Listen to the episode by clicking the link to your preferred podcast platform below:
In this solo episode, host Lindsay explores how to reframe discussion prompts to enrich classroom dialogue. She draws on insights from her collaborative work with Dr. Eric Soto Shed around discourse and how to have discussions in various classrooms and around different current events.
The opportunity explored here is to develop different types and frames of prompts that help move beyond binary questions to facilitate deeper, more nuanced conversations in educational settings. Why? Binary prompts can limit student engagement and contribute to polarizing dialogues. Moving toward diverse question structures supports critical thinking, understanding, and inclusivity in discussions. What? When approaching discourse, particularly around high-emotion topics, Lindsay cautions educators to build up to it. Practicing discourse and learning skills around it are important first steps so your class is equipped to handle more polarizing or contentious topics as you move deeper into the course. With that in mind, here are some action steps educators can integrate into their discourse planning: Step 1: Notice your questions. Are they falling into specific categories? What’s the goal of the discourse? Consider if your questions are mostly binary, “Are you on this side or that side?” and consider if that leads to argumentation and defensiveness over open communication and sharing ideas. Step 2: Shift your questions based on goals. There are four ways we can move beyond the binary and spark better conversations:
Incorporate reframed prompts regularly to cultivate robust, empathetic dialogue and build essential communication skills in your classroom. To help you implement today’s takeaways, I’m sharing my Reframing Discourse Prompts with you for free. And, if you’re looking for more details on the ideas in this blog post, listen to episode 276 of the Time for Teachership podcast. If you’re unable to listen or you prefer to read the full episode, you can find the transcript below. Quotes:
If you enjoyed this episode, check out my YouTube channel where you can learn about more tips and resources like this one below:
TRANSCRIPT
Lindsay Lyons: Hello and welcome back to another episode of the "Time for Teachership" podcast. This is episode 276, my goodness, on reframing discussion prompts. Okay, so this, for some context, comes out of some work that Dr. Eric Soto Shed and I were doing with San Francisco Unified School District. Amazing work there happening around discourse and how to have discussions in various classrooms, around current events, around lots of things. And so we were talking and engaging in the need really, or the opportunity I suppose, presented itself that, you know, there's a lot in the prompt that we offer students to discuss, and staff honestly, to discuss. And what could that look like to envision different types or sentence frames of, and purposes I suppose, of prompts that would offer us kind of a reframe away from the binary of this or this, this side or this side, which often contributes to kind of polarizing conversation. So that's what we're getting into today. Okay, as we think about reframing discussion prompts, we want to move beyond a binary agree or disagree question for discussion or discourse that really promotes kind of the sense of dialogue, of inviting deep listening. It promotes the skill of seeking to understand other people in a conversation, whether that is in person, whether that is with students, with staff, with families, whether that is virtual, uh, social media, right? We, we need this as a skill, as a, uh, collective kind of community. Like, locally, nationally, globally, right? We, we would benefit from building this skill. And so, uh, this is particularly valuable for high-emotion topics that we talk about a lot on the podcast. Whatever that is, whether it's politics, current events, whether that is some sort of Interpersonal clash or repairing harm that has been done in a class community, this is valuable to have, which is why we're front-loading this in September. There are various things that could be coming up that we want you to just kind of be thinking about, um, as opportunities for discourse. Now, you are not gonna start the year with, "Here is this super hard, uh, difficult, high emotion, polarizing topic. We've never practiced discourse before. Here we go," right? That's not going to happen. But I often talk about how long it takes to come up with a really good prompt for discourse, and it is a long time. I mean, the minimum, I would say, is, like, two weeks, and I like to have two thought partners to kind of think about what those prompts, how those prompts may land for people, uh, help refine the language of them. Just have some thought partnership as well. So with that in mind, we wanna think about just starting to notice when we think of questions, what kind of categories do they fit in? What are the goals of that discourse? And is there a potential reframe if our gut instinct was to say this or this, right? Are you on this side or this side? Should we do this? Should we not do this? Which is a lot of social studies questions, to be quite honest with you. Like, a lot of questions that we say, uh, in deliberations, for example, which are about kind of coming to consensus typically or making a decision, those are like, "Do we do this or do we do this?" Or, "Here's the proposal. Is it a yes or is it a no?" And