversation: I see conversations as a more casual way to share ideas, learn from each other, but not convince anyone of anything. If done at the beginning of an inquiry, it can establish initial thoughts and/or opinions on a particular topic – the baseline.
- Purpose:
- Determine opinion/beliefs
- Get students talking
- Establish a baseline
- Low stakes way to share information from initial knowledge base
- Not meant to convince
- Outcome:
- Share information/ideas
- Make student comfortable talking with each other
Discussion: Discussions are a small step away from conversations. The main difference is the knowledge base from which students are pulling. Much like a conversation, students are learning from each other instead of convincing them of anything. However, there should be some information gathering prior to a discussion—i.e. reading a short article or from the inquiry process.
- Purpose:
- Determine opinion/beliefs
- Get students talking
- Establish a baseline
- Low stakes way to share information from informed knowledge base
- Information gathering
- Not meant to convince
- Outcome:
- Share information/ideas based on accumulated knowledge
- Make students comfortable talking with each other
Deliberation: Of the four types listed here, this is the exercise I feel my students need to learn the most. For a democracy to function effectively, deliberation is necessary. In a deliberation, students will have opinions, but they are not trying to win any arguments. A deliberation is about cooperation and compromise. Participants express their opinions so as to find a mutually beneficial solution. If only one viewpoint prevails, then the deliberation has failed. No one will completely get their way.
- Purpose:
- Determine own opinion/platform
- Listen to and address the concerns of others
- Hear different informed perspectives/opinions
- Reflect on own perspective/opinion
- Find common ground
- Persuade but not “win”
- Outcome:
- Come to a consensus, reflecting the concerns of everyone
- Compromise
Debate: Though they might feel like arguments, debates should be about establishing a platform based on facts, then present them in such a way as to convince others that it is the “correct” belief or course of action.
- Purpose:
- Determine own opinion/platform
- Listen to and address the opinion/platform of others
- Hear different informed perspectives/opinions
- Use evidence to convince others of the merits of your opinion/platform
- Outcome:
- Determine which opinion/platform (or parts thereof) is “correct”, or better argued for
- Establish a “winner”
Choosing the type of classroom discourse based on the desired purpose and outcome will greatly affect the overall mood of the exercise – is it about winning an argument or about working together or just to hear what other people have to say?
Two of those three things seem to be lost from current political discussions. Students know what it looks like to talk to someone to win an argument. Now we need to show them how, in a democracy, we can work together and listen without trying to win.
What do you think of these definitions in theory or in practice? Share your thoughts with me!