Talking as Thinking
When students ask to continue thinking and developing ideas in an informal way
“Can we just continue to brainstorm as a group next week?”
This seemingly innocuous question has been rattling around in my brain for the last few months. Before I share my answer, some context.
This question arose at the end of some vocal brainstorming in a course I teach called “Theory of Knowledge”(TOK). In the course, we look at ways of knowing (such as language and memory) and areas of knowledge (such as arts and science). The course is part philosophy, part psychology, part critical thinking. In a typical class, for example, we might ask how Math is similar to yet different than Science (stringent testing, yet focuses deductive reasoning) or Music (identifies patterns, yet seeks widely agreed upon conclusions) while examining how mathematical thinking relies upon a combination of formal reasoning and intuition.
The course concludes with a major assessment in which students are expected to write a 1600 word philosophical essay in response to a prompt given by the IB, the governing body that designed both this course and the overall curriculum used at my school. By way of example, here are this year’s prompts:
- “In gaining knowledge, each area of knowledge uses a network of ways of knowing.” Discuss this statement with reference to two areas of knowledge.
- “Knowledge within a discipline develops according to the principles of natural selection.” How useful is this metaphor?
- “The knower’s perspective is essential in the pursuit of knowledge.” To what extent do you agree?
- “Without application in the world, the value of knowledge is greatly diminished.” Consider this claim with respect to two areas of knowledge.
- To what extent do the concepts that we use shape the conclusions that we reach?
- “In knowledge there is always a trade-off between accuracy and simplicity.” Evaluate this statement in relation to two areas of knowledge.
A different set of questions are issued each year, so that each year a new group of students creates their own original thoughts. I structure their writing process by starting them off brainstorming a mental map of associated ideas and concepts. For example, I asked one group to think about patterns in math, science, art, and to insert some of the key terms they learned last year (“theory” in each different field) without too much critical thought: this is more of a review session of what they learned last year. At this point, I also have them complete a question storm to generate a lot of ideas about the various topics.
For the next step, I ask students to become a little more discerning and to identify which concepts seem relevant to their topic: in articulating relevance, students start to think about how they might answer the questions. They share their initial thoughts, drafting shared mind maps together before moving onto generating their own theses. One aspect of this process that I struggle with is fostering productive group work while avoiding group think: for a complex task such as the TOK essay, it soon becomes clear when a person simply borrowed a thesis or drew from the group rather than derived their own thoughts.
And then, after a few class periods of work, I have the students engage in an iterative, recursive process of thesis refinement: once the kids have their own thesis and examples, they talk. Each person shares their initial thoughts, the other students share similar or different examples, discuss their own response to their peers’ fledgling thought, and I make my best guess when it is time to move on to the next person so that each person gets a chance to share their idea.
The conversations this year remind me of the best kind of GMWP “meeting”: Jen Doucette asks people what they have been thinking about and we move around the group, sharing questions, ideas, thoughts, etc. It is an utterly simple process and by the end of the conversation at our meetings, everyone has an idea for their next blog post.
Over the last year, I have come to think that this form of conversation may be the simplest and most effective method of brainstorming. But reflecting upon my experiences with both my students and my GMWP colleagues, I think that two essential elements shape these conversations:
Practice
My initial thought was “trust,” but I think a successful group has to have more than just belief in each other. Trust is important but so is the practice of thoughtful, successful conversations. I think the group needs to have developed the habit of talking thoughtfully about a specific topic and arriving at some sort of insight. A culture of talking and thinking needs to have been built, one discussion at a time, one comment at a time. Those seniors have been in class for years together, and every time a teacher guided them to a thoughtful interaction over the years led them to this conversation. As Annie Dillard wrote, “How we spend our days is, of course, how we spend our lives,” and hundreds of days of respectful, thoughtful conversation led those students to live the sort of life in which they can think together.
Shared Focus
Before idealizing this moment, however, I should note that the student’s comment was inspired not merely by the pleasantness but by the productiveness of the conversation. The TOK essay is a difficult task and this entire class had felt confusion a week earlier when they first looked at the questions. Their shared bewilderment had slowly given way to understanding of the questions and emerging ideas from each student: by the time we talked, they were all starting to articulate a thesis from a set of shared questions and shared lessons. Each student in the room wanted to develop a thesis for their essay, so this was a useful conversation for them.
A well-practiced group of focused people of thinking together: the best learning can be simple at times.