there is value to that. Not at all saying there's not. The, the thing that that does or the skill that that builds in us is argumentation, which I think particularly having coached and taught social studies for, you know, over 15 years now, that is, uh, something that we do more and we teach more and we coach more, and kids are actually, you know While they may not always find the evidence, they're quite good at saying, "Hey, here's my position, and I'm gonna stand here and defend it," right? Versus, "I'm going to seek to expand the way I think about this, deepen my understanding and complexity of the problem or the issue at hand, and r- really grow my thinking," which is what this episode is all about. So knowing that, uh, I will say a quick caveat, um, before we get into some of the examples. I noted that this idea of should, right, like, "Should we do this or this?" Is very common in social studies. And so to avoid that- Um, we have tried to take out all of the shoulds in these examples. However, um, if you find one and you want to replace it, you can totally use could, um, in place, right? So could we do something versus should we. Just invites a little more imagination and a little less structure. That said, um, one of the things that I've been reading about is that sometimes if there are too many options, particularly when this type of discussion and student voice and, you know, idea generation is not a common practice in their schooling experience, kids might shut down, and they might need just as a scaffold, as a stepping stone for their first discussion or two, a kind of a forced choice option, quote unquote, is the, it's often called in the social studies literature, where it's, "Yeah, here's your choice, this or this." Get practice and fluency in having this type of discussion, and then we'll really expand outward, which is where we wanna ultimately go. Okay, so I do wanna do wanna be in that. Okay, so here are the potential goals and shifts that we could make. If you have a kind of binary question, and you're like, "I wanna do something different with this. I want the whole kind of sh- shift to happen around the question." So we're still talking about the important topic, yes, but we're talking about it in a different way. So one goal could be critical analysis. So in this situation, you want people to think about maybe it's a policy, an idea, an action. You say, "Okay, I want you to think about the potential impacts if this happens. I'm not saying it should happen or it should not happen, like, that's not the question. But if it happens, what are the potential impacts that this action or policy could have?" Right? So we're getting really critical. We're analyzing, and we are maybe not ever coming to the point where we pick a side, although that certainly, I think, could be a nice culminating activity where there's this individual written or verbal presentation in, in terms of like, okay, now knowing all of this analysis has happened with the class discourse and getting all the ideas, here's where I land. But the goal of the discourse itself with the class, we're leveraging the brilliance and the diverse ideas in the, you know, 20 to 30 person group. That's to think about potential impacts, right? Or alternatively, you could say, like, "Here's this issue What are the root causes? So what are the various things that could have caused that? Because usually it's not just one, right? We do root cause analysis a lot in leadership and, and leading change, and we try to land on one root cause to tackle because that's, like, what the easiest thing to do is. But usually there are many, uh, causes that have deep roots, and so let's, you know, think about what those might be. Um, and then again, after the analysis, you can feel free to choose a position, but if the goal is critical analysis, the question's gonna be different, right? Okay, so that's one goal. Uh, let me share an example, I guess, right off the top. So if you are saying, okay, so here's this proposed immigration policy or maybe current immigration policy. It could also be, um, any sort of policy like, um, free and reduced lunch policy, um, zoning in our local community policy. It could be, um, gun control legislation policy. Well, whatever the policy is, right? Um, a critical analysis question might be what are the potential impacts of this policy, right? Or what is causing high rates of, for example, immigration or, um, gun violence or, like, whatever the focus topic is. So, like, why did there feel like there needed to be a policy about this, and, like, what is causing that thing, right, that is happening? Um, how does, whatever the topic, how does immigration impact our community, right? So what are the impacts of... So you could even analyze deeper, right? We're talking broadly about immigration. How does that impact our community, right? We're talking about whatever the topic is, um, rezoning, uh, having zoning in this way. Uh, how does that impact our community, right? So critical analysis, those are some example questions. Okay, policy. Policy questions would be the second potential goal or shift, and that would be to narrow the scope on how to address a factual reality. So this comes a bit from, um, Nichelle Pinkney and Joe Schmidt's book on Civil Discourse where I was reading that sometimes broad questions like, "What do you think about, you know, immigration?" Or, "What do you think about ICE?" Like, these are, like, really broad. They might bring up