Mixing Critical Thinking and Group Work
In Chapter 10, Bean advocates “goal oriented use of small groups” (p. 184) which follows certain criteria:
The teacher presents a disciplinary problem requiring critical thinking (resulting in a claim with argument rather than a “right answer”).
Students work together in small groups to reach consensus on a “best solution” to the problem.
In a plenary session, group recorders present their group’s solutions and arguments.
As the reports unfold, the teacher coaches students’ performance by pointing out strengths and weaknesses in the arguments, showing how the alternative claims emerging from groups often parallel on-going disciplinary debates, and otherwise offering constructive critiques.
At the end, the teacher may also explain how this problem would be (or has been) approached by experts. (pg. 184-185)
I would consider using something similar to this approach in certain classes where students struggle with arguments. It would seem especially useful in preparation for writing argumentative essays. Allowing students to explore, brainstorm and negotiate a stance (or multiple stances) as a group without necessarily producing a standard essay, might free students of potential stress, while helping them to focus on the issue. This approach meshes well with many subjects, not just writing. I could use this approach in more advanced Spanish classes and also in my English-speaking classes in teacher preparation and linguistics classes, especially as a way of helping students differentiate between and more deeply understand different disciplinary approaches to the same problem. I wonder how other teachers might incorporate this into similar L2, teacher preparation and linguistics courses.