some really intense emotions, right? And that actually might inhibit the productivity or generativity of the, of the conversation because we're just in, like, fight or flight mode at that point, right? We don't wanna traumatize students. We don't wanna shut down students. It, it may be beneficial, and their, um, advice is to, like, think about a very specific situation that is happening. So we ground it in a factual reality, and then we think about what is a policy decision, right? That comes from Hess and McAvoy. Uh, they talk about the policy frame being really helpful, um, to address whatever the factual reality is. So if we say, um, their example, uh, Pinkney and Schmidt's example is, "What could we do about unaccompanied minors at the border?" So if there is this reality that there are a lot of unaccompanied minors at the border, what, what should be done about that, right? Again, I'm defaulting to should, but in the list we have the freebie for you with what could we do, and so then we're expansively thinking. Um, so we have this factual reality. This is a hard situation, right? There's a lot of tough things. Our students may or may not be directly implicated, so this may not be a good one for you to, to say to your students. It may cause a little too much trauma or hit too much close to home. But if you get the general gist of, right, like, this is the specific thing that's happening, what could we do about it, you could apply it to a variety of things. So, um, if the rezoning prompt for your local community is because your city is very, um, you know, it, it exists along a commuter rail, and we need to increase the housing capacity to grow our community because people wanna live here, um, we need to rezone to have more, um, affordable housing opportunities, right? Then, like, you could ask, like, what do we do about the fact that a lot of people wanna live here and there are not enough homes? Right? That's the factual reality. What can we do about it? So again, just, like, that frame is what we're kinda carrying over to different topics. Okay. The third goal or shift Could be to identify values. Here's what I mean by this, and there's a lot of potential here. I also do wanna say, we've talked about this in episodes before, that we wanna build up the value language. I really like values in action. Um, if you Google values in action, they have 24 character strengths on their website that are identified by positive psychologists that are great to just have as a word list, as, you know, posters in your classroom, whatever you want. A- and that's like a really good reference point. But you can co-create the values with students, you can do a lot of things. But once we've identified, like, names of values, which I think are... It's a great September activity, by the way. Uh, invite students to name what their own values are. Again, great introductory activity, whether you're doing this in a discussion, whether you're making art around this. I've done both. They're great, students like them. Um, and it's also, like, a critical thinking thing that really sets the stage for students to be able to identify values in others, or consider where their values intersect with a particular topic that they're discussing, or a character's actions that they are reading the book about. So identifying values would invite students at first to name their own values, right, and how those are at play in whatever the topic is, as well as community values. So either class values, school values, family values, um, city values, s- country or state values that are stated, um, and how th- those values should or could inform a policy So again, here we are thinking about kind of the self to community, so micro to macro, um, or macro to micro. So we're having students connect. We have to know ourselves first, right? What are my values? Identify the values in others, identify the stated values of the community, and then maybe compare them to how we live them out. Okay, well, these are our stated school values, right? But then when we look at this school policy, is that actually living out the values that are written on our website and that we have at the top of our documents? Like, or is it actually in conflict? Or maybe the stated school values are in line with all of our school policies, but they actually conflict directly with my values as an individual, and how do we remedy that, right? So that is a whole arc of things that you could talk about. So this idea of, uh, values identification, again, to go back to an immigration example, when you think about the idea of the impacts of immigration, what is the value that comes to mind? So you can also tell that a lot of these different questions p- fuel each other. So if you've done your critical analysis of what are the potential impacts of an immigration policy, you can pair that with a values identification prompt. So when you are thinking about this, as we're discussing and identifying impacts, what is the value that's front of mind for you? As you think about, uh, rezoning, as you think about gun control, right, what is the value that is most salient or most present for you as an individual? And, like, get that out there, because what that will do, typically, is to share your position from a place that is not attack and defend, like you're right, I'm right, you're wrong kind of thing. And it enables you to seek to understand another person's position. From a stance of, like, not attack and defend, but, like, this is where I'm coming from. Maybe this is an experience tied to those values. You get a lot more personal, and you get a lot less polarized when we can just identify values. Values are inherently, inherently, but not... I suppose they could be co-opted for sure. Uh, but values are typically a positive, right? A, a, a value, a thing that I find that is important, that is a good thing that all people should have and, you know, find important to some degree. Now, some values are more important than others for people, but typically it has kind of this, again, positive psychologists came up with this list of values. It is a positive thing. Um, so, you know, or what values would you want to inform our policy on immigration or rezoning or a- assessment for our school policy, right? Uh, those are some questions that center values in the prompt. Okay, and finally, the fourth one that we've come up with so far, please feel free to share more, of course. We'd love to add to this list. But the fourth goal away from the binary, um, is civic imagination. So really excited about this idea. We've talked about this in previous episodes before, but you're h- here what you're doing is you're inviting a brainstorm of alternative policies that affirm dignity. So yes, we have had, you know, examples of policy, but Let's just, like, shift the, the question. So away from something like, is this policy a good policy, right? Uh, w- instead of saying, is immigration, is this immigration policy a good immigration... a, a good policy, excuse me. We might say, how might we creatively illuminate the ways immigration has impacted our community, right? So we're even stepping outside there of the idea that we have to create a policy to, you know, shift... Like, we're, we're getting away almost from, like, a deficit mindset of like, oh, we're thinking about this, like, negative thing happening, and instead we're actually thinking about the positive. So we're civically imaginating... I- imaginating? Imagining the ways that immigration have positively, presumably positively impacted our community, and now you can share that. So, um, thinking about the artist JR and how there are just, like, images of people in s- communities and spaces that are put on the outside of walls that, okay, hey, like, people, human beings are living here, and, like, check out all of the faces of our community, right? Like, that's a civic imagination, um, example. How could we generatively engage community members in conversations about immigration? So that's another one, right? So we're civically imagining what is possible on the civic side of things to, um, discuss, have discourse or dialogue about, um, this phenomenon. How could the US support the freedom, safety, and economic opportunity of all its residents, right? So again, we are expanding there beyond just the sense of immigration, just to say, okay, well, in, in this immigration phenomenon, what people are seeking when immigrating is freedom, safety, and economic opportunity. So how do we provide that for all of, and again, language is really precise here, all of the US residents, people living in this space, right? You could even expand this out to say, like, how could the US support the freedom, safety, and economic opportunity of all people in the world, or in the Northern Hemisphere, or the, the North American continent? Th- there are a range of, you know, frames you could use. But I think the idea of, again, shifting to civic imagination, what could be possible, takes us out of that binary. Okay, we have talked about a lot of examples today. Um, there are far more examples in this Reframing Discussion Prompts freebies, um, that I'm gonna share with you. And so you can get that. Let me tell you where you can get that. You can get that at today's episode, which is going to be at lindsaybethlyons.com/blog/276 That will have the summary of the entire episode, a full transcript for accessibility, and, uh, this, this freebie. I do want to, again, extend an invitation to anyone who wants to either come on the show and talk about reframing. Like, if you have a discourse prompt in mind and you wanna grapple with it and language it and consider the purpose of it together with me on the show, happy to invite people on. If you would like to submit that in an email and be like, "Hey," you know, have, have another person come on who's a subject matter expert in whatever you teach, and like we'll do a, a show where you're not on but your idea is, is the central focus, absolutely, totally welcome. And if you have other ideas for how to reframe discussion prompts that are purposes beyond the four we listed here today, would absolutely love to have them. So please share anything that feels relevant, along with the, your typical questions and suggestions for episodes, and we'll talk to you next time.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Time for Teachership is now a proud member of the...
AuthorLindsay Lyons is an educational justice coach who helps schools and districts co-create feminist, antiracist civics-based curricula, discussion opportunities, and equitable policies that challenge, affirm, and inspire all students. A former NYC public school teacher, she holds a PhD in Leadership and Change, and is the founder of the blog and podcast, Time for Teachership. Lindsay believes all students deserve literacy, criticality, and leadership skills. Archives
September 2026
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